6 ms·

I think this is nicely said. I grew up in a Western European country where I was used to most people caring about big societal issues such as health, environmen

I think this is nicely said. I grew up in a Western European country where I was used to most people caring about big societal issues such as health, environment, civil rights and privacy. In most European countries there is real competition between newspapers and an, at least in some places, a tradition of democratic participation. Meanwhile, in Australia, the “free press” is effectively owned by Rupert Murdoch, the government needs to make voting for federal elections compulsory in order to get people to take a stance / have an opinion (yes, you will get a fine if you don’t vote!), and our leading politicians still debate whether climate change is real or not. What matters to the average John / Jane is not public health, wars, civil rights, or media diversity but whether you get to watch the “footy” on Wednesday nights. I say this as a European who has resettled in Australia and become a citizen. The country has welcomed me and given me a good life style, but how I wish sometimes Australia would wake up to the things that really matter.

ostenning 5y ago
I did the opposite, moved to Germany from Australia. Now I look at my home country and im shocked about how things are degrading there
- shell0x 5y ago
  As a German living in Australia, I’m shocked what happened to Germany. Politics turned to Left-wing/Green party vs AFD and there is no middle ground anymore. The FDP basically disappeared and there’s a cliff in society over things like the refugee crisis and Merkel’s “everyone is welcome here” politics. If I’d ever come back to Europe, I’d settle in Switzerland. It just is the better Germany(at least to me).
  - sva_ 5y ago
    What do you mean the FDP disappeared? They're at >12% in current estimates, which is higher than in the 2017/2013 elections. They've only been ranked higher in 2009 (14.6%, financial crisis), and in 1961 (12.8%).
  - rospaya 5y ago
    > there is no middle ground anymore Isn't there a grand coalition in Germany for most of the last 15 years between the center-left and center-right which did very well?
    - G3rn0ti 5y ago
      If it „did very well“ is, of course, a matter of your political views but Merkel’s coalition of the largest center right (CDU) und center left party (SPD) is exactly the reason why the political fringe on both ends of the spectrum has been radicalizing in the recent years. Merkel’s conservative voter base crumbles and she keeps on losing to the right. The social democratic party has been losing voters, too, even more dramatically so to both the right and green/radical left. Both major parties became somewhat co-dependent clinging to their dwindling power over this country. With all the scaremongering about a growing right wing party like the AfD, many Germans fail to realize its supporters have always been there and never grew in numbers but before Merkel had been represented by a caucus inside the most popular parties. There have been various connections inside the CDU and the “Seeheimer Kreis” in the SPD that have become marginalized during the Merkel years with her overly pragmatic and uninspired way of administering a whole country and not committing to any visible political principles. As a famous German conservative politician of the 1970s once said: „There must never be a political party establishing itself on the right side of the CDU“ (or it‘ll be the end of its dominating power). Exactly that, leaving room for the AfD, was one of Merkel‘s biggest mistakes and it’s going to haunt Germany‘s politics for many years to come.
    - raxxorrax 5y ago
      Grand coalition is basically political stand still. That isn't too negative in these times though.
  - otikik 5y ago
    > Merkel’s “everyone is welcome here” politics. > I’d settle in Switzerland Is this intentionally ironic?
    - janeroe 5y ago
      > Is this intentionally ironic? There is no contradiction. If you want to come to Canada, for example, you have to qualify for one of the programs, e.g. "Express Entry". That is, have education or better yet Canadian education, at least bachelor's degree but better PhD, experience or better yet Canadian experience, profession in a shortage list, proficiency of English and French, enough money for a year, be <35 y.o., have a husband/wife who also has all of those. If I have none of those, should I be welcome? What if I'm part of ISIS and has been sent to found an HQ in Toronto? You wouldn't invite everyone to your house indiscriminately. Why would you to your country (and then also feed them and house)?
      - robben1234 5y ago
        Refugees and skilled migration are different things.
        shell0x 5y ago
        Exactly. Germans don’t need a visa to work in Switzerland.
marcusverus 5y ago
> the government needs to make voting for federal elections compulsory in order to get people to take a stance / have an opinion (yes, you will get a fine if you don’t vote!) This seems like such a bad idea. Ideally, the democratic process taps ‘the wisdom of crowds’ and allows a society to make reasonable decisions. But all human beings are not capable of contributing to good decision making. Roughly the 15% of people have IQs below 85, making them effectively mentally retarded. And beyond that, a huge number of people are grossly uninformed about contemporary political issues, history, science, etc. The best contribution that some folks can make to the democratic process is not participating in the democratic process. Moreover, if you force the unintelligent and uninformed to vote, you’re empowering the media to run the country. When someone’s politics are uninformed by firmly held principals and a solid understanding of history and current events, they will be more susceptible to be steered by biased media.
- ubercore 5y ago
  I think your point here would be far stronger without the intelligence argument. I don't want to tell someone they can't vote because they didn't pass an IQ test threshold.
  - L_226 5y ago
    You don't need to tell them they can't vote, you just need to tell them there is free beer at the footy on that day /s
    - gonzo41 5y ago
      Well, elections usually happen around the AFL and Rugby finals, so there's a fair bit of drinking happening. So why not vote, get a snag and then get drunk. Seems like a win win for everyone.
  - marcusverus 5y ago
    > I don't want to tell someone they can't vote because they didn't pass an IQ test threshold. You've misunderstood my comment. I'm not saying that we should prevent unintelligent people from voting, I'm saying we shouldn't actively seek out their input by compelling them to vote. We know that poorly educated people are the least likely to vote, and we know that educational achievement correlates strongly with IQ--so by requiring voting, you will be significantly increasing the proportion of voters who are not intellectually capable of making an informed decision about how we can run a society. You do not seek out the advice of the least intelligent people you know. Even if, out of a stubborn commitment to egalitarian ideals, you did ask for their advice, you'd be a fool to weight it equally with the people who you hold in high regard. So why the hell would we, as a society, choose to do so by compelling the vote?
nxmnxm99 5y ago
I can't imagine living in a place where everyone is constantly moralizing about things like "media diversity". How exhausting.
- wombatmobile 5y ago
  What do you mean by "moralizing"? To me, "moralizing" is when I tell you to not do something that I don't like but which doesn't directly affect me. Like, don't drink alcohol to excess, or don't cheat at cards, or don't swear in front of kids, or always tell the truth. I have an opinion that media diversity benefits society, and I don't consider that "moralizing". I consider it caring about my community, and I consider opposing media monopoly to be fighting back against an individual who would denigrate society for his own ends. That's not moralizing - that's standing up for ourselves.
  - nxmnxm99 5y ago
    That's not the definition of "moralizing". > Moralize definition, to reflect on or express opinions about something in terms of right and wrong, especially in a self-righteous or tiresome way Which is roughly what you (and the rest of the social justice crowd and, apparently, western Europe) just did.
- dkdbejwi383 5y ago
  I don't think I'd class "being concerned that the overwhelming majority of the media is owned and controlled by a single individual" as "moralising"
  - nxmnxm99 5y ago
    I'd point out the extreme irony of this comment, but I suspect it'll fall on deaf ears.
    - dkdbejwi383 5y ago
      Nah go on
advanced-DnD 5y ago
> our leading politicians still debate whether climate change is real or not. But the Great Barrier Reef is definitely no endangered, because UNESCO says so!!! Australia is a joke of a country. It's just a Texas with ocean.
- tristor 5y ago
  > Australia is a joke of a country. It's just a Texas with ocean. Unfortunately it's worse than that, at least Texas has significant fiber infrastructure and quality high-speed Internet, some basic understanding of personal freedom and respect for individual privacy, and low enough property costs and taxes that normal average people can survive comfortably there, not just those blessed with a corporate job. Also in Texas, hobbies aren't banned simply because it might upset some Karens. Australia is following in the footsteps of the worst facets of China, with also having the worst facets of Texas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Austral...
  - plugger 5y ago
    > with also having the worst facets of Texas Excluding the gun deaths and socialised health care of course. Those are two things that Australia has unambiguously gotten right that Texas and/or the US seems incapable of addressing.
- janeroe 5y ago
  > Australia is a joke of a country. It's just a Texas with ocean. It's called California.

ostenning 5y ago

I did the opposite, moved to Germany from Australia. Now I look at my home country and im shocked about how things are degrading there

shell0x 5y ago
As a German living in Australia, I’m shocked what happened to Germany. Politics turned to Left-wing/Green party vs AFD and there is no middle ground anymore. The FDP basically disappeared and there’s a cliff in society over things like the refugee crisis and Merkel’s “everyone is welcome here” politics. If I’d ever come back to Europe, I’d settle in Switzerland. It just is the better Germany(at least to me).
- sva_ 5y ago
  What do you mean the FDP disappeared? They're at >12% in current estimates, which is higher than in the 2017/2013 elections. They've only been ranked higher in 2009 (14.6%, financial crisis), and in 1961 (12.8%).
- rospaya 5y ago
  > there is no middle ground anymore Isn't there a grand coalition in Germany for most of the last 15 years between the center-left and center-right which did very well?
  - G3rn0ti 5y ago
    If it „did very well“ is, of course, a matter of your political views but Merkel’s coalition of the largest center right (CDU) und center left party (SPD) is exactly the reason why the political fringe on both ends of the spectrum has been radicalizing in the recent years. Merkel’s conservative voter base crumbles and she keeps on losing to the right. The social democratic party has been losing voters, too, even more dramatically so to both the right and green/radical left. Both major parties became somewhat co-dependent clinging to their dwindling power over this country. With all the scaremongering about a growing right wing party like the AfD, many Germans fail to realize its supporters have always been there and never grew in numbers but before Merkel had been represented by a caucus inside the most popular parties. There have been various connections inside the CDU and the “Seeheimer Kreis” in the SPD that have become marginalized during the Merkel years with her overly pragmatic and uninspired way of administering a whole country and not committing to any visible political principles. As a famous German conservative politician of the 1970s once said: „There must never be a political party establishing itself on the right side of the CDU“ (or it‘ll be the end of its dominating power). Exactly that, leaving room for the AfD, was one of Merkel‘s biggest mistakes and it’s going to haunt Germany‘s politics for many years to come.
  - raxxorrax 5y ago
    Grand coalition is basically political stand still. That isn't too negative in these times though.
- otikik 5y ago
  > Merkel’s “everyone is welcome here” politics. > I’d settle in Switzerland Is this intentionally ironic?
  - janeroe 5y ago
    > Is this intentionally ironic? There is no contradiction. If you want to come to Canada, for example, you have to qualify for one of the programs, e.g. "Express Entry". That is, have education or better yet Canadian education, at least bachelor's degree but better PhD, experience or better yet Canadian experience, profession in a shortage list, proficiency of English and French, enough money for a year, be <35 y.o., have a husband/wife who also has all of those. If I have none of those, should I be welcome? What if I'm part of ISIS and has been sent to found an HQ in Toronto? You wouldn't invite everyone to your house indiscriminately. Why would you to your country (and then also feed them and house)?
    - robben1234 5y ago
      Refugees and skilled migration are different things.
      - shell0x 5y ago
        Exactly. Germans don’t need a visa to work in Switzerland.

marcusverus 5y ago

> the government needs to make voting for federal elections compulsory in order to get people to take a stance / have an opinion (yes, you will get a fine if you don’t vote!) This seems like such a bad idea. Ideally, the democratic process taps ‘the wisdom of crowds’ and allows a society to make reasonable decisions. But all human beings are not capable of contributing to good decision making. Roughly the 15% of people have IQs below 85, making them effectively mentally retarded. And beyond that, a huge number of people are grossly uninformed about contemporary political issues, history, science, etc. The best contribution that some folks can make to the democratic process is not participating in the democratic process. Moreover, if you force the unintelligent and uninformed to vote, you’re empowering the media to run the country. When someone’s politics are uninformed by firmly held principals and a solid understanding of history and current events, they will be more susceptible to be steered by biased media.

ubercore 5y ago
I think your point here would be far stronger without the intelligence argument. I don't want to tell someone they can't vote because they didn't pass an IQ test threshold.
- L_226 5y ago
  You don't need to tell them they can't vote, you just need to tell them there is free beer at the footy on that day /s
  - gonzo41 5y ago
    Well, elections usually happen around the AFL and Rugby finals, so there's a fair bit of drinking happening. So why not vote, get a snag and then get drunk. Seems like a win win for everyone.
- marcusverus 5y ago
  > I don't want to tell someone they can't vote because they didn't pass an IQ test threshold. You've misunderstood my comment. I'm not saying that we should prevent unintelligent people from voting, I'm saying we shouldn't actively seek out their input by compelling them to vote. We know that poorly educated people are the least likely to vote, and we know that educational achievement correlates strongly with IQ--so by requiring voting, you will be significantly increasing the proportion of voters who are not intellectually capable of making an informed decision about how we can run a society. You do not seek out the advice of the least intelligent people you know. Even if, out of a stubborn commitment to egalitarian ideals, you did ask for their advice, you'd be a fool to weight it equally with the people who you hold in high regard. So why the hell would we, as a society, choose to do so by compelling the vote?

nxmnxm99 5y ago

I can't imagine living in a place where everyone is constantly moralizing about things like "media diversity". How exhausting.

wombatmobile 5y ago
What do you mean by "moralizing"? To me, "moralizing" is when I tell you to not do something that I don't like but which doesn't directly affect me. Like, don't drink alcohol to excess, or don't cheat at cards, or don't swear in front of kids, or always tell the truth. I have an opinion that media diversity benefits society, and I don't consider that "moralizing". I consider it caring about my community, and I consider opposing media monopoly to be fighting back against an individual who would denigrate society for his own ends. That's not moralizing - that's standing up for ourselves.
- nxmnxm99 5y ago
  That's not the definition of "moralizing". > Moralize definition, to reflect on or express opinions about something in terms of right and wrong, especially in a self-righteous or tiresome way Which is roughly what you (and the rest of the social justice crowd and, apparently, western Europe) just did.
dkdbejwi383 5y ago
I don't think I'd class "being concerned that the overwhelming majority of the media is owned and controlled by a single individual" as "moralising"
- nxmnxm99 5y ago
  I'd point out the extreme irony of this comment, but I suspect it'll fall on deaf ears.
  - dkdbejwi383 5y ago
    Nah go on

advanced-DnD 5y ago

> our leading politicians still debate whether climate change is real or not. But the Great Barrier Reef is definitely no endangered, because UNESCO says so!!! Australia is a joke of a country. It's just a Texas with ocean.

tristor 5y ago
> Australia is a joke of a country. It's just a Texas with ocean. Unfortunately it's worse than that, at least Texas has significant fiber infrastructure and quality high-speed Internet, some basic understanding of personal freedom and respect for individual privacy, and low enough property costs and taxes that normal average people can survive comfortably there, not just those blessed with a corporate job. Also in Texas, hobbies aren't banned simply because it might upset some Karens. Australia is following in the footsteps of the worst facets of China, with also having the worst facets of Texas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Austral...
- plugger 5y ago
  > with also having the worst facets of Texas Excluding the gun deaths and socialised health care of course. Those are two things that Australia has unambiguously gotten right that Texas and/or the US seems incapable of addressing.
janeroe 5y ago
> Australia is a joke of a country. It's just a Texas with ocean. It's called California.