I was laughing deeply when I saw Bob Brown, the Greens leader, threatening to block in the senate the proposal from the government to take action to reduce the emissions by 5 – 15 % by 2020. Such threat that was shared by Liberals and Nationals.
What does this actually mean?
It means that no action would be taken in regard to reduce the effect of climate change, let alone take action to reverse its effect. Then we will be lost watching all political parties engaging in blame game, for electoral reasons only.
Who can believe that the Greens, who was established to fight for this particular reason, would abandon this big goal? And for what in return?
The failure of the government to pass its bill will give all political parties the excuses not to do anything in this regard. The Labor government would say that “we” had failed to pass this bill, and will blame the alliance between the Liberals and The Greens for it. The Liberals would declare that John Howard was right not to take actions, and will declare that jobs are saved and we do not need to take any action in this regard.
But what the Greens would achieve from this lack of actions?
The Greens will maintain its viability by maintaining its loud voice on opposing any steps in this regards.
But would this be classified as childish move or opportunist one?
For the Greens supporters it’s called “sticking to principles”, even if this means that no real action to reduce the destructive effect of emissions on our environment will be ever taken. The Greens hierarchy would think that this means that the expiry date of this party would be prolonged, by prolonging the empty rhetoric on doing anything on environment and just resorting to political score-pointing.
For any political analysis this would be the biggest betrayal for the issue of protecting environment. The Greens infact stopped any actions taken to acknowledge the issue and take any step in this regard.
The Greens empty rhetoric and demands of “take full step or no step at all” are neither acceptable nor viable. If the Labor would adopt the agenda of the Greens in this regard, one of these political parties should disappear. In politics you negotiate, take what you can take. And then if it is not enough, you ask for more.
It is very clear that the Greens had many reasons to abort any action on climate change:
1- It wants to continue acting as “vocal syndrome” in Australian politics, where they complain about almost everything, but practically achieve none. By this way they think that they can just keep loud voice, before people start to forget about their presence.
2- It wants to establish good basis to justify its growing alliance with the racist far-right Liberals party. This relationship is not new, but it needs to be born in light, after years of secret dealings.
By doing this, the Greens would fail to fulfill its role and infact would reach its expiry date, exactly as happened to the Democrats. For the small “left” parties, who know that they will never govern a country, the philosophy behind its activities should be just to “keep bastards honest”, try to extract compromises and enforce them to make socio-economic changes. The philosophy is so easy. Small party should be active on few important issues, to get some votes from the current big governing parties. Then the government would act in a bid to stop the exhaustion of its votes. Also any presence in the decision making bodies (Parliaments and councils) is just to access a platform and resources to highlight the issues that matter. Through this process, the most important issue is that the power thirst should not divert the attention of such party to start making compromises, to achieve more power grabbing instead of more socio-economic changes. If this happens, the party would become part of the problem and not part of solution.
And this is exactly what happened to the Greens.
The power thirst of their hierarchy made them start to make compromises to “look attractive” for the “undecided” voters.
This is why the Greens had departed many platforms, departed its direct-action style and started to engage in behind-doors deals with “any” political force to attract “any” votes to keep its viability by “any” means.
Who remember when was the last time a Greens member had jumped on a tree and tied him/herself to it? When was the last time the Greens talked about the occupation of Afghanistan?
On the contrary. The Greens was talking recently about Afghanistan asking for more troops to be deployed to ensure that “the job had been done”.
Going back to climate change action.
If I was the Labor party hierarchy, I would invest millions of dollars to expose the Greens on these particular issues.
The Greens block of the bill in senate means that there will be no actions to reduce the emissions for long time to come. I will also remind people that the Greens is allying in their position with the Liberals, whose leaders were denying, and are still denying, the existence of climate change.
If I am in Labor party, I would be dancing for this opportunity to expose the true colour of the Greens: transparent colourless (to allow them change their colour when needed).
We are praying that the Greens opportunists will continue in their political naivety in displaying their pure opportunism.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
As a prominent Muslim, a moderate and secular one, I agree with our MP Scott Morrison that radical Islam is one of the most dangerou...
اضطرار وزير الاوقاف السوري للظهور امام التلفزيون السوري محاولا تهدئة المخاوف المتصاعدة من المرسوم الخاص بوزارته والذي اثار ضجة هائلة ع...
في اذار من هذا العام وبعد زيارات متعددة الى طهران ودمشق وبيونغيانغ, ظهر تيم انديرسون في الكيان الاسرائيلي الغاصب. بدون انذار او مقدمات. وب...
In March this year, and after visiting Tehran and Damascus at earlier occasions, Tim Anderson arrived in “Israel”. To date, we do not know ...