How the Judicial System Protects & Enables Paedophiles, Misogynists, Bullies, Rapists, Sexual Abusers & Predators

For me, the appeal of ‘blogs’ is the opportunity to broaden my horizons from diversified sources, to potentially absorb a wider perspective or consider many different points of view: ‘ideas’ pitched from the ground floor, void of the rapacious multi-media influences. However, it only really works provided we have the tolerance and empathy to calmly consider and understand a different viewpoint, without having to necessarily agree with it. This is the test of character, the difference between what we say we are, as opposed to what we actually do. I’ll come back to that.

As an example, we like to say we live in tolerant societies, yet looking around our communities and beyond, it is clear that this is not true. Do we tend to lethargically view the world through eyes tainted with inherent preconceived prejudices or through rose-coloured glasses? Are we less likely to consider our own opinions or ‘view of the world’ because we are bombarded by the powerful corporate influences of the 24-hour news cycle that manufacture them for us?

How do these corporations remain credible when the majority of us don’t trust or believe what they say? These are the same powerful media corporations who influence, hide, defend and protect misogynists, bullies, rapists, abusers and evil sexual predators: but only if these ‘perverted individuals’ continue to generate sufficient commercial revenue, to justify the cost of engaging a firm of lawyers to run protection for their illegal conduct

Profits drive the ‘business case’ that determines the legal strategies necessary to protect the ‘corporate executives’, payoff and silence poor victims while providing license for ‘predator celebrities’ to continue re-offending without accountability; provided they keep generating big profits. Lawyers have the skills that allow the guilty to continue their illegal predatory behaviour against vulnerable people, without having to face a Court of Law.  Just another example of how the legal and justice systems favour the Rich and Guilty and not the Poor and Innocent.

A couple of years ago I remember thinking how bizarre it was, the way the tabloid media seemed to dismiss Charlie’s misogynistic behaviour with a large degree of amusement, mere light-hearted buffoonery, promoted under the headline of ‘entertainment’.

Then in a very short period of time attitudes changed completely, a 180-degree turnaround seemed to occur when Donald, rode into town. That started a broad reappraisal and precipitated the downfall of the likes of HarveyKevin, Bill and Matt.

The common thread with all these examples is that apparently it was always known that this inappropriate and illegal behaviour had been going on for years. The people in power knew about the abuse, accommodated it, facilitated it, they hid it, protected the filth and used lawyers to enable their disgusting ‘predatory behaviour‘ to continue, instead of stopping or preventing it. These were commercial decisions based simply on the profitable thing to do, yet these corporations have not been held to account nor have they accepted culpability.

These predators have been accused of the same reprehensible behaviour we have witnessed globally following the various inquiries into the culture of ‘entrenched institutional child sexual abuse’, perpetrated against poor, innocent and vulnerable kids. Those without a voice, without representation, terrified, totally alone and exposed, a horrid existence with nowhere to hide nor escape.

These hell holes (institutions) were State sanctioned and operated in the name of charity or God, by individuals who for decades used lawyers to enable ‘predatory behaviour’ to continue; emancipating abusers so they could continue to break the law and ruin the lives of children. These tax-free institutions protected their considerable wealth courtesy of a well-educated upper class, while being funded by a naive middle class who found comfort in the knowledge that ignorance is bliss…if you want it.

How can the legal profession conduct these inquiries into sexual abuse with any credibility, charging taxpayers millions of dollars to hand down volumes of edited findings, containing information about paedophiles, most of whom have already faced the courts. But who investigates and reports on the ‘protected paedophiles’ (including clergy) those who are free to re-offend, because the legal profession protects them, by silencing victims with ‘non-disclosure agreements’.

Let’s face it, the legal professionals have always known the whole truth. They know because they have practised in this space for decades, deriving significant revenue from churches, institutions and corporations to protect predators at the expense of innocent victims…predominantly woman and children!

These vultures profit from the misery of the poor and vulnerable, they know who the predators are, because they have essentially let them off, set them free…for money! Lawyers have a problem with ‘morals and ethics’ if ‘actions speak louder than words’ because they know who the brutalised children are, yet they still defend the rapists and protect paedophiles. Why does the legal profession not have a duty of care to protect vulnerable children or do they really believe that ‘knowing and doing nothing’ is the legal privilege that sanctions child molestation?

Perhaps it’s just a conflict of interest that prevents ‘legally protected paedophiles’ from being included in the ‘Terms of Reference’ for these abuse inquiries or are lawyers just the innocent middlemen offering a ‘without conscience’ service for a substantial commercial fee. Do they believe that their actions are for the betterment of our society? Who represents the victim, who has their best interests at heart? Well, if it’s NOT the churches and institutions, NOT corporations, NOT government and clearly it’s NOT the legal profession or the judicial system, THEN WHO???

The ‘legal professions’ practice of negotiating amoral ‘non-disclosure agreements’ to SILENCE VICTIMS in exchange for small compensation payments needs to cease. This is mere reparation for betrayal in the form of 30 pieces of silver for the suffering of the most vulnerable members of society; those who once looked to the churches for protection, only to be ‘sold out’ by the very institutions whose tax-free existence was to care for the downtrodden.

What is the greater evil, the predator or the facilitator whose actions meant that vultures continue to prey on the innocent, the disadvantaged and vulnerable victims? The answer is neither; it’s actually the enabler i.e. the legal profession and the embedded defective judicial system that enables predators to freely re-offend and as a consequence, allow the organisations that facilitate this behaviour to flourish. They knew the dirty secrets and they hid them, No ethics, no morals, no accountability, no conscience necessary, when you set child-rapists free, so they can rape again and again!

Why is the legal profession so malevolent, why is their duplicity unchallenged, is it just their elliptical language and superiority complex that separates the arrogant privileged from the rest of us?

Now the legal profession has recommended that the church remove the secrecy surrounding the confessional to protect children from paedophiles. What a diversion, all that does is give a free kick to the thousands of paedophiles who are not religious and takes the heat off a few wigs in the judiciary! Why do hypocritical lawyers insist that the clergy must divulge, while THEY still feel compelled to protect paedophiles and seem happy to do so? Is it that lucrative? Why is THEIR ‘client privilege’ more important than the rights of sexually abused children, after all, that is the basis of their argument against the church. What is the difference?

What makes lawyers more righteous than anyone else?

Why not ‘blow open’ the lawyers files and air their dirty laundry to reveal all the paedophiles that are not known to the courts. Let’s indemnify the lawyers against repercussions so we can find out the truth, find out who these predators are and get them out of our institutions and out of our society. No one can argue that it would not be a worthwhile initiative, no matter how many paedophiles it may uncover in the legal and justice fraternity.

The truth is right in front us, in the files of the legal profession, the same profession that conducts these ‘show inquests’ that purposely deflect our attention elsewhere, so that nothing changes. Let’s get serious about protecting the truly vulnerable. How resolute are the politicians, the lawyers and the judicial system about protecting innocent children and exposing these criminals? Do they have the courage, the capacity and motivation to support changes to the Law?

Unfortunately, it is difficult to be encouraged looking at the government and judicial systems historical track record, when it comes to implementing meaningful policy changes. The records, as they say, speak for themselves. 25% of the worlds prisoners are in the U.S (2.3 million individuals). 97% of inmates are incarcerated without having their day in court. Based on these statistics and the demographic of the incarcerated, it appears that after 150 years, the judicial system has only managed to re-badge slavery, not abolished it. So what chance of any meaningful progress?

One wonders if the financial reward for maintaining the status quo in the ‘land of the free’ is so great that the vested interests will never risk overhauling laws to transform the corrupted and ineffectual judiciary system.  The United States official motto is ‘In God we Trust’. ‘Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free’ (John 8:32). As I mentioned right at the start, the test of character is the difference between what we say we are, as opposed to what we actually do.

We are dealing with a secret society of truly evil ‘septic parasites’ here, the devil dressed like virtuous angels, so don’t risk allowing a ‘one night stand’ supporting a ‘black gown‘ at the Golden Globes detract us from WHAT this community of filthy, putrid perverts are doing and WHAT they will continue to do if we don’t take a stand now and lobby hard for meaningful long-term change.

“The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.” – Martin Luther King Jr.

2 January 2018

Advertisements

Who Starved While You Were at Lunch & How China Can Help!

Every once in a while I have a catch-up lunch with a couple of mates I’ve known for about 30 years or so.  They are good blokes: accomplished in their chosen careers, love their families, content and comfortable with their place in the world and also deeply proud of their indigenous heritage.  I wouldn’t say they are in their twilight years, perhaps more likely tracking somewhere in the ‘mid- to late afternoon’ range, but they are what I would call salt of the earth people.

These fellas came from meagre means, working class as ‘working class’ can be. Their parents didn’t have much but they made damned sure that their kids had better opportunities in life than perhaps they did. Probably what I’d call ‘obscure old fashion love’ where actions speak louder than words and success is measured by what their parents went without.

Our conversations are predictable, interesting and sometimes insightful. They’re mostly book-ended with humour, more often than not at the expense of our own individual misfortunes. To an outsider we may appear heartless or unsympathetic, for example, we rolled around laughing after fully work-shopping the news that one of us has an impending operation for an enlarged prostate. Who knew that such a subject could create such imaginative and amusing possibilities? In reality (but not obviously), there exists a genuine empathy and a quiet concern, but here the ‘unspoken’ screams louder than the words we frequently scramble to find.

The beauty of the interaction is the level of undisciplined etiquette, where we always start more yarns than we finish, as a simple impromptu subject can unleash a continuous dialogue and a hundred embellished stories. It’s where annoying interruptions around the ‘table of knowledge’ are not only appreciated, it’s openly encouraged (in fact, expected) as the most serious conversations degenerate into nonsensical avant-garde poetry or philosophy. This is what happens when you fuse a couple of beers with bullshit!

This week’s linguistic tour brought us to a discussion on the ‘Rise of China’ and their global influence in our world today.  What we found interesting is the irony of the journey China has taken in the short span of our lifetimes. We remember the 1966 Cultural Revolution, the failed 10-year movement to purge all remnants of capitalism, where the death toll was reportedly between 5 and 10 million. The numbers are staggering, incomprehensible; there was a shocked silence of disbelief around the table. Is that right, 10 million?

The only one of us who has travelled to China proceeded to school us on 1960’s Chinese history, as we learn that one of the consequences of the Great Leap Forward was the 1959 to 1961 ‘Great Chinese Famine’ where it’s reported that deaths due to starvation are estimated as ‘at least’ 43 million people. What? The numbers are unbelievable, what sort of pain and anguish does that translate into? Why didn’t I know about it and why is everything about China described as ‘Great’?

Adding to the conversation, I admitted with a degree of ignominy that I had only just learnt that 285,000 people had starved to death in Somalia during the 2011 East African drought. How did I not know about this? What was I doing in 2011 that was so self-consuming that I was not aware of this catastrophe, yet I was all over the 2011 Japanese earthquake/tsunami/Fukushima disaster where approx. 16,000 lost their lives? I later learned that 300,000 Somalians also lost their lives in a similar famine in 1991-92.

These numbers are mind-boggling, yet everyone seems preoccupied, ‘being Kardashianed’ or staying busier than ever posting selfies on social media, then stressing as they wait for the ‘likes’ to feed their narcissistic place in a fake world. Between 1998 and 2004 3.8 million died from disease and starvation in the Congo and in 1996 an estimated 3.5 million people starved to death in North Korea. Would it be racist to suggest that white societies would react differently if these deaths had occurred in white societies?

What can I say, I’m feeling embarrassed that this has been allowed to happen in my lifetime while I was busying myself surviving in a safe middle-class world, subsisting in a cupboard with blinkers on. So now is the time to be proactive. Let’s not wait for the next round of historical statistics; why can’t we act now before it’s too late?

We have been warned. There are currently more than 20 million people that are in need of urgent humanitarian assistance i.e. the Yemen Crisis.  That is virtually the population of Australia yet it is not even making the evening news because the tabloid media are too preoccupied talking about Trump’s latest faux pas.

How can I possibly come up with an appropriate closing paragraph here? I cannot. It is beyond my capacity to transcribe my feelings, as my mind is incapable of comprehending the magnitude of anticipated fatalities. Perhaps we just keep raising awareness until we can embarrass a wealthy and persuasive nation like China to use their leverage to influence change. Only China has the ability to comprehend the potential consequences like no other; the devastation of millions of people losing their lives by slowly starving to death.  China has the advantage of ‘living history’ and understands first-hand the consequences of inaction when dealing with a potential catastrophe of this size.

伟大的中国 . 参与世界

“A man who has committed a mistake and doesn’t correct it is committing another mistake”  – Confucius.

25 November 2017

Trump Card Played in Leadership Vacuum – A Symptom of Political Apathy & Why It’s on You!

Whether it’s the political, corporate or commercial landscape, I cannot remember a time when there was such a void of inspirational, dependable and quality leaders; leaders worthy of our respect, who are motivated to act for the benefit of all citizens and stakeholders.

Today our leaders seem totally disconnected from those they represent. They lack foresight or innovative thinking, they linger in the superficial, pander to hysterical minorities, blindly obey dubious orders and are bereft of humanity. They just seem to do a very ordinary job, feed their egos, take the bucks and do a runner. Where are the great visionaries, communicators, those with a strategic plan beyond their tenure, those who have the sound judgement to care about the future, who can implement and be accountable?

Our leadership has lost the wider community’s esteem and confidence. Is this just a reflection on social evolution, where we are fully connected in a virtual world but totally unengaged in the real spaces we live in? So what has caused this degeneration that has spawned the greatest leadership vacuum of our times?

I believe we need to better understanding what it is that we have done to discourage good candidates from standing for office and why we don’t elect them when they do. But first, we should closely examine the behaviour of our leaders and see if that provides an insight into why ‘we the people’ put them in power.

There are certain orthodox behavioural qualities that our leaders appear to exalt; a similar heartless air of superiority while oozing a miasma of decaying authoritarianism. They are all so similar right down to the same tailors, same stylists, all talking the same indecipherable gobbledygook, promoting the same mistakes while adopting the same bad habits.

They are all students of related institutions like the Harvard Business School, society’s brain trust, the analytical and strategic warlords of the free-market capitalist economies of the world. Minds ‘lost in blind logic’ peddling on the road to nowhere in a fragile global economy, which is essentially a pyramid scheme where viability depends upon the world population doubling every 30 years.

This is the leadership that keeps doing what they did yesterday and we wonder why nothing changes. They continue to govern with no imagination, no vision beyond their current term, standing for nothing, scared of being bold, no empathy, emotion, or wisdom, excelling only in personal postulation. They are just conscience minds living unconscious lives! Management completely indoctrinated in the ‘smile as you kill’ culture of fear, anxiety, intimidation and loathing, their creative skills muted, in a society where we suffer profoundly due to the prolonged under-representation of the feminine influence and sensibilities in leadership roles.

We cannot afford to continue to have sleepwalkers marching in time with the corporate music, blindly obeying callous orders without question or care for the harsh personal consequences of their insipid actions. Look where it has got us, living in denial, existing in a state of amnesia, disengaged, disinterested and dislocated! People are turning off, tuning out and dropping off; the reverse of the Human Be-In sixties counter-culture’s catch phrase.

Meanwhile, the leadership continues to be rewarded for failure, mediocrity and bad results. These executives are the beneficiaries of the global pyramid scheme, receiving usurious remunerations from the ‘wall of borrowed money’; the billions of dollars pouring into Western economies which has the effect of artificially inflating the value of financial markets while masking management’s commercial failings and incompetence.

So what can be done to improve the standard and quality of our leadership? It is ultimately up to us provided we are prepared to engage in the process and make sustainable choices.

It is interesting that in Western societies we champion democracy; in fact we enthusiastically and sometimes forcibly promote it along with the associated benefits of good Corporate Governance and free markets. Yet, we barely exercise our rights to participate in the democratic process and when we do, it’s begrudgingly. It’s no secret that potential leaders take full advantage of our illogical political apathy!

Look closely at who we vote for. We vote for or appoint individuals who promise more than the other candidates. The highest bidders appeal to what we want not what we need. We vote for ‘what’s in it for me’ and don’t care that we will spend our children’s future today and leave them a debt legacy tomorrow. These populists know our human weaknesses and failings, as they make grandiose promises to appeal to our greed and self-indulgence. They are not leaders, they just have despotic ambitions with the characteristics of contemptible parasites, yet we empower them because of our apathy, inaction and selective ignorance while wondering why it feeds our discontent.

The reason we don’t vote for real leaders is that only real leaders promise what we can afford, what is sustainable, what is achievable, what is deliverable, what is responsible, and what is fair and equitable. What chance do we have when greed, complacency, recklessness and foolishness plagues the constituency? It will lead to the eventual failing of the democratic system if we are not prepared to participate in the process and support leaders who advocate for responsible and sustainable policies.

The alternative, ultimately, is to witness democracy have its ‘wall come down’ and that will be very untidy (catastrophic) for everyone with anything to lose!

“Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.” – Martin Luther King Jr.

18 August 2017

Trump – Making Australia Great-er!

In virtually every conflict since World War II, Australia’s military has followed our allies the United States of America into almost every significant war: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq (1 & 2) and Afghanistan. Our continued mutual support is a World War II legacy, when our US friends sacrificed thousands of lives in the Battle for Australia against the Japanese, at a time when our own so-called ‘mother country’, Great Britain, was prepared to let us fall to the enemy, just as they did with their colony in Singapore.

The 1951 pact, the ANZUS Treaty, cemented our relationship and commitment to the conflicts that followed and I feel it reasonable to suggest that at that time most Australians were in favour of our unquestioning support for our US allies, to the point that we now have thousands of US personnel stationed in Australia.

However, more recently Australians are starting to seriously question our military marriage with the USA and are nervous about where this relationship may take us in the future. This scrutiny and re-examination is courtesy of the somewhat unpredictable behaviour of the new US Commander in Chief.

Now, some say ‘the country doesn’t change just because the President does’ or ‘not to worry because the bureaucracy still runs the country’, however, this is simply not true. The reality is that the society, values and principles of the USA have changed drastically since we signed the ANZUS Treaty in 1951, particularly and understandably since 9/11… so we can speculate whether the President’s conduct is a product of, or reflects the shift in the country’s ideology and standards and not the other way around.

One questions whether ‘we the people’ can recognise these vicissitudes? As an observer, I’m left perplexed. Oliver Stone’s recent ‘The Putin Interviews’ provided a fantastic insight: that the US actually has more in common with Russia than not. It reminded me of JFK when he said on the subject ‘Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.’ Yet perversely, the documentary seemed to be dismissed with somewhat spurious criticism that Stone’s questions were not tough enough!

Even when you apply the normal filters, Putin made some valid points. Why is the US more preoccupied with who leaked emails leading to the resignation of the Chair of the Democratic Party, rather than being outraged that insiders attempted to hobble the campaign of one of its own Democratic candidates. See, US Election: Democratic Party chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigns in wake of email leaks.

We hear all about the ‘land of the free’ and then watch a documentary like ‘Killswitch’ (2016) where Governments autocratically control the internet, or a film like ‘Snowden’ (2016) or another documentary like ‘Silenced’ (2014) about how the Government prosecutes whistle-blowers who disclose illegal activity relating to internal surveillance against the world’s citizenship. (The reality is that government agencies already know exactly who leaks what to whom, but obviously don’t disclose, dare they reveal which allies they are spying on)!

These examples reflect the societal changes in America. This is not the same ‘freedom’ Australians fought for alongside our American allies in the past. Australians are now starting to see a different ‘home of the brave’ and we can thank President Trump in part for that increased scrutiny, as I believe his behaviour will be the catalyst for Australians to wake up and very closely analyse what we stand for (and what we are seen to stand for) when we align ourselves with others.

5 July 2017

We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing.

– Gore Vidal

See also ‘Media Trumped’ and ‘Sinking Globalisation with Oil’.

Sinking Globalisation with Oil

It has been interesting to observe since the 1970s how the term ‘globalisation’ gained traction and found a place in our lives. It has threaded its way into our subconscious, evolving to a point where it relates to all things financial, economic, political and cultural. Indeed, it has been defined as the process of international integration arising from the interchange of world views, products, ideas and other aspects of culture.

Along the way, it was broadly dismissed by some detractors who mocked globalisation as the ‘Americanisation’ of the world. The International Monetary Fund identified trade, capital investment, migration and dissemination of knowledge, as the four basic aspects of globalisation. So what does it mean for globalisation now that the U.S.A. is moving towards a ‘protectionist economy’ trumpeted by the new president-elect?

Within weeks of the November 2016 U.S. Presidential election, the incoming administration announced that the U.S. will be withdrawing from the 12 nation Transpacific Partnership Pact or the cross-Pacific free-trade deal, meaning Australia may miss out on billions of dollars in benefits, reportedly ‘painting a bleak outlook’ according to the Australian Chamber of Commerce. If a free-trade deal meant that Australia ‘were to be winners’, then you can’t blame the losers for withdrawing, when clearly one major aspect of globalisation, trade, is no longer viewed as beneficial. So why are we surprised and what’s next?

The outlook is undoubtedly an environment where ‘capital costs’ will be higher, migration restricted and there will be a decline in shared aspirations as certainty diminishes with the effective dismantling of globalisation. The U.S. will no longer be criticised for their role as the ‘world’s police’, as they withdraw into protectionism and focus internally. The game changer for the U.S. ‘military establishment’ and clearly recognised by the new administration, occurred in 2011 when the U.S.A. became a net exporter of refined petroleum products and the world’s third-largest producer of crude oil and second-largest exporter of refined products. So where does this leave Australia in the new paradigm, particularly in relation to Defence?

That other transpacific pact, the 1951 ANZUS Treaty was an agreement to protect the security of the Pacific, which has over time provided some Australians with a false sense of security regarding our Defence arrangements, as they believe our ‘fall back’ position in defending our sovereignty is to rely on our allies in the USA & NZ. Well, maybe not anymore, it depends on what Mr Trump means when he says our alliance is a ‘special relationship’. It may be that we now need to prepare our Defence on the basis that support is no longer a given, if it ever was.

Certainly the U.S. have been looking at some of our more recent Defence policies and actions and would question why they should risk American lives to defend our inanity, based on some imprudent decisions in relation to matters like ‘Submarines’ and the ‘Port of Darwin’, the latter a strategic asset which forms part of the Australian-United States Alliance’s Strategic Defence Framework, now leased to a company with Chinese State interests.

Some would argue that the recent submarine deal demonstrates that we do have a long-term Defence plan, primarily for the benefit, welfare and votes from the good people of South Australia. The first of 12 submarines arrive in 15 years’ time, the last in 50 years i.e. 2066.

The 50 billion dollar submarine contract ($4.12 billion per sub) for equipment powered by ‘diesel electric’ technology was awarded to France after it was decided not to proceed with the bid from Japan. Apparently, ‘too soon’; it’s only 70+ years since midget subs breached Sydney Harbour.

Interestingly, it has been reported that the Israeli Navy is in negotiations with Germany to supply superior nuclear submarines for only A$600 million each. Not ‘too soon’ for Israel! So why the 595% price ‘mark-up’ for Australian taxpayers? Well, it’s not a matter of poor probity on behalf of Defence, when it’s a political decision. This is particularly concerning given that in the last 15 years we have witnessed the momentous shift in global economic power, the biggest since the Industrial Revolution, back in favour of our eastern neighbours.

So, looking at the global geopolitical trends, do you think we are adequately responding and adapting to our changing environment or alternatively are you reasonably satisfied with the current complacent status quo; the ‘she’ll be right, we’re the lucky country’ strategic plan? Pope J.P.2 made the point that we are ‘lucky’ because as a country we have never been really tested. So may the ‘Age of Luck & Denial’ continue and we’ll just ‘hope’ that the ‘reality test’ is not forced upon ‘US’… the clock is ticking!

22nd November 2016

In June 2010 Australian Emeritus Professor Frank Johannes Fenner, AC,CMG,MBE,FRS,FAA predicted the extinction of the human race within around 100 years.

Media Trumped

I’m perplexed as to why so many people seem ‘surprised’ with the outcome of the U.S. Presidential election. Particularly interesting was the manic, toxic reaction and atrocious behaviour by the mainstream tabloid media, who seem to have whipped themselves into some kind of hysterical bile-filled orgasmic crescendo of loathing, as they remonstrated against those with differing opinions. Is it a case of hyper-embarrassment because the tabloid media consistently get the big things wrong or is it simply that they’re detached and indifferent; an insular fraternity of cabals, who despise those of alternative persuasions? Clearly, the extreme, tabloid media’s failure to provide ‘diversity of opinion’ proves that they are out of step with Australia’s inclusive, tolerant society.

It must be humiliating for the doyens of the media, as well as the ‘politicians’ and ‘pollsters’ who comprehensively failed when it came to their coverage of both the U.S. Presidential Election and the June 2016 Brexit referendum. I suppose it’s bound to happen when they all have their noses in the same acrimonious trough. The politicians court the pollsters, the media suckle the politicians and the pollsters continue to make large predictions based on small samples. No wonder they get it wrong. Politicians need to listen to their constituents, the media need to get back to professional journalism, and pollsters need to broaden their reach beyond just the affluent (i.e. those with phones), and check in with the seemingly unnoticed, poor and disenfranchised, because they ‘vote’, as the U.S Election reaffirmed.

There was a time when journalists were researched and impartial. Their reports focused on ‘the story’. Now it’s openly biased opinion pieces, littered with vitriol from a smug and patronising media elite; a bunch of postulating sycophants removed from the realities of the real world who redraft media releases because they are incapable of unearthing real stories. They live in a small cocoon, influenced by like-minded narcissists, repeating the same old diatribe with few original ideas, continually chanting their ‘transcendental mantra’ of toxic ordure until it’s miraculously ‘factual’.

What I do find intriguing is that the media, academics and politicians on one hand seemed genuinely shocked with the outcome of the U.S. Election while on the other, keep telling us that ‘the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer’, as if they are or care about the poor, who (unknown to the media), ‘vote’! They recite this refrain out of habit, refusing to acknowledge that the rich sands have shifted around them. These media people, the ‘ideological elite’, are actually the wealthy privileged; the opposite of how they like to see themselves. The ‘affluent’ simply do not give any consideration to the disenfranchised working poor, in fact, they look down on them like common peasants, all because the working poor missed the opportunity to participate and benefit from one of the longest periods of post-war economic expansion. Really, why are they so shocked by this election result?

The ‘advantaged’ who profess to be egalitarians, like ‘talking the talk’ but they certainly are not ‘walking the walk’, given their lack of action and disregard for the working poor. In the U.S. approx. 15% or 45,000,000 people live below the poverty line predominantly in rural and inner city parts of the country. A 2013 UNICEF report ranked the U.S. as having the second highest relative child poverty rates in the developed world. So if you are a poor citizen of the U.S.A. then you have nothing to lose if you vote for change. So they did!

How dare they!

9th November 2016