The cave-in by the left was not because the left position’s in terms of numbers was weak, but because the leader was weak and the left leadership had to go all out to ensure that he wasn’t embarrassed.
Rudd’s departure does not mean the Australian political system will be any less vulnerable to an anti-political attack either from within or without. It’s just that it is unlikely next time it will be done with such panache.
Latham is articulating a search for a new relationship of politics to society, based not on its representation, but on intervention on a degraded basis. You have been warned.
The over-turning of the orthodoxies of the Howard period during 2008-2009 has been forgotten as much as the reason for the popularity for the man who brought them about.
If Rudd was so powerful, how could he have been summarily dismissed within barely a blink of an eye?
Karl Bitar says that Howard’s agenda has little relevance to the electorate today. He should know.
Gillard claims to want to move away from political correctness on asylum seekers, but in fact her entire approach to the issue shares the assumption of the politically correct left; namely that concerns about it are such a powerful inflammatory force in the electorate that it must be indulged and made a big deal of.
Like One Nation, Abbott’s accession to the leadership is being confused with another phenomenon – the revival of the right.
If Howard couldn’t sustain a distinctive agenda in the run up to the 2007 election, why should Abbott after 2010?
What we are seeing here is the second stage of the problem of undermining of the Australian political class, that began with the exhaustion of the domestic program twenty years ago, and has now extended to the international sphere.