ga('send', 'pageview');
John Passant

Site menu:

August 2016



RSS Oz House



Subscribe to us

Get new blog posts delivered to your inbox.


Site search


My interview Razor Sharp 18 February
Me interviewed by Sharon Firebrace on Razor Sharp on Tuesday 18 February. (0)

My interview Razor Sharp 11 February 2014
Me interviewed by Sharon Firebrace on Razor Sharp this morning. The Royal Commission, car industry and age of entitlement get a lot of the coverage. (0)

Razor Sharp 4 February 2014
Me on 4 February 2014 on Razor Sharp with Sharon Firebrace. (0)

Time for a House Un-Australian Activities Committee?
Tony Abbott thinks the Australian Broadcasting Corporation is Un-Australian. I am looking forward to his government setting up the House Un-Australian Activities Committee. (1)

Make Gina Rinehart work for her dole

Sick kids and paying upfront


Save Medicare

Demonstrate in defence of Medicare at Sydney Town Hall 1 pm Saturday 4 January (0)

Me on Razor Sharp this morning
Me interviewed by Sharon Firebrace this morning for Razor Sharp. It happens every Tuesday. (0)

I am not surprised
I think we are being unfair to this Abbott ‘no surprises’ Government. I am not surprised. (0)

Send Barnaby to Indonesia
It is a pity that Barnaby Joyce, a man of tact, diplomacy, nuance and subtlety, isn’t going to Indonesia to fix things up. I know I am disappointed that Barnaby is missing out on this great opportunity, and I am sure the Indonesians feel the same way. [Sarcasm alert.] (0)



Feminists for the warmongering Wall Street candidate Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton at the Democratic National Convention.


Jenna Price has a piece in today’s Canberra Times (and I assume other Fairfax papers) absolutely gushing about Hillary Clinton.

I sent this to the Canberra Times letters editor in response.

I don’t hate Hillary Clinton because of her gender, Jenna Price. (‘Hillary’s ascendancy glorious for women here‘ The Canberra Times Tuesday August 2, page 17). The idea is as absurd as voting for someone merely because of their gender, an absurdity however that Jenna Price and other conservative feminists share.

I oppose Hillary Clinton because she is the candidate of Wall Street. Her election will not improve the lives of most women in the US. It will make them worse. Clinton is the candidate of the elite, and their agenda is to drive down the living standards of working women and men to restore profit rates.

I also oppose Hillary Clinton because she is a warmongering imperialist who, like Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama, will slaughter tens of thousands of innocent women, girls, boys and men in her wars and drone attacks. Which side will Price be on when that happens – the side of the mass murderer Hillary Clinton or the side of those women and girls Clinton murders?



Comment from Ross
Time August 2, 2016 at 7:45 pm

I’m impressed John that you call this lying psychopath, the war criminal she really is.While I also don’t trust Trump,he is signalling peace with Russia.

Hillary is exhibiting serious personality dis-orders while Trump has some semblance of sanity .

Comment from Cecilia Nunez
Time August 3, 2016 at 2:59 am

Totally agree with your opinion, thanks for sharing it. As a Latin American I fear Clinton’s election as she was involved in at least one coup against a democratically elected government while she was Secretary of State; as a president she will go for whoever dares to oppose the US (and there are a number of countries doing that at the moment). She’s a much bigger threat to Mexico and the rest of the Americas than Trump could ever be; the wall Trump promises to build already exists.

Comment from John
Time August 3, 2016 at 6:31 am

Good point Cecilia. Thank you.

Comment from Lycaon
Time August 5, 2016 at 12:40 am

Exactly, John….

The diabolical logic of choosing the lesser evil is that it produces greater evils. We vote for Bill Clinton, to get the Republicans out; he achieves much in the way of starving Iraqi children, reducing Somalia to a failed state and locking up half the black men in America, but less in the way of affordable healthcare and the like; people get disillusioned, and by the time two terms are spent, the anointed successor – Al Gore, who spent the 80s trying to impose religious censorship on pop music – loses to Bush. Bush turns out to be far to the right even of Ronald Reagan, which leads to a revival of lesser-evilism, and the appearance of the genuinely charismatic Obama as a saviour. Further disappointments lead to a lesser-evil vote for Obama in 2012 in the face of Tea Party lunacy and the congenitally unpleasant Romney, until an exhausted Obama limps over the line in 2016. If you are keeping up, we have now reached the part of the cycle where Donald Trump becomes president.

The point is this: lesser-evilism does not actually prevent, but merely delays, the election of the greater evil, or something even worse than the greater evil. It does so because it paralyses political actors, preventing them from making clear and decisive political choices that could change the momentum of politics in the long term. Their credibility is exhausted, and then their will to fight. The great parties of the Second International lived through some very reactionary governments and serious electoral reversals, but their determination to build an independent pole of political activity allowed them to grow anyway, and place material limits on what those governments could actually achieve. If we live in endless fear of ‘the wrong lizard’, we are unable to build anything of the sort.

Write a comment