3 ms·

Lots of people reporting that the offices of MPs and senators were inundated with calls today and over the last few days. Twitter was on fire too. Ignored, just

Lots of people reporting that the offices of MPs and senators were inundated with calls today and over the last few days. Twitter was on fire too. Ignored, just like the expert testimony before the PJCIS. Who do these fools think they were representing? Today I watched my country's democracy die via livestream, with the words "Labor withdraws all amendments".

cmroanirgo 8y ago
There's some seriously shady things going on for this bill to have seen the light of day. For me, this was the 50tone block of concrete on the lead coffin on the rotting cadaver of a political system that serves humanity in a balanced manner.
happybuy 8y ago
> Who do these fools think they were representing? The US government and their agenda to spread similar laws in their country and across the world. Labor was always on board with the core of the legislation; likely as they were aware of some unreported Five Eye's agreement that Australia will be the 'thin edge of the wedge' to introduce such laws worldwide. Any amendments proposed wouldn't have changed the goal and was simply the basis for some political theatre to look like such a law has been considered and debated by the politicians. The outcome had already been decided a lot earlier than that point.
bigiain 8y ago
> Who do these fools think they were representing? The same interests they are always representing. Themselves. The organisations and lobbyists that got them voted in. The organisations they're looking forward to offers of high-priced consultancies and directorships after the next election. Did you expect anything else?
- magduf 8y ago
  Don't forget the voters who elected them. Do you see the voters running to the polls and voting for someone else when crap like this gets passed? Of course not. Therefore, the voters implicitly consent to it.
ern 8y ago
>Who do these fools think they were representing Voters? I don’t mean to be snarky, but while Tweets, submissions and letters may inform the content of bills in democracies, but the counts of these are not numerically representative of much, apart from the feelings of people who feel strongly about an issue. That said, these laws sound exceedingly stupid.
- magduf 8y ago
  As Churchill said, the strongest argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. The voters are getting what they voted for.

cmroanirgo 8y ago

There's some seriously shady things going on for this bill to have seen the light of day. For me, this was the 50tone block of concrete on the lead coffin on the rotting cadaver of a political system that serves humanity in a balanced manner.

happybuy 8y ago

> Who do these fools think they were representing? The US government and their agenda to spread similar laws in their country and across the world. Labor was always on board with the core of the legislation; likely as they were aware of some unreported Five Eye's agreement that Australia will be the 'thin edge of the wedge' to introduce such laws worldwide. Any amendments proposed wouldn't have changed the goal and was simply the basis for some political theatre to look like such a law has been considered and debated by the politicians. The outcome had already been decided a lot earlier than that point.

bigiain 8y ago

> Who do these fools think they were representing? The same interests they are always representing. Themselves. The organisations and lobbyists that got them voted in. The organisations they're looking forward to offers of high-priced consultancies and directorships after the next election. Did you expect anything else?

magduf 8y ago
Don't forget the voters who elected them. Do you see the voters running to the polls and voting for someone else when crap like this gets passed? Of course not. Therefore, the voters implicitly consent to it.

ern 8y ago

>Who do these fools think they were representing Voters? I don’t mean to be snarky, but while Tweets, submissions and letters may inform the content of bills in democracies, but the counts of these are not numerically representative of much, apart from the feelings of people who feel strongly about an issue. That said, these laws sound exceedingly stupid.

magduf 8y ago
As Churchill said, the strongest argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. The voters are getting what they voted for.