activists with a responsible agenda. They are radicals with an irresponsible agenda.
A friend of mine voted Greens in the last state and federal elections. I like this person but she is, to put it simply, naive about politics. To her the Greens are the "environmental" party. My friend believes she is passionate about the environment. Aside from the fact that both she and her husband each own a car - despite both being retired and having no children or grandchildren to care for - it might be said she does.
The two of them have solar panels on the roof, they have a water saving garden, they recycle, they buy their food as "close to home" as possible and so on. They really do believe they are doing the right things.
My friend also researches these things. She can afford to pay more for clothes which are, as she puts it, "responsibly and fairly manufactured".
What she has not researched is the election manifesto of the Greens. She saw no need for that. For her it is the party which cares the most about the environment - and that is all she feels she wants or needs to know.
One of my roles in elections over quite a number of years now has been to assist people who need help with our voting process. Voting is said to be "compulsory" in this country. What that really means is that attendance at the ballot box and marking the ballot papers is compulsory. Nobody can actually force you to vote. But the right to a valid vote is something I consider to be of sufficient importance that I try to help people without influencing their actual vote.
It is something which is incredibly difficult to do. It is also essential that I do this in as a completely fair and unbiased manner as possible. Most people can simply mark their own ballot papers with no help but those who need help also need to sure it is their choice going into the ballot box. I have to be prepared for questions.
I take that so seriously that I have actually sat and read (and yawned over) the policies of each party and independent candidate. This is what has made me aware that the Greens are not the friendly tree-huggers they claim to be. The Greens policies align more with old style Communism. Were they ever to win office and have to actually implement their policies they would fail. We would be a country even more divided than we are now.
One of the Greens senators "led" a "protest" in the capital city of a neighbouring state on the day we were acknowledging the death of the Queen. This Senator was so well informed that she was throwing "blood" over "the coat of arms of the oppressors" on "our land". The red paint was actually being thrown over the coat of arms outside the offices of the Portuguese consulate - a building which, under international law, belongs to another country and is recognised as such. Her actions were widely reported in the press as a valid protest.
This helps nobody, least of all the people the Greens claim to be so concerned about - and it does not help the environment either. This is why our voting system needs to be reviewed and reformed. It is why we need to be better informed about the policies of all parties...and why I will continue to try and stay awake as I try to inform myself.
1 comment:
The Portuguese were colonisers on at least the scale of the [ex-]British Empire.
Especially when it came to Australia's youngest and one of its nearest neighbours - the nation which has been known for the past 20 years as Timor-Leste.
Not to defend the destruction of the Portuguese Embassy; which I find as abhorrent as you would.
And, no, the Greens are not tree-huggers.
[The "watermelon" discussion you quoted did make me laugh - some from the left are socialist or communist on the inside or even anarchist - and have infilitrated Green groups that way - especially in New South Wales].
Post a Comment