Horse 2873 - Toilet Paper Casserole

This is why people are stocking up on toilet paper, even though going to the supermarket is and always was an acceptable excuse to leave the house.

INGREDIENTS

- 92 rolls of toilet paper, even though Covid-19 is a respiratory disease.

- Enough Pasta to build a life size statue of John Gorton. If you do not know how big John Gorton is, imagine two Grant Denyers standing on top of each other. You will be wrong, but it's fun.

- More Bread than is sensible.

- One copy of the Daily Telegraph.

- One thyme sprig.

METHOD

STEP 1

Heat oven to 160°C/140°C fan-forced/gas mark 3 (I have no idea what this is) and put the kettle on.

STEP 2

Put Pasta and Bread into a 50L flameproof casserole dish.

STEP 3

Add 1918ml of water. This must be exact or else the ADF will be called in. Trust me, they will know.

STEP 3

Soften for 10 mins, then wazz in a blitzer.

STEP 4

Gradually stir in 1666ml hot water, then add 92 rolls of toilet paper; using a stab blender to pulp toilet paper as you go.

STEP 5

Cover and put in the oven for 2hrs 30 mins, then uncover and cook for 30mins.

STEP 6

Open Daily Telegraph.

STEP 7

Be outraged by stories in the Daily Telegraph about how people have bought insane amounts of toilet paper, the second that a lockdown has been called. 

STEP 8

Convert outrage into outrage about immigrants buying insane amounts of toilet paper, the second that a lockdown has been called. 

STEP 9

Invent stories about bus loads of pensioners and immigrants breaking lockdown for the sole purpose of buying insane amounts of toilet paper, the second that a lockdown has been called. 

STEP 10

Go into apoplectic fit of rage about a restaurant that you never go to anyway, being shut because of lockdown.

STEP 11

Blame lockdown on pensioners and immigrants breaking the rules willy-nilly.

STEP 12

Snooze on the couch after rage.

STEP 13

Be woken up by the fire alarm because you put wet toilet paper into the oven and it dried out and spontaneously caught fire.

STEP 14 

Take burnt Toilet Paper Casserole out of the oven.

STEP 15

Garnish with the one thyme sprig.

GOES WELL WITH

Sourdough which you will have exactly one go at making during lockdown before you decide that you could have just bought that at the supermarket in exactly the same way as you could have always gone to get a sensible amount of toilet paper on any day you like. 

White bean, parsley, kale, rocket, acai & garlic mash.

Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam.

Horse 2872 - Signalling Virtue - 4 - Temperance

The fourth of the cardinal virtues has had something of a political disservice done to it. Indeed, Temperance had an entire political movement named after it, at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries.

The virtue of Temperance as suggested by Plato (σωφροσύνη, sophrosyne) gets its name on English from the Latin 'temperantia' and refers more to a habitual disposition of the mind anything else. We might like to think of temperance as a series of chains which binds our appetites and desires to appropriate and sensible levels.

We may want to eat chocolate and ice cream all day long because humans like that which is pleasurable and dislike that which is unpleasant but it would serve us very badly to do this. It would do us well to eat broccoli, brussel sprouts and carrots because those things contain vitamins and minerals which are necessary and good for our health and wellness. There is a place for chocolate and ice cream and the virtue of temperance is the virtue as practiced which informs us of doing things and enjoying things in the right amount, at the right time, in the right way and for the right reasons.

One may choose to think of temperance in a limited sense as applied to a desire for vice goods such as cigarettes and alcohol or other drugs, or even perhaps on the other carnal, sensual, fleshly, and bodily desires of humans rather than rational or spiritual aspects of humans; however even that perhaps doesn't adequately describe the virtue properly.

Temperance is more properly the restraint, self-control, discretion, and maybe abstention, of one's desires, which might very well also include a desire for power, fame, riches, etc. This should be reasonably obvious considering that when we speak of someone losing their temper, what we usually mean is that someone has displayed excessive and unrestrained anger or rage. That doesn't mean to say that being angry of itself is always unwarranted, it is just that the virtue of temperance moderates the self and imposes voluntary self-restraint.

It must be said that Plato considered sophrosyne to be the most important virtue, as it demonstrated the sound-mindedness of the individual. Moreover, it was by exercising the virtue of temperance that the other virtues didn't become monstrous.

Evidently the early church also thought that temperance was a virtue worth pursuing as Paul, Peter, James and Jude all mention various aspects of living self-controlled and  upright lives, and the word 'sophrosyne' itself appears three times within the new testament.

That aspect of restraint is important because that may very well change depending upon circumstance. If you are having lunch with someone whose internal moral compass has directed them to be a vegetarian, then it would be a hideous and cruel imposition upon them if you were to demand a steak dinner, or perhaps bacon from a Jewish or Muslim person, or even to go to the pub with someone whom you know is an alcoholic. Temperance apart from looking at the restraint imposed upon one's self, also looks at the benefit of that restraint for the betterment of others.

It is also important to remember that while temperance might invite you to practice restraint upon your own desires, it does not give you permission to harumph at other people who do like and use the things that someone is exercising self-restraint over. The things might very well be bad in your eyes but temperance as a virtue, is itself self-referential and even imposes temperance upon itself.

One of the great ironies of the temperance movement which succeeded in getting the prohibition of alcohol being made into United States' law, is that in doing so it had to be intemperate. In doing so, the movement then moved into the realm of the operation of justice and law. 

To look at the virtue from the other side, intemperance can be discovered from the effects of a lack of restraint. While intemperance isn't as immediately expressed as it is with alcohol and doesn't cause one to collapse in a heap in the street, the effects of excessive drug usage are various diseases, the effects of excessive eating are also various diseases, the effects of excessive gambling are poverty and calamity, the effects of excessive speed in a motor car can be a road accident, the effects of excessive spending might be an accumulation of things and accumulation of debt, the effects of an excessive use of power might include societal unrest.

Addendum:

In general when you see protesters out on the stretch it is because they feel that governments have been intemperate and have failed to exercise justice. The protesters in Sydney recently, demonstrated a lack of prudence in going out in a mass unprotected gathering, while also demonstrating a lack of fortitude by not waiting this out, over what they saw was a lack of temperance on the part of the state government in imposing lockdowns, which then caused a lack of justice being exercised. 

Whether or not you agree with this is up to you but I personally think that my inconvenience is less valuable than the lives of others. I also think that the protestors in Sydney have shown that they think that their inconvenience is worth more than the lives of others.

Then again, I think that all of the virtues are best expressed when pressed into the service of others because ultimately I think that everyone wins when civic philos is everyone's motivation as opposed to ego driven love.

Horse 2871 - Signalling Virtue - 3 - Fortitude

The third of the cardinal virtues, if the first has to do with a mind that knows what is right, and the second knows is fair, is at first glance the most active. However, Fortitude as a virtue has less to do with physical strength and more to do with strength of character.

Fortitude is usually translated in ancient texts from ἀνδρεία (andreía); which considering that the default gender of most of this kind of language is male, might be rendered into modern English as 'manliness'. Immediately I can imagine all of the boofnuts who are reading this, all grunting. That does fully half of the population of the world a disservice because virtues can very much be displayed by both men and women. In fact we probably get our word Fortitude via the Latin 'fortitudo'; which again doesn't help us very much because it yet again boils down to strength.

Perhaps a better appreciation of what fortitude as a virtue encompasses is to look at all of the various ways in which it is displayed.

Courage for example is not an absence of fear. Fear is a very useful innate sense that tells us that a thing is dangerous and can cause us harm. If fear is the good sense that something is dangerous, then courage is facing the dangerous thing (which still might be very fearful) and then taking action in the face of the dangerous thing. Courage is facing the dangerous thing and doing it anyway. Fortitude is the virtue which powers the resolve to keep courage going.

That brings us to the second aspect of fortitude which is related to the first; that being forbearance, endurance, or long-suffering.

If you have a boxer in the ring who is very strong but unable to keep going, they will not have a very long boxing career. If you have someone who is able to stand up blow after blow, then they will likely do better.

Fortitude as a virtue has a lot to do with how one reacts to the uncertainty, intimidation, fear, obnoxiousness, drudgery, boredom, ennui, and pain, which is caused by the world, other people, and perhaps even ourselves. 

To be fair, the kosmos can be a pretty cold place and it is reasonable to be fearful, annoyed, angry, disappointed, and sad, at circumstances, other people and one's self. Unbridled enthusiasm and cheerfulness simply might neither be appropriate or possible in the face of what is thrown at us. Fortitude is the virtue which honed, will keep us going. Fortitude is the virtue which allows one to look forward at a possible hope. Fortitude is the virtue which allows us to endure the unpleasantness of the world and other people and ourselves and to employ optimism.

It should be pointed out that fortitude is not doing a thing in the face of danger, if one has not rationally thought about it. Rushing headlong into a situation with no regard for the safety, well being, or feelings of another person or even one's self, is more foolhardy and reckless than anything else.

Someone who displays no fear or little fear when real fear is actually justified and appropriate, might be acting from a sense of confidence and bravado where it is not merited. Excessive pride or self-confidence leads to hubris and harm and damage being caused. I for instance am fearful of going swimming and live electricity. Water and electricity are both things which can kill me and I very much think that they should be respected and left well alone. Other people who have appropriate levels of skills should attend to those things; not me.

I should like to return to the aspect of fortitude which is that it in particular is the virtue which powers the resolve to keep on going. Fortitude is how people find the inner strength to stick it out when things are tough. It is the virtue which enables people to care for others, for extended periods of time (years and decades even) including when there isn't a commensurate level of gratitude. It is the virtue which looks forward to some task or goal or achievement which has to be worked for and then which demands one to apply one's self towards the fulfillment of that future task or goal or achievement.

Indeed without fortitude, it seems to me that although someone might have good intentions to do good and be good, or to do something, they probably won't stick at it very long and the task or goal or achievement will be left wanting.

Horse 2870 - Signalling Virtue - 2 - Justice

Justice (δικαιοσύνη, dikaiosyne) is an odd thing to be thought of as a virtue because in our modern conception of what it is, it is thought of as a something which is dispensed by an authority. Justice personified carries a sword and a set of balances; which we are to take as weighing all of the relevant evidence and then using some kind of force to ensure that appropriate actions are then taken. That is usually a formal undertaking, in the legal system; enforced by judges and various officers of the law such as police and sheriffs.

Justice as far as the ancient Greeks were concerned is closer to what we might consider to be a sense of fairness. Justice which carries a set of balances and a sword can only properly be exercised once someone has transgressed the law or crossed its boundaries. Justice as far as the Greeks were concerned, also had to do with how one conducted one's self apart from the law. Indeed the Greek word 'dikaiosyne' also carried with it connotations of what Christianity might consider to be righteousness. Justice as a virtue does not depend on the law¹ but rather, as a virtue has to do with character.

If justice has more to do with one's conduct, then it also includes those things which we would expect a morally good person to practice as a thing in action. Such things as honesty, telling the truth, fair dealing, keeping obligations and keeping promises, to both other people and indeed one's self are all part of the exercise of justice as a virtue.

People as egoists who are the centre of their own lives and the star of their own show, are emphatically more likely to notice when an injustice has been perpetrated against them. For this very same reason, people are also emphatically less likely to notice when they are the perpetrator and they have offended someone else's claim for justice. Justice as a virtue does not depend upon whether or not it has been offended (because the law as referee and master can only adjudicate after the event) but rather, those practices such as honesty telling the truth, fair dealing, keeping obligations and keeping promises, should be part of one's moral formation apart from the law.

Of course whenever we talk about claims, we invariably also must talk about what people are entitled to; which includes entire realms of rights, both over real property and over intangible property. Justice therefore has to do with things like one's right to safety, one's right to not suffer harm, to receive fair consideration as part of contract obligations! as well as someone's inherent right to dignity and all of the entitlements which flow out of that. Justice as a virtue also has to do with the underlying fairness which underpins those obligations, commitments and considerations. It also has to do with how much someone gets as a result; whether it is too much, whether it is not enough, whether it is the right amount, and most importantly what exactly is fair.

Justice as a virtue in action, apart from having to do with fairness also has to do with that Roman concept of Fidus. Fidus is usually rendered in English as 'faith' but instead of some abstract concept, also has to do with the repeatable testing of a thing. Fidus is the belief that a thing will do what it is supposed to do (money for instance is a fiduciary instrument because we all collectively expect that it be good for payment) and fidus as applied to justice is the belief that those obligations, commitments and considerations will be honoured. One of the critical components of justice which says that a thing will happen fairly, is that people can reliably believe that the thing will happen fairly. Justice as a virtue gets out ahead of fidus and makes that a practice and a discipline; so that that fidus is repeatedly and reliably justified.

When one speaks of something being justified, it says that all of the components which make up the thing line up. The components of fairness, honesty, the keeping of commitments and obligations, how one treats others, how one affords and awards other people's dignity and entitlements, and how this is repeatedly and reliably demonstrated, all go together to prove the virtue of justice. 

In short, the practice of the virtue of justice should result in someone behaving fairly and decently in the world. Just like prudence, justice is a virtue which is to be practiced and is perfected and honed through that practice. 

Note:

¹Justice in relation to the operation and enforcement and judging of law and what the consequences of people's actions as a result of transgressing the law, is a civic virtue which should also be done honestly, fairly, and decently. It should also be done without fear or favour and be consistent with its metering out of consequences.

Horse 2869 - Which Sports Probably Shouldn't Be At The Olympic Games?

This is the year that doesn't end.

Yes it goes on and on, my friends.

Some people started living it, not knowing what it was.

And we'll keep on reliving it forever, just because...

This is the year that doesn't end.

At the time of writing, it is the 23rd of Caligula 2020. We've run out of regular names for months at this point and have now started naming other discalculic months after other Roman Emperors who were murderous knaves. It is 23/19/2020.

And because it is still 2020 (which means that all the rules are being bent beyond sensibility including beginning sentences with conjunctions), that means that sports are still going on. Euro 2020 was won by Italy in the 19th month of 2020 and now the 2020 Tokyo Olympics are also being held in the 19th and 20th month of 2020. 

Before it had even begun, there were cries in Japan that the Olympics should just be cancelled due to the ongoing pandemic and there is always the inevitable set of questions about what sports should and shouldn't be at the Olympic Games.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-23/tokyo-olympic-games-sports-should-not-be-there/100294178

In Tokyo, there will be 33 different sports represented by 50 separate disciplines across 339 events.

That's an awful lot of sport to cram into 17 days of competition.

Why are there so many?

- ABC, 23rd Jul 2021

Good question, Aunty.

Sports like tennis, football, rugby, hockey, netball etc. all have their own World Cup; which renders an Olympic Gold Medal sort of second rate. Then there are the questions about whether or not some sports should be sports. Do we really need Rhythmic Gymnastics or Synchronized Swimming? 

But as this is 2020 and the rules are being bent beyond sensibility, then why not ask what sports shouldn't be included in the Olympic Games... and indeed should never be played at all. 

Hand Grenade Catching

The rules are simple. Take a standard hand grenade and pull the pin out. Throw said hand grenade as far as you can. The winner is the team who can throw their hand grenade the furthest, catch it, and then put another pin back in it before it explodes.

The IOC would of course have to issue Olympic Standard Hand Grenades so that no-one could cheat but that's not an insurmountable problem.

Naysayers may say nay at the idea of having such a dangerous and overtly military sport at the Olympic Games but then again, running, swimming, archery, shooting, shotput, discus, javelin and horse control, were already overtly military sports. 

Naysayers may also say nay at the thought that people might not actually want to participate in such an idiotic sport; to which I say yea. May I remind everyone that thousands upon thousands of involuntary participants took part in this very sport in the totally unofficial and unorganised UnOlympics of 1916 which was held in Western Europe. One could (and should) say that the whole participation of a hundred million people in the 1916 UnOlympics was idiotic.

Hide And Seek

There have been some truly talented players of International Hide And Seek down the years. Australia's undisputed champion of Hide And Seek is undoubtedly Harold Holt who went missing in 1966 in preparation for the 1968 Mexico City Olympics. 

The mascot for the worldwide Hide And Seek Association is Walter "Wally" Waldo. I have never been able to work out which club he plays for but it is a team that plays in a red and white 'blood and bandages' kit.

Naysayers may say nay at the idea of having such a simple minded and pointless sport like Hide And Seek but then again, racewalking, dressage, and steeplechase, seem to exist for no other purpose than for someone to get a gold medal every four years.

Giant Jenga

Make the blocks really wackadoo big. Everyone already knows what the rules are intuitively and unlike sports which have artistic merit as a criterion for winning, Giant Jenga has spectacular visuals for win conditions.

Give the teams of one or two, simple apparatus like an Olympic Standard Mallet so that no-one can cheat.

Naysayers may say nay at the idea of what is categorically a game and not a sport being included but then again, nobody seems to question why golf, badminton, or table tennis are at the Olympic Games.

Weightlifting also seems like a daft idea because nobody needs to or should lift heavy things anymore. We have forklifts and trolleys. Surely this sport is just occupational health and safety gone absent without leave.

Boxing Kangaroos

'Hey, wait! That's a thing and not sport' I don't hear you say because this is the medium of text. I say yea, a boxing kangaroo is a kangaroo which is extraordinarily good at the art of pugilism for some hitherto unknown reason but give some poor unsuspecting involunteer a pair of boxing gloves and suddenly that's what they are forced to do: box kangaroos.

Naysayers may say nay at the idea of making an animal fight a human for our entertainment because it is cruel and I say yea to that. I am sure that using sciencey science science we could get some boffins to invent a mechanical kangaroo to really knock the innards out of our pugilistic participants.

Naysayers may still say nay at the idea of rewarding people for fighting but then again nobody seems to question why boxing, wrestling, taikwondo, are mainstays of the Olympic Games.

...

Maybe that's the whole point of the Olympic Games. Everyone in the world has agreed that for the slimmest of a good reason, we're all going to watch sports that nobody cares about for four years, then all become instant armchair experts, then go back to not caring about various sports for four years.

We've decided that we'll pretend that it's not political and complain when nation states break the tissue paper thin veneer that it's not political, even though it's one of the most politically charged sporting events in the world. We'll accept corruption and racism, just so we can engage in a few moments of fleeting glory and then we'll write stories and legends about it.

The whole premise of the Olympic Games is dafter than a two dollar clothes brush but that's why in the 20th month of 2020 we need it so very very much. Right now, the world is scary and sad and people are dying but for two weeks we all get to go on a holiday of sport and pretend that something else matters. Sport matters so very much because it doesn't matter at all.

Horse 2868 - Signalling Virtue - 1 - Prudence

The first of the four cardinal virtues is called φρόνησις (phronesis) by Plato and gets the name Prudentia in Latin. In English we call it Prudence and it is distinct from knowledge or Wisdom because Prudence implies knowing what to do, being able to decide what to do, and having the ability to discern the appropriate course of action to be taken in a given situation at the appropriate time.

Whereas knowledge is learned and Wisdom is earned, Prudence as one of the four cardinal virtues a thing which is to be both learned and practiced. 

In the Greek mindset, Prudence is a moral good which is built and is then operated with like a tool. Early Christians would have seen this a useful virtue because it is synthesized from both Wisdom and Discernment. Discernment is seen as a spiritual gift, where one has a special sense to know what to do going forward. 

Prudence however is not an innate ability. Prudence as a thing which is learned and practiced, appears to exist at the point where it is being called upon. A person who has a lot knowledge can still display a lack of prudence and do stupid things. As a virtue, prudence lives in the world of moral goodness and rather than just being Mens Conscia Recti which is a mind aware of what is right, it is a mind aware of what is right and morally good and then which acts and does the good thing.

As something which is built, Prudence as a cardinal virtue requires work in order to grow. 

Being good, is to be an intelligent or reasonable person with intelligent and reasonable thoughts. Prudence allows a person to have moral or ethical strength and then is maintained by doing the good thing.

To underline this point, someone who is less intelligent (and I do not wish to use this in the pejorative sense), is obviously capable of demonstrating prudence by making good choices based upon good sense. Choosing to do what is good or noble or just or kind, is entirely independent from the amount of intelligence that one possesses. In fact I would argue that some highly intelligent people prove this by choosing what is bad or ignoble or unjust or unkind. 

Indeed Prudence is itself the cultivated ability to govern and discipline oneself by the use of reason. As applied to the other virtues, Prudence regulates and makes the distinction between Justice and Inequity, Fortitude and Recklessness, or Temperance and Gluttony. Prudence as a self-regulatory and self-disciplinatory action is often seen as the wellspring from which the others come forth from.

There are of course multiple ways to conceive of what moral goodness is, be they religious, spiritual, utilitarian, but in general most people will arrive at a set of common ideas as to what it is. 

The feature about Prudence which makes it probably the most important of all of the virtues is that doing things which are morally good requires choices to be made. Prudence implies that rational actors will act rationally and for the good of themselves and others. 

A lack of prudence as an exercised virtue not only results in stupid things being done but stupid decisions being taken, and selfish decisions being taken which have bad consequences and may result in harm being caused.

This then is why prudence should be signalled because virtue itself is normative and if imprudence is displayed and practiced then society itself becomes less good. 

Perhaps the most immediate and visually obvious display of prudence and imprudence being displayed at this moment in time, is the wearing of masks and being vaccinated. It is probably reasonable to say that sowing the seeds of vaccine untrust and hesitancy has resulted in needless death. Prudence would suggest that you do these things in order to reduce the harm caused to both yourself and others. Imprudence would be doing exactly the opposite and holding large parties, where the virus can be transmitted. 

Prudence involves some degree of imagining the future and then choosing what will benefit both the individual and others, as consequences of exercising that choice. Imagining what will benefit others and then making choices which realises those benefits, is like making a down payment what is necessary for our well being and happiness and the happiness of others. That isn't the ultimate end goal of the virtues because it is good that they exist and are exercised for their own sake but it is a useful by-product.

Horse 2867 - Signalling Virtue - 0 - The Starting Assumption

One of the phrases which right wing media with distinctly authoritarian overtones has decided to weaponise in its arsenal in fighting the culture war, is "Virtue Signalling". I find this kind of phrasing used as a weapon both baffling and annoying because if anyone actually bothered to think about what the phrase means in political, economic, and philosophical terms, then you immediately run into an immense amount of either hypocrisy or knavery, or perhaps both.

Is the right complaining that people who are virtue signalling not genuine; in which case, are they actually concerned about the issues at hand? Is the right complaining that the virtues being signalled, differ from their value set; in which case, would they actually prefer that vice is signalled? Moreover, why does the right choose to fight perceived virtue signalling with signalling of their own? Is the right merely complaining that virtues exist and that the only possible overlay is that the only allowable lens to view the world is an economic one? If that's true, since virtue doesn't and shouldn't exist, then by right I should literally murder everyone and steal to get what I want. 

It should be apparent that I explicitly reject the notion that virtue shouldn't be signalled because as a member of society and part of the commonwealth of people, I think that it is almost self-evident that everything simply works better and more pleasantly if everyone is nice to each other. Ironically, my rational selfishness leads me to believe that everyone is better off if everyone isn't individually selfish all the time. 

Virtue is that part of character which is good for being good. People will disagree about what kind of motives and philosophical standpoint produces goodness or even what goodness is but in general, most people are fine with the four cardinal virtues as described in Plato's "Republic" because it's useful to have a common framework.

Plato named four cardinal virtues in the Republic and maps them to both the social classes of the imagined ideal city described therein and within the faculties of people. Plato's conception of what constitutes a good city and what constitutes a good person are practically identical and that's one of the central points of his narrative, where he imagines a discussion of the makeup of the character of both a good city and a good person.

It's almost Kantian in that he doesn't actually have to go anywhere or even necessarily need to produce data to arrive at any empirical evidence for his reasoning.

The four cardinal virtues identified in the Republic are: Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Temperance.

What I find particularly telling when it comes to the right's complaint about virtue signalling is that the virtue which is almost always being complained about is Justice. Indeed the term employed by way of abuse by the right is 'Social Justice Warrior' which concedes the point that there is a culture war going on and that the enemies of the right are fighting for justice.

That's often been the case through history. The chartists, trade unions, suffragettes, and now movements like Black Lives Matter, have all been crying out for justice to be served; usually because injuries exacted by the right have resulted in increased harm and poverty of the powerless. It does not surprise me that part of the arsenal employed by the right, is to brand social movements like Black Lives Matter as Marxist; as if that were some kind of magic curse. Again, if anyone actually bothered to read what Marx wrote, then you immediately run into an immense amount of knavery. 

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.

- Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto (1848)

You might disagree with the prescription which Marx writes to deal with the treatment of the disease which he sees but his dianogsis is pretty difficult to disagree with. At the time, most people in the world didn't even have the right to vote; much less any say about what laws governed them. Trade unions and collective bargaining were outlawed across Europe and in the United States, actual slavery where people were owned as chattel goods wouldn't be abolished for another 17 years. 

In my lifetime especially, the lessons which were learned by generations who live through two world wars, the 1918-20 flu pandemic, and the Great Depression, made people realise that there was more power in standing together than apart. For a while, those who had been oppressed appeared to gain ground; so those people who run what amounts to private monopolies and who want to act as if they have responsibility to the nation at large, simply had to destroy what was built. In a modern political context, nothing has changed: oppressor and oppressed - standing in constant opposition to one another.

Marx knew that people tend to on most occasions to act in accordance with their own interests. If you extend that principle out beyond the realm of economics, I think that it holds true across all kinds of areas where you have people with power and people in control of that power. There are definitely socialists within Marxism and there are definitely socialists within the Black Lives movement as there have been in every single social movement but that does not make those socialist movements, it makes them mass movements.

To the people who have power, authority, privilege etc. any kind of pushback at all is treated as though it is oppression (even if that is the instrument which is being exacted upon the people who are pushing back). Since power being wielded cruelly tends to be a feature right across the authoritarian north of the political compass, then resistance against the pushback tends to look mostly identical to that same power being wielded.

The common feature of the Chartists, Trade Unions, Reformers, Suffragettes, Civil Rights movements, and the Black Lives Matter movement are people crying out for the virtue of Justice to be honoured. Calling that Marxist as a term of abuse, makes sense because Marx himself looked around the world in which he found himself and saw workers being exploited, slavery still in action, and the people who were being exploited with no say at all about what was happening to them. 

That's why the term 'virtue signalling' as a term of abuse seems so baffling to me. It is really strange to me that stating the truth is used as a form of abuse. Where people are accused of virtue signalling, then it is usually true and the specific virtue which they are both signalling and crying out for, is Justice.

Pushing back against virtue signalling is itself signalling that someone is not only find with injustice being allowed to exist but that they want it to flourish. It is a strange world when virtue itself is seen as something to be quashed. 

Horse 2866 - Talkback Radio: Selling Complaint Through The Destruction Of Public Philos

As Sydney has entered an extended lockdown due to the deliberate indifference of the current Federal Government in wanting to rollout an effective vaccine program, I have been driving to and from work across this swirling conurbation. That means that I have had the opportunity to listen to the radio. What have I learnt?

Some talkback radio stations which used to be thoughtful have recently made the editorial decision that it is a good idea if the general public is offended and affronted by any and all policies which governments took to protect people from dying due to Covid-19. 

Of course flooding the airwaves with this constant wash of complaint, has meant that instead of any sense of public philos being generated, this has produced a work of lots of individual affrontery (as opposed to effrontery which is just insolent or impertinent behaviour). If the beast that shouts "I" at the heart of the world is allowed to shout louder and louder, then that is all that is heard. Suddenly, any sense of community which might have existed and any sense of public duty and philos which could have been built, is burned upon the altar of selfish atomos.

There is of course a lot of profit to be made in manufacturing outrage because outrage sells advertising space. That outrage can be manufactured quite easily if you can make the beast that shouts "I" at the heart of the world, shout ever louder. If you can get that beast to shout about some notion of freedom; including where individual freedom is going to result in the harm of other people, then sooner or later that notion of freedom with be transformed into a sense of entitlement; which only burns public duty and philos faster upon the altar.

In the before times the radio stations who play to their audience of people who on the whole are older than I, loved to play the game of baiting their audience into disparaging millennials, for not being hard working or perhaps soft. I find this particularly mind bending because the Lost Generation, Greatest Generation, and the Silent Generation, who were in many cases conscripted to fight two of the bloodiest conflicts in the history of the world and who also lived through the Great Depression, were the ones who built the world which the audience of talkback radio now lives in. The two World Wars and the Great Depression built moral goods like nothing else could have done and that sense of shared community which was forged as a result, is the reason why the modern welfare state exists. People thought that other people's welfare was something worth purchasing. Today? Not quite so much. At some point, the people who run media decided to convince us that other people are disposable, if the ends of that are our imagined freedoms.

No trial, whether it is thrown up by other people, by the vicissitudes of history, or in this case by nature itself, seems pleasant at the time. At the time that someone is going through hardship, it can in fact only seem painful. However, once the trial has passed, it generally leaves people changed in some way. The kinds of moral goods that the work of trials produce are virtues like resilience, perseverance, patience, maybe even kindness and the realisation that other people have inherent value and should be afforded respect and dignity.

If you were going out to face a fast bowler in a cricket Test Match, then you would think it most advisable to wear some kind of protective gear such a helmet, shinpads, maybe a forearm guard and a protector for other parts. I would have also hoped that you would have done the practice beforehand, to learn things like timing and stroke selection in batting practice. The most successful Test batters also learn patience and temperance, and how to be calm in the face of 90mph screamers from 22 yards away.

By definition a novel virus is one that people's immune systems have never seen this before. The virus is novel. Just like other viruses which are endemic, this one has started out with nobody having had it before; that means that herd immunity is only built up either through everyone's immune system having learned to recognise it through a vaccine or having actually gotten the virus. The latter of those two, that is actually getting the virus, has a non zero chance of death.

The inherent problem with a novel virus is that it is like sending out a batter to the centre of the field, with no bat. There's not exactly any training that one can do for that. You can send out a batter with the requisite pads and protection but they can not score any runs whatsoever because runs only come off of the bat. The only option is that they either get out or manage to survive because the bowler fails. 

It would be advisable then for the batter to lift up their hands that are dangling and brace their knees and shins and wear a helmet and a face guard. Maybe even learn and practice those moral goods like patience, resilience and long-suffering; so that when you are bruised you won’t be put out of joint, but will heal. The problem is that the repeated yelling of the beast that shouts "I" at the heart of the world, demands freedom for itself and that other people go out to the middle of the field with no bat. 

I kind of suspect that the underlying rules of economics and ethics work in similar ways. I don't think that it is imprudent to assert  that people act in ways that they perceive will bring them maximum good.

You could make an argument that a lack of wisdom results in people making bad choices instead of prudent ones but I think that if you can repeatedly yell offence, affrontery and complaint in the name of freedom, then people will yell so loudly that public health, public philos and any sense that anyone owes any duty to anyone can be yelled out of hearing. 

Horse 2865 - The Delta Variant In Sydney: Handbags For The East And Police For The West

As Sydney enters ever tighter lockdown restrictions for longer periods of time, it has become increasingly obvious that the NSW State Government has a different approach to combating the virus depending on the economic class of people whom it is showing up in.

Three weeks ago, when a few Delta variant cases were discovered in Bondi the NSW Government decided that instead of locking down the area immediately that they would respond “proportionately”. By "proportionately" we now know that that meant doing squat all and allowing people to buy things at Prada and Gucci. Right wing conservatives in the media cheered them on  as the lie was kept up that the NSW Government would try and contain the outbreak with contact tracing. They didn’t. Instead, once the virus jumped the famed "Red Rooster Line" in Sydney, that meant that the authoritarians in the government could have a field day.

If the there are positive cases of the virus in the Eastern Suburbs and richer areas, then the solution is to get private school children vaccinated as quickly as possible; including if that means that they jump the queue, such as was the case at St Joseph's College and an unnamed girl's school. But if there are positive cases of the virus in the Western Suburbs and in poorer areas, then the solution is increased policing, fines to be handed out and even police brutality for the lucky few.

The messaging to the general population is vastly different. For cases in the Eastern suburbs it becomes "We need to balance stopping COVID with avoiding imposition on people. Buying bath towels is essential."

However, for cases in the Western suburbs it becomes "We are launching a major police operation. If you have food, don't leave the house." 

Very classist messaging is very often followed by racist messaging because one of the things that the Enlightenment gave us along with the ideas of freedom, liberty, and human rights, is the idea that there is a socio-political order based upon physical difference.

Although the media might not be conscious of the fact, I keep on hearing the phrase "multicultural communities in western Sydney" from the media when the expression that they should be reaching for is "people in western Sydney". How come the media never speaks about “multicultural communities in Eastern Sydney"? I suspect that "multicultural communities in Eastern Sydney" don't exist until those people happen to own and operate ethnic restaurants; in which case they then become part of the rich tapestry of society.

On the other side of The Red Rooster Line, those multicultural communities magically seem to become ghettos and enclaves according to the media. Suddenly they don't want to assimilate into society and are othered by the media. That othering by the media then translates into people spouting racist claptrap in the comments section of newspapers and media outlets' YouTube channels. 

Admittedly a lockdown is a good idea but only because of the gross incompetence of both the Federal and State Governments and especially the Federal Government's dereliction of duty when it comes to matters of quarantine, vaccination rollout and ironically, border protection.

Sydney's Western Suburbs do not need extra police patrolling the streets. It needs Doctors and Pop-Up clinics who can administer the vaccine. That of course means actually ordering and delivering the vaccine instead of merely announcing it. Telling me that I have been booked in for a vaccination on September 23 is kind of a bit late with respect to the current lockdown in July.

What Sydney's Western Suburbs do not need are to be made scapegoats for a failure in Government policy. I now know of at least four cases where the media has hounded someone for getting the virus. I find that incredibly knavish when we know that this current outbreak was started by an unnamed entitled darling who lives in the Eastern Suburbs.

If this current Delta variant outbreak of the virus has taught us anything it is that the media who have employees who predominantly come from the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney, don't really see us who live West of the Red Rooster Line as worthy of respect or perhaps even as human. There is definitely class warfare going on and the side of the city who controls the media are winning.

Horse 2864 - Patient Zero: The Wuhan Lab Leak Theory Theory

It is understandable that when people are inconvenienced or hurt and especially when people die, they want explanations and answers. What they also want is to assign responsibility and culpability for the negative or undesirable thing and possibly recompense and justice. 

In relation to where Covid-19 came from, this desire to know where the coronavirus came from assign is very much about assigning responsibility and culpability, and has devolved into a political issue as much as a scientific one. It has also devolved into and increasingly stupid debate as conspiracy theories are pushed and debated; almost as and antidote to science. Voices of dissent yell louder and louder; pushing for a "proper" investigation, without any clue as to what a "proper" investigation is.

What's interesting is that just like searching for the first documented patient in a disease epidemic within a population who is the so-called patient zero, you can use the evidence of what has been published to find out who the patient zero is for a conspiracy theory.

Although it is certainly possible that Covid-19 came from a laboratory and found its way into the community at large, is that sensible? While we would like more transparency from China, it does change the fact that we don't know the actual source and we might never actually know. It is probably more likely that the coronavirus came from an animal. The SARS outbreak of 2002-04 probably started in Guangdong and also spread through wet market vendors, farmers, chefs, and other people in the food industry.

The proponents of the Wuhan Lab Leak Theory, don't really want to look at the SARS outbreak of 2002-04 or perhaps the influenza pandemic of 1918-20 because that would then mean that they'd have to admit that we might never actually know the actual source of the virus. That would be terribly undermining to waging the political war to assign responsibility and culpability. Remember, an admission of uncertainty isn't actually a condemnation of science. One of the fundamental principles of science is that we do not know things and need to test them.

Asking the question of where the Wuhan Lab Leak Theory came from, is a little bit easier. The internet acts rather like finding a horde of documents. If you want to find when a theory started, you keep on chasing the chain of ideas until you find the earliest date. Since conspiracy theories follow memetic rules (things go "viral" on the internet), then it is relatively easy to look for key words and phrases to find who the patient zero is.

The earliest think that I can find which supports the Wuhan Lab Leak Theory is this article in the Daily Telegraph:

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/coronavirus-australia-chinese-scientists-linked-to-virus-probe-studied-live-bats-in-australia/news-story/702b1f91ee7a2e69cbc2aff821d8f857

Two Chinese scientists — who western intelligence agencies are looking into as part of their probe into the origins of the global coronavirus contagion — studied live bats in Australia in research jointly funded by the Australian and Chinese governments.

An exclusive investigation can reveal the Five Eyes intelligence agencies of Australia, Canada, NZ, UK and US, are understood to be looking closely at the work of a senior scientist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Peng Zhou, as they examine whether COVID-19 originated from a wet market or whether the naturally-­occurring virus may have been released from the level four laboratory in Wuhan that was studying deadly coronavirus pathogens from bats.

The Australian government’s position is the virus most likely originated from the Wuhan wet markets but it is possible it was accidentally released from a laboratory.

It can be revealed that Zhou — the head of the Bat Virus Infection and Immunity Project at the Wuhan Institute of Virology — spent three years at the bio-containment facility, Australian Animal Health Laboratory between 2011 and 2014, where he was sent by China to complete his doctorate.

- Sharri Markson, The Daily Telegraph 27th Apr 2020

Not only is the claim that Covid-19 was accidentally released from a laboratory untestable but as this hides behind the masthead of The Daily Telegraph, it means that under the Evidence Amendment (Journalists' Privilege) Act 2011 neither the journalist nor their employer is compellable to answer any question or produce any document that would disclose the identity of the informant or enable that identity to be ascertained.

That being said, it means that not only can none of these "cables", or "warnings" be independently verified but as the relevant legislation protects journalists from having to produce any document that would disclose the identity of the informant, those documents don't necessarily have to exist. Never assume that someone must be right simply because they can not be proven wrong.

https://twitter.com/SharriMarkson/status/1254746436845006853

Exclusive: Two Chinese scientists, who western intelligence agencies are looking into as part of their probe into the origins of coronavirus contagion, studied live bats in Australia in research jointly funded by the Australian and Chinese governments.

- Sharri Markson, @SharriMarkson Twitter, 27th Apr 2020

There is a problem here. The current version of the article as published on The Daily Telegraph's website is dated 8th May 2020. Sharri Markson's original link to the article, which was actually when the article was first published, was 27th Apr 2020. I find it interesting that at a press conference on April 30, 2020, the then President Donald Trump said the administration had evidence showing COVID-19 came from a lab at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, although he declined to provide specifics. “I can’t tell you that. I’m not allowed to tell you that,” Mr Trump said.

I would suggest that the reason why Mr Trump declined to provide specifics is because he never had any. When combined with the fact that the article has been edited from the original, seems to suggest that it was edited to take into account new aspects of the theory because the theory was mostly made up. Practically nobody is going to question dates of publication; which means that the article can now supply facts after bootstrapping them after the fact.

And boy, did the bootstrapping come.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/coronavirus/bombshell-dossier-lays-out-case-against-chinese-bat-virus-program/news-story/55add857058731c9c71c0e96ad17da60

China deliberately suppressed or destroyed evidence of the coronavirus outbreak in an “assault on international transparency’’ that cost tens of thousands of lives, according to a dossier prepared by concerned Western governments on the COVID-19 contagion.

The 15-page research document, obtained by The Saturday Telegraph, lays the foundation for the case of negligence being mounted against China.

...

The Western governments’ research paper confirms this.

It notes a 2013 study conducted by a team of researchers, including Dr Shi, who collected a sample of horseshoe bat faeces from a cave in Yunnan province, China, which was later found to contain a virus 96.2 per cent identical to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that caused COVID-19.

The research dossier also references work done by the team to synthesise SARS-like coronaviruses, to analyse whether they could be transmissible from bats to mammals. This means they were altering parts of the virus to test whether it was transmissible to different species.

Their November 2015 study, done in conjunction with the University of North Carolina, concluded that the SARS-like virus could jump directly from bats to humans and there was no treatment that could help.

- Sharri Markson, The Daily Telegraph 4th May 2020

Never mind that the material within this article never actually establishes a direct link between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the COVID-19 pandemic. If the article used to cover up the suspicion doesn't reveal any specifics and the original article refuses disclose the identity of informants, then we run back into the problem that this theory is inherently impossible to falsify. 

Ms Markson of course resents the fact that anyone would dare question whether or not she made up the whole thing and went out on the attack.

https://twitter.com/sharrimarkson/status/1258194834382176257?lang=en

The utter hypocrisy of Nine newspapers dedicating resources of two senior journalists over at least two days to try expose my confidential sources while going to court to protect their own.

- Sharri Markson, @SharriMarkson Twitter, 7th May 2020

By the 7th of May 2020, the Wuhan Lab Leak Theory had already leaked and been caught by The New York Times, ABC in America, CBS, Breitbart News, One America Network, FOX News, BBC, and then come back to Australia to Sky News, The Australian, and back to the Herald-Sun, Courier-Mail and the Daily Telegraph which could crow loudly that all of these other outlets were reporting this, then it must be a thing.

By the time the Wuhan Lab Leak Theory had already run around the world twice, the truth could never ever hope to get its boots on. The theory may have existed before Sharri Markson's Daily Telegraph article of 27th Apr 2020 (edited and republished 8th May 2020) but it certainly didn't have any traction by that date and it wasn't being spouted by powerful people in politics and the media. It should be noted that making unfalsifiable claims is one of the prime drivers of conspiracy theories because once you've decided to leave rational discourse and evidence behind, people are free to believe whatever they like.

Horse 2863 - Why The 2021 Batley And Spen By-Election Gave The Wrong Result And Why We Will Never Know What The Right Result Was

 The 2021 Batley and Spen by-election which was held on the 1st of July, following the resignation of the previous Member of Parliament Tracy Brabin, who was elected Mayor of West Yorkshire (and became intelligible to sit as an MP, once again highlights the utter stupidity of the First Past The Post system. 

There is in fact no post which the candidates must get past; which you would naturally assume as the name implies, that there would be some minimum standard. That simply isn't the case. 

To wit, the results of the election are thus:

13,296 (35.2%) - Kim Leadbeater LAB 

12,973 (34.3%) - Ryan Stephenson CON

8,264 (21.9%) - George Galloway WOR

3,245 (8.6%) - Everyone Else OTH

The fact that George Galloway is mounting a legal challenge to the result when under the current system he has zero chance of winning, indicates that given the opportunity, he would have voted for the Conservative candidate as a second choice. Herein lies the idiocy of the First Past The Post system. It isn't actually the first past the post who wins but merely the one with the most votes who wins. 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"

- Thomas Jefferson, Declaration Of Independence, 4th July 1776

I think that it is also self-evident that the United States which was created in the wake of this Declaration, which did not extend the franchise to men without property, all women, and lots of people on the basis of race, was not instituted upon deriving its just powers from the consent of the governed. Quite the opposite. It was conceived in liberty for a select few.

Nevertheless, the principle that governments should derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, is a good one; especially considering that the two biggest things which determine what a government is are the ability to write, administer, and enforce laws, and the monopoly on violence therein. 

That might sound incredibly harsh but bear in mind that both Bodin and Hobbes arrived at this conclusion and Max Weber in his 1919 work "Politics As A Vocation" which was written in the aftermath of the First World War and kind of foreboding foreshadowing of the rise of the Soviets, the Fascists, and the Nazis, who would all exact violence in hideous ways.

His conception of the concept of the state itself is any entity which holds the exclusive right to use or authorise physical force against the residents within the geographical borders of a territory. That monopoly of force must always occur via a process of legitimation.

What does this have to do with the mechanics of elections? Elections for members of parliaments, who are the representatives of the people; who then take part in the process of writing and if in government the exercise of the administration and enforcement of laws, can only arrive at legitimacy through deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. My question is: how do you arrive at that consent if more than half the population did not vote for you?

The thing is though in Australia, we have compulsory preferential voting; which means to say that not only is every MP in Australia chosen by at least 50%+1 of the vote but because everyone is compulsorily asked what they think, then that consent is achieved, although perhaps begrudgingly.

People might make the case that there is a right not to vote but I would argue that all citizens who live within a country and choose to continue in the civic life of that country, owe their opinions of consent to that country. If they want to express that none of the candidates are good enough, then that should also be an option. However, if someone does not want to take part within the civic life of the country, then should be forced to leave. 

In the case of Kim Leadbeater, 64.8% of the population did not vote for her. In the case of Ryan Stephenson 65.7% of the population did not vote for him. In the case of George Galloway 78.1% of the population did not vote for him. I would argue that none of these candidates actually have the consent of the governed.

If there had been preferential voting, then the people would have been asked to whom they would ultimately consent to as their Member of Parliament until someone did achieve at least 50%+1 of the vote. I think that it is fair to assume that 50%+1 is the bare minimum threshold of where consent actually lies, instead of the current system where the people have not been asked at all. Who you like best and who you will consent to are in fact different questions and the Most Votes Wins system fails to address this.

When the AV referendum was held in 2011, the argument made against the Alternative Vote (which is just another name for preferential voting) was mostly that implementing AV would be expensive, due to the necessity of installing electronic voting machines. Clearly that is idiotic dumbwittery on a massive scale because Australia uses paper ballots to conduct elections; which means that the actual paper looks identical to that used in the United Kingdom.

On the existing ballot papers, the instruction "Number the boxes from 1 to 16 in the order of your choice" is so simple that a ten year old child could follow it. I can only assume that the No to AV campaign thought that the average intelligence of the Great British public was less than that of ten year olds.

If they took this view, then that says to me that the people who are actually in charge of the United Kingdom, don't care about the consent of the governed and they certainly aren't interested in asking for that consent. Instead we get an MP whom almost two thirds of the electorate might despise. However, this is true for every election for the House of Commons.

Horse 2862 - The Morrison Government And Peter Poe's Law

It is a strange state of affairs when the Herald-Daily-Courier-Advertiser-Telegraph-Sun and The Australian have turned on a Liberal Party Prime Minister but given that we have half the population of this country effectively locked down and we haven’t heard from the Prime Minister in days, it is understandable.

Considering that half the country is in lockdown, with public health advice in mass confusion, what on earth is he doing? From the 27th of June when "Lockdown II: Electric Boogaloo" began until this afternoon, the Prime Minister (Scott Morrison) gave Zero media interviews; held Zero press conferences; made Zero public statements; and made Zero posts on social media.

It is reasonable to ask what kind of leadership that going missing in action during critical moments demonstrates but as was proven during the 2019–20 Australian bushfire season when the Prime Minister (Scott Morrison) went to Hawaii, Scott Morrison going into hiding is his signature disaster strategy. 

History though, tells us the lesson that when any debacle comes crashing down around a tory Prime Minister in Australia, reverting to being completely bereft of any leadership whatsoever, is true to type. A century ago after state controls on movement were not able to stop the spread of the Spanish flu, the then Prime Minister Billy Hughes, also said very little to clarify things in the middle of a pandemic. He said almost nothing about the influenza pandemic as Prime Minister and as far as I can tell, never mentioned it by name in any official capacity. 

The Prime Minister who was described by his opponents as a spider, a rat and a crab, and who was a political journeyman who would go on to be a member of six different political parties and be expelled from three of them, also like Scott Morrison tried to handball the responsibility to the State Governments and Premiers where ever he could. 

https://electionspeeches.moadoph.gov.au/speeches/1919-billy-hughes

"With the exception of quarantine, all matters affecting public health are within the control of the States. It is doubtful whether Australia will ever be able to satisfactorily cope with some of her grave problems while exclusive power remains with the local authorities. Many preventable diseases still ravage our people, and the full co-operation of all our Governments is alone likely to lead to success. Millions of pounds are annually lost to the nation through sickness and death, and great suffering and sorrow brought by such diseases to the homes of the people. Tuberculosis, venereal complaints, typhoid and other epidemics will yield to treatment if all the forces of Government are combined in their attack. The Government is prepared either in conjunction with the States, or independently if such conjunction is impossible, to undertake this urgent task.

Nothing is so supremely important as the health of the people, and Australia is, because of the present division of authority, lagging behind [unreadable] countries in the [unreadable] of the subject [unreadable] lines."

- Prime Minister Billy Hughes, 30th Oct 1919

https://electionspeeches.moadoph.gov.au/speeches/1922-billy-hughes

"The Commonwealth does not suggest duplication of existing machinery nor to take the matter out of the hands of the States, but believes that by co-ordination and co-operation the desired results can be obtained. With a view to giving effect to this proposal, and acting in co-operation with the States, the Government will appoint a Royal Commission to consider and report upon the best means for co-ordinating the various activities and improving the nation’s health."

- Prime Minister Billy Hughes, 20th Oct 1922

I find it amazing that in the middle of a pandemic and only after the largest pandemic in recorded history which raged, from February 1918 had April 1920 had broken, did infection control became a national issue. It was only after state controls on movement proved insufficient to stop the spread of the "Spanish flu" (H1N1), that the Nationalist Hughes officially created the Department of Health on 7 March 1921.

What I also find amazing was that Dr John H Cumpston was appointed as Director-General of the brand new Department of Health, after being hastily appointed as the Federal Director of Quarantine during the pandemic and then remained head of the Department of Health until 1945. Dr Cumpston was the chap who suggested the creation of a Health Department and the introduction of universal health care.

What I don't find amazing is that the idea of universal health care which actually was implemented in the UK with the NHS in 1948, would take a further 36 years to be implemented in Australia. Before the introduction of Medicare in 1985, the vast majority of Australians had to pay for private insurance to cover their expenses in hospital.

It was a Curtin Labor Government which passed the Pharmaceutical Benefits Act (1944) which underpins the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme we still have today, and allows the Australian Government to negotiate for prices upon and subsidise medications. You'd think that the memory of the 1918-20 influenza epidemic and the Second World War would have been enough to convince tory parties in Australia that public health and preventative medicine were worth pursuing, but no.

Although Menzies' Government did expand subsidies for residential aged care services and did create a government owned private health care with Medibank (in the National Health Act 1953), the tory Liberal Party which he founded, killed off any hope of universal healthcare in favour of private insurance funds and private health care providers (mainly charitable and religious based organisations).

The Institute of Public Affairs which calls itself a conservative, non-profit free market public policy think tank but which is nothing more than a private enterprise cheer squad, was set up by G.J. Coles (Coles), H.G. Darling (BHP), C.D. Kemp (Australian Paper Manufacturers), Sir Keith Murdoch (Herald & Weekly Times), and G.H. Grimwade (Drug Houses of Australia) and has always hated the idea of universal healthcare.

https://ipa.org.au/ipa-review-articles/be-like-gough-75-radical-ideas-to-transform-australia

And the public’s bias towards the status quo has a habit of making even the most radical policy (like Medicare, or restrictions on freedom of speech) seem normal over time. Despite the many obvious problems of socialised health care, no government now would challenge the foundations of Medicare as the Coalition did before it was implemented.

...

20 Means-test Medicare

21 End all corporate welfare and subsidies by closing the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education

29 Eliminate the National Preventative Health Agency

72 Privatise the CSIRO

- IPA, 5th August 2012

The Morrison Government which is under instruction from the IPA (as most Liberal Governments have been since 1949) is just the latest in a long line of tory policy. In the grand scheme of things, Scott Morrison being absent at times of national crisis and emergency is not unexpected. The Morrison Government being absent at times of national crisis and emergency and doing things at an utterly glacial pace, is also not unexpected. This kind of policy and attitude has now lasted for more than a century. That looks like even deeper Laws and Principles are in operation and that leads me to consider both Poe's Law and The Peter Principle.

Poe's Law:

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/big-contradictions-in-the-evolution-theory.1962980/page-3#post-17606580

Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article.

- Nathan Poe, 10th Aug 2005

The Peter Principle: observes that people in a hierarchy tend to rise to their maximum level of incompetence.

With just 5.9% of Australians fully vaccinated and our rollout being the 95th most efficient in the world, I would like to say that the Prime Minister (Scott Morrison) presenting only some vague plan to exit from "Fortress Australia" only after eighteen months after the start of the pandemic, would normally suggest that we are the prisoners of an incompetent government but sadly that's not the case. "Fortress Australia" has now been breached 26 times and still we haven't got anything concrete.

twitter.com/GregHuntMP/status/1357177406189051904

On the advice of the Scientific Industry Technical Advisory Group on Vaccine lead by Professor Brendan Murphy, the Australian Government has secured an additional 10 million doses of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.

- Greg Hunt, Minister for Health and Aged Care, 4th Feb 2021

This is full on Peter Poe's Law from the Federal Government, where it is no longer possible to tell incompetence from intentional malfeasance. It should be restated that in 2019/20 and 2020/21, the Morrison government did not build any quarantine centres or buy enough vaccine. That's the bottom line here. The Morrison Government should have been expected to be missing in action from the start of this because his party has always hated the idea of universal healthcare, and tory Prime Ministers in Australia revert to being completely bereft of any leadership whatsoever.