Spacehamster’s Blog

Geez, it’s amazing how much things can change in a month! I was reading this article about the Prime Minister’s Christian faith. I winced, as I recalled what that faith had become under both Howard and Bush’s reign. Preaching fire and brimstone, calling for the deaths of homosexuals, the protection of monolithic State Institutions. So this articulation of Rudd’s Christianity really surprised me -
here are two ways to read Rudd’s blending of faith and politics.

The first - and, in fairness, the way most people who know him read it - is that Rudd’s values really are driven by the Old Testament prophets crying out for justice, and the example of the radical Christ, who consorted with the despised of his day - tax collectors, prostitutes, criminals and lepers - and who overturned the tables of the money lenders in the temple.

The second, less charitable, view is that after the 2004 election Rudd saw the strategically important, if not particularly large, evangelical vote and decided he wanted a slice of it for Labor. Rudd talked to this author in 2005 about the Faith, Politics and Values working group he had established within the Labor caucus. To supporters of the Christian-inspired Family First party, which had sent preferences to the Coalition in several decisive seats, he asked: “What do you get from the Liberals that you don’t get elsewhere?”

This is a brand of Christianity that I haven’t heard expressed in 11 years. Using religion to help the poor, the weak and the defenceless? I thought that’d gone out of fashion in the selfish me-tooism of the 21st Century. And then I remember that those forces lost resoundingly at the end of 2007 and won’t recover for a long, long time.

Now this is the kind of Christianity I can get behind.

It’s been barely a month since Kevin Rudd became PM, and the world has changed beyond recognition. The Liberal Party, both at a State and Federal level, are in complete tatters. And if the articles from Akerman, Bolt and Co. are any indication there’s some serious self-examination going on.

For myself, I have to ask: What does being Conservative really mean in the 21st Century? It seems to me that under Howard, being Conservative is defined by what you’re opposed to rather than what you stand for. So a Howard Conservative (there’s no other word for it) was against the Environment, against Migrants and Immigration, against Art and Culture, against Aboriginals, against Workers. They were for Big Business, for Big Industry. I believe it was that stance which lost them the 2007 election.

Perhaps it’s time to re-evaluate what Conservative means. I believe Conservative means believing in ideas that have always worked in this country. So it means being for a Consitutional Monarchy, supporting a Capitalist Economy, encouraging people to take responsibility for their own actions, defending Australian values. Notice the difference between the two? I think Conservatives can win back votes if they define a more positive message that includes all Australians, rather than demonising them.

Well, it’s been about two weeks since Kevin Rudd has sworn in as the new Prime Minister of Australia, and I’m already suffering from political whiplash. In that time he has already -

• Ratified the Kyoto Protocol.
• Attended the Bali Climate Change conference with several Cabinet Ministers.
• Stopped the Pacific Solution Migration Policy
• Arranged a COAG meeting with State Premiers
• Negotiated with Aboriginals for an apology for past wrongdoings

It’s only been a fortnight and the Political Landscape has changed beyond all recognition. Only a month ago all this would’ve been completely unthinkable. However, the same meanness of spirit that typified the Howard years (at least for me) is still there. Witness these exchanges on Tim Dunlop’s blog. I don’t ever recall calling the Australian people stupid when they voted for John Howard in 2004.

There’s still a lot of work to be done - and not all of it can be done by the Government. From my point of view the Howard legacy is a mixed one. We have a strong economy, but we failed to invest those profits into our Health and Education Infrastructure. On the internet we have the Howard-Haters, and the Howard-Lovers (there’s no other word for either group). The perfect example of a country that is still very much politically divided. It took 11 years for John Howard’s Government to divide the country. How long will it take to unite it again?