Loudmouth activists are not ‘the nation’

This is “the nation”, not a tiny clique of professional whingers.

One of the biggest problems for journalism and politics alike is that the practitioners of both are too often insulated in tiny bubbles of screeching groupthink. Usually together. Like the denizens of Plato’s famous cave, they point excitedly to the little, dancing shadows on their walls, and happily convince each other that they’re looking at the real world.

As I’ve recently written, braying loudmouths on social media strive mightily to throw giant shadows, but the reality is that they’re just midgets on stilts. Yapping little terriers, deluded that they’re the biggest dogs in the yard.

This seems especially true of the perennial idiot-parade of honking ninnies whining about Australia Day. Like the annual utter-spoon race over ANZAC Day, the squalling cretins of the left work themselves into a bellowing din on social media, while ordinary Australians just quietly assemble at the dawn services and parades, holding their little flags in sombre respect.

The disconnect between the people and the activists over Australia Day was perfectly captured at a “protest” several years ago. A crowd of ordinary Australians, many of them newly-naturalised immigrants, looked on in bewilderment as their planned festivities were disrupted by a shouting, bullying handful of “activists”.

So, when media and politicians babble about “the nation” being “divided” by Australia Day, they’re just honking out their back-holes, as usual. Quote:

Scott Morrison’s proposal for a separate national day recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage, while keeping January 26 as Australia Day, has failed to win the support of his ­indigenous special envoy Tony Abbott but was hailed as a game-changer by Cape York lawyer Noel Pearson and others. End of quote.

This proposal is nonsense, of course. We already have a raft of “days”: NAIDOC Day, Sorry Day, and so on. Just how many “days” do just 3% of the population need?

Still, I’m sure the children raped in remote communities, the women bludgeoned and battered at extraordinary rates, the truants and the juvenile criminals, will all rejoice in yet another “day” of useless virtue-signalling. Quote:

The Prime Minister’s proposed two-part recognition of indigenous and post-1788 Australia came as he announced he was stripping Byron Shire Council, on the NSW north coast, of its ability to conduct citizenship ceremonies after it voted to move Australia Day observances to January 25.

“Their job is to book the hall, conduct the ceremony with dignity and respect in accordance with the rules. Now, if they want to abuse that privilege and if they want to use it as a political football, it’s simple — we’ll get someone else to do it,’’ Mr Morrison said.

He said he was “open for a chat with the Australian people about how we could better acknowledge indigenous Australians and our indigenous peoples’’. End of quote.

Then put it to a plebiscite. But that will never happen: the left know they’ll lose. Quote:

Acting Opposition Leader Tanya Plibersek left the door open for an extra day but Labor senator Malarndirri McCarthy slammed the idea as a “distraction” and a “thought bubble”, asking when Mr Morrison would address the Referendum Council’s bid for an indigenous voice to parliament. End of quote.

Ah. So, one distracting, useless thought bubble gets trumped by another?

The reality is that very few ordinary Australians want to change the national day. Polling indicates just 11% of Australians want to change the date. Which, oddly enough, is about the same number as the peak Greens vote, in 2010. Forgive me for suspecting that it’s probably the same people.

But let’s not kid ourselves, if we allow this one more step on the Long March through the institutions, nothing will change. Not one more Aboriginal child will sleep in safety. Not one more school in a remote community will improve its attendance. The only jobs will go to the usual urban professional “Indigenous activists” already suckling on the government teat all their lives.

Most of all, the yammering, carping complaints of the bullying whingers won’t abate a single decibel. No matter what, the professional offenderati will find something new to be “outraged” about.

Giving another inch to the mewling left won’t shut them up: it will only encourage them to divide the nation more.


Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to daily sudoku?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to podcasts?
  • Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

Who is Lushington D. Brady?

Well, a pseudonym. Obviously.

But the name Lushington Dalrymple Brady has been chosen carefully. Not only for the sum of its overall mien of seedy gentility, reminiscent perhaps of a slightly disreputable gentlemen of letters, but also for its parts, each of which borrows from the name of a Vandemonian of more-or-less fame (or notoriety) who represents some admirable quality which will hopefully animate the persona of Lushington D. Brady.

To read my previous articles click on my name in blue.

Listen to this post:
Voiced by Amazon Polly
62%