Australian conservative former PM encourages tightening of gun laws

[Metaphor]

An interesting contrast of what conservatives in Australia, compared to conservatives in the US, advocate.

John Howard, a former Prime Minister (not President or Head of State, Australia is not yet ready to abandon its magickally-blooded, inbred family for that honour) says he would welcome tighter gun laws in the wake of a shooting death in Sydney. Howard himself tightened gun laws when he was PM.

Now, don't get me wrong: Howard made my skin crawl with his amendment of the Marriage Act to make sure poofs and lezzas continued to be discriminated against by the government in Australia.

And yet what a contrast culture makes. No conservative in Australia would dream of advocating the death penalty (something Obama supports), and Australia's conservative parties aren't even that interested in gun rights.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

How much tighter could their gun laws be?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

That is a violation of the 2nd Amendment to US Constitution which applies everywhere!

Actual photo from Darwin, NT.

 

[bigfield]

Another amnesty certainly sounds like a worthwhile option.

 

[Angry Floof]

An interesting contrast of what conservatives in Australia, compared to conservatives in the US, advocate.

John Howard, a former Prime Minister (not President or Head of State, Australia is not yet ready to abandon its magickally-blooded, inbred family for that honour) says he would welcome tighter gun laws in the wake of a shooting death in Sydney. Howard himself tightened gun laws when he was PM.

Now, don't get me wrong: Howard made my skin crawl with his amendment of the Marriage Act to make sure poofs and lezzas continued to be discriminated against by the government in Australia.

And yet what a contrast culture makes. No conservative in Australia would dream of advocating the death penalty (something Obama supports), and Australia's conservative parties aren't even that interested in gun rights.

No matter where you live, the roots of conservatism are fear of change, fear of other, us vs. them, clinging to tradition, etc., which is why dogmatic, absolutist religion so easily infests conservative political parties. Australia's "liberal" party shares all these underlying drivers with America's Republicans and Libertarians even if the political and social particulars differ.

Militarize the police in Australia, or reposition the country and place it right next to one that has a huge illegal drug industry, or any number of threatening things, and see what happens. Lots of things could possibly put Australian conservative attention on gun control. Scaredy cats love guns* if you scare them in just the right circumstances. And conservative Australia seems to follow in conservative US footsteps in many ways, so don't be surprised if the right wingers among them start demanding more guns for citizens. A conservative PM calling for tighter gun control sounds like a minor anomaly. The others will likely bring him in line with the correct fear response eventually.

*Not suggesting that all gun owners are compensating for fear necessarily, but in the United States, the right wing gun nuts are full of fear. They even say so out in the open without a wince that they feel safe with guns and feel like frightened cowards without them. They think they are characterizing gun control advocates as frightened cowards, and don't realize the error and irony of that.

 

[Angry Floof]

Another important factor I almost forgot about: right wing mentality loves authority. If their chosen authority of the moment advocates the death penalty or every citizen owning fifty firearms, then the conservative masses for the most part will adopt that view.

 

[Tigers!]

No matter where you live, the roots of conservatism are fear of change, fear of other, us vs. them, clinging to tradition, etc., which is why dogmatic, absolutist religion so easily infests conservative political parties. Australia's "liberal" party shares all these underlying drivers with America's Republicans and Libertarians even if the political and social particulars differ.

Or alternatively conservatives realise that not all change is beneficial or an improvement. We would like some more thought given to the consequences of proposed changes rather than just change it because you don't like it.

 

[Angry Floof]

No matter where you live, the roots of conservatism are fear of change, fear of other, us vs. them, clinging to tradition, etc., which is why dogmatic, absolutist religion so easily infests conservative political parties. Australia's "liberal" party shares all these underlying drivers with America's Republicans and Libertarians even if the political and social particulars differ.

Or alternatively conservatives realise that not all change is beneficial or an improvement. We would like some more thought given to the consequences of proposed changes rather than just change it because you don't like it.

Well, that's a convenient view. Kind of a cartoon.

I'm curious, how do you avoid the kind of thinking that contributes to fascism? We all have the capacity for black and white thinking, fear, closed mindedness, groupthink, us vs. them tendencies, tribalism, authoritarian leanings. What sort of questions do you ask yourself when faced with difficult issues to be sure you're not just a right wing authoritarian follower in your choices and opinions?

I acknowledge that you of course don't have to answer that. It's none of my business really. But I am always interested in how others deal with these pitfalls of thinking that we all share.

 

[zorq]

No matter where you live, the roots of conservatism are fear of change, fear of other, us vs. them, clinging to tradition, etc., which is why dogmatic, absolutist religion so easily infests conservative political parties. Australia's "liberal" party shares all these underlying drivers with America's Republicans and Libertarians even if the political and social particulars differ.

Or alternatively conservatives realize that not all change is beneficial or an improvement. We would like some more thought given to the consequences of proposed changes rather than just change it because you don't like it.

I'd love to give conservatives in the US that much credit, but their refusal to acknowledge the success and benefits of single payer health coverage and the benefits of gun prohibition in other developed nations makes me doubt that it comes down to "giving some more thought."

Heck, their foot dragging refusal to even acknowledge climate change as a scientific (or even political) issue prevents me from giving them that much credit.

No, the roots of conservatism are not "careful consideration." Hylidae's interpretation of conservatism's roots, at least in the US, was much more accurate.

 

[Tigers!]

Or alternatively conservatives realise that not all change is beneficial or an improvement. We would like some more thought given to the consequences of proposed changes rather than just change it because you don't like it.

Well, that's a convenient view. Kind of a cartoon.

I'm curious, how do you avoid the kind of thinking that contributes to fascismcommunism? We all have the capacity for black and white thinking, fear, closed mindedness, groupthink, us vs. them tendencies, tribalism, authoritarian leanings. What sort of questions do you ask yourself when faced with difficult issues to be sure you're not just a right left wing authoritarian follower in your choices and opinions?

I acknowledge that you of course don't have to answer that. It's none of my business really. But I am always interested in how others deal with these pitfalls of thinking that we all share.

FIFY

Do you ask yourself the same questions? I acknowledge that you of course don't have to answer that. It's none of my business really. But I am always interested in how others deal with these pitfalls of thinking that we all share.

The questions I ask myself are
1. Is the cure worse than the disease?
2. Is there an alternative than might solve the issue at hand?
3. Is there really a problem or just the bleatings of a self-interested mob?

What about you?

 

[Tigers!]

Or alternatively conservatives realize that not all change is beneficial or an improvement. We would like some more thought given to the consequences of proposed changes rather than just change it because you don't like it.

I'd love to give conservatives in the US that much credit, but their refusal to acknowledge the success and benefits of single payer health coverage and the benefits of gun prohibition in other developed nations makes me doubt that it comes down to "giving some more thought."

Heck, their foot dragging refusal to even acknowledge climate change as a scientific (or even political) issue prevents me from giving them that much credit.

No, the roots of conservatism are not "careful consideration." Hylidae's interpretation of conservatism's roots, at least in the US, was much more accurate.

As a conservative I am can see the benefits of severe gun prohibition restrictions in other developed nations. Is that careful consideration? Or still beyond the pale?

 

[SimpleDon]

No matter where you live, the roots of conservatism are fear of change, fear of other, us vs. them, clinging to tradition, etc., which is why dogmatic, absolutist religion so easily infests conservative political parties. Australia's "liberal" party shares all these underlying drivers with America's Republicans and Libertarians even if the political and social particulars differ.

Or alternatively conservatives realise that not all change is beneficial or an improvement. We would like some more thought given to the consequences of proposed changes rather than just change it because you don't like it.

Actually, what you have described isn't a conservative. It is a moderate.

A conservative opposes change because it is change. (Except for tax cuts for the rich, of course.) They view tradition as the glue that holds society barely together. They are driven by fear. And fear creates conservatives. What hylidae said.

A liberal believes that change is the answer to every problem. Usually involving the government.

A radical embraces change for the sake of change.

A reactionary wants to rollback change to a time in history that they consider to be better than today.

A libertarian wants to rollback change to a time that never existed. When markets and men were free, of regulation and social responsibility, respectively.

Communism and fascism are the authoritarian expressions of being a radical or a reactionary, respectively.

Most Americans are moderates and take the labels "conservative" or "liberal" to reflect their initial reaction to change. By European standards most Americans, including Obama and Hillary, are right of the center and an oddity considering that America has driven a lot of the progress and change in the world. We are science and technology liberals and social conservatives.

 

[Angry Floof]

Well, that's a convenient view. Kind of a cartoon.

I'm curious, how do you avoid the kind of thinking that contributes to fascismcommunism? We all have the capacity for black and white thinking, fear, closed mindedness, groupthink, us vs. them tendencies, tribalism, authoritarian leanings. What sort of questions do you ask yourself when faced with difficult issues to be sure you're not just a right left wing authoritarian follower in your choices and opinions?

I acknowledge that you of course don't have to answer that. It's none of my business really. But I am always interested in how others deal with these pitfalls of thinking that we all share.

FIFY

Do you ask yourself the same questions? I acknowledge that you of course don't have to answer that. It's none of my business really. But I am always interested in how others deal with these pitfalls of thinking that we all share.

The questions I ask myself are
1. Is the cure worse than the disease?
2. Is there an alternative than might solve the issue at hand?
3. Is there really a problem or just the bleatings of a self-interested mob?

What about you?

Thank you! I also ask questions about the problem at hand. #3 is interesting in that after your two questions about the problem itself, you then move to your assumptions about other people. I admit, I also tend to expect certain behaviors from others, depending on the situation and what they have already revealed about their way of thinking. However, what I'm really curious about most is what questions you ask yourself about your own thinking.

For example:
Am I starting my examination of this issue by automatically applying my opinion of other people involved?
Is it useful to make judgments of others first and then apply critical thinking to the facts or would the other way around work better?
Am I reacting emotionally first and then justifying what I already believe?
Is this reaction of justifying my preformed opinions a useful framework in which to solve problems?

Stuff like that.

Also, fascism is not an ideology. It's a way of thinking that can apply to a great many ideologies. Communism is just one belief system that can easily be poisoned by fascism, much like Christianity and conservative political ideologies.

Are you curious as to why that is?

 

[SimpleDon]

Well, that's a convenient view. Kind of a cartoon.

I'm curious, how do you avoid the kind of thinking that contributes to fascismcommunism? We all have the capacity for black and white thinking, fear, closed mindedness, groupthink, us vs. them tendencies, tribalism, authoritarian leanings. What sort of questions do you ask yourself when faced with difficult issues to be sure you're not just a right left wing authoritarian follower in your choices and opinions?

I acknowledge that you of course don't have to answer that. It's none of my business really. But I am always interested in how others deal with these pitfalls of thinking that we all share.

FIFY

Do you ask yourself the same questions? I acknowledge that you of course don't have to answer that. It's none of my business really. But I am always interested in how others deal with these pitfalls of thinking that we all share.

The questions I ask myself are
1. Is the cure worse than the disease?
2. Is there an alternative than might solve the issue at hand?
3. Is there really a problem or just the bleatings of a self-interested mob?

What about you?

These are good questions. If you are a conservative the answers to the questions are always,

1. Is the cure worse than the disease? Yes.
2. Is there an alternative than might solve the issue at hand? Yes, if the alternative is doing nothing.
3. Is there really a problem or just the bleatings of a self-interested mob? Yes, bleatings​

 

[SimpleDon]

An interesting contrast of what conservatives in Australia, compared to conservatives in the US, advocate.

John Howard, a former Prime Minister (not President or Head of State, Australia is not yet ready to abandon its magickally-blooded, inbred family for that honour) says he would welcome tighter gun laws in the wake of a shooting death in Sydney. Howard himself tightened gun laws when he was PM.

Now, don't get me wrong: Howard made my skin crawl with his amendment of the Marriage Act to make sure poofs and lezzas continued to be discriminated against by the government in Australia.

And yet what a contrast culture makes. No conservative in Australia would dream of advocating the death penalty (something Obama supports), and Australia's conservative parties aren't even that interested in gun rights.

One of the reasons that Americans give for their support of liberal gun rights is our frontier heritage, the six gun taming the wild west, etc. But there is no other country with which we share this like heritage with more than Australia, with the possible exception of Canada.

We both conquered a continent. We both killed, corralled and conquered indigenous populations.

Why don't Australians consider guns to be part of your heritage, one that you don't have to grow and to evolve out of?

 

[bilby]

That is a violation of the 2nd Amendment to US Constitution which applies everywhere!

Actual photo from Darwin, NT.

Looks more like Pine Gap to me.

 

[bilby]

An interesting contrast of what conservatives in Australia, compared to conservatives in the US, advocate.

John Howard, a former Prime Minister (not President or Head of State, Australia is not yet ready to abandon its magickally-blooded, inbred family for that honour) says he would welcome tighter gun laws in the wake of a shooting death in Sydney. Howard himself tightened gun laws when he was PM.

Now, don't get me wrong: Howard made my skin crawl with his amendment of the Marriage Act to make sure poofs and lezzas continued to be discriminated against by the government in Australia.

And yet what a contrast culture makes. No conservative in Australia would dream of advocating the death penalty (something Obama supports), and Australia's conservative parties aren't even that interested in gun rights.

One of the reasons that Americans give for their support of liberal gun rights is our frontier heritage, the six gun taming the wild west, etc. But there is no other country with which we share this like heritage with more than Australia, with the possible exception of Canada.

We both conquered a continent. We both killed, corralled and conquered indigenous populations.

Why don't Australians consider guns to be part of your heritage, one that you don't have to grow and to evolve out of?

Our aborigines were less numerous and less well armed, and so less effective when belligerent in the defense of their land than yours, and more easily massacred by lightly armed settlers; and our settlers were mostly convicts, and as such not trusted with very much freedom, or with weapons, which remained in the hands of the guards (albeit some of whom were ex-convicts).

 

[Will Wiley]

Or alternatively conservatives realise that not all change is beneficial or an improvement. We would like some more thought given to the consequences of proposed changes rather than just change it because you don't like it.

Well, that's a convenient view. Kind of a cartoon.

I'm curious, how do you avoid the kind of thinking that contributes to fascism? We all have the capacity for black and white thinking, fear, closed mindedness, groupthink, us vs. them tendencies, tribalism, authoritarian leanings. What sort of questions do you ask yourself when faced with difficult issues to be sure you're not just a right wing authoritarian follower in your choices and opinions? .

good questions. Conservatives in Australia are very open to fascism, including the aformentioned Prime Minister, who, should be charged with war crimes.
Sure...they want people to hand their guns in...but perhaps for their own reasons, not for the reason most of us might like it.
If Australian "conservative" politicians had a sizeable portion of the population taught to revere to right to bear semi automatic weapons, then you can be assured it would be a bigger issue.
Apart from the war waged on the indigenous population and the very odd shell in WW2 we have not had war happening on our soil...the idea of people needing guns...is, alien really. Why would we need them?
I sat next to an Aussie ex pat on a flight recently who lives in LA, and he keeps a gun in his car, but here, well, people would think you had a kangaroo loose in the top paddock if you did.

 

[Tigers!]

FIFY

Do you ask yourself the same questions? I acknowledge that you of course don't have to answer that. It's none of my business really. But I am always interested in how others deal with these pitfalls of thinking that we all share.

The questions I ask myself are
1. Is the cure worse than the disease?
2. Is there an alternative than might solve the issue at hand?
3. Is there really a problem or just the bleatings of a self-interested mob?

What about you?

Thank you! I also ask questions about the problem at hand. #3 is interesting in that after your two questions about the problem itself, you then move to your assumptions about other people. I admit, I also tend to expect certain behaviors from others, depending on the situation and what they have already revealed about their way of thinking. However, what I'm really curious about most is what questions you ask yourself about your own thinking.

For example:
Am I starting my examination of this issue by automatically applying my opinion of other people involved?
Is it useful to make judgments of others first and then apply critical thinking to the facts or would the other way around work better? I try to avoid
Am I reacting emotionally first and then justifying what I already believe?
Is this reaction of justifying my preformed opinions a useful framework in which to solve problems?

Stuff like that.

Also, fascism is not an ideology. It's a way of thinking that can apply to a great many ideologies. Communism is just one belief system that can easily be poisoned by fascism, much like Christianity and conservative political ideologies.

Are you curious as to why that is?

For example:
Am I starting my examination of this issue by automatically applying my opinion of other people involved? Since my opinion is one of the reasons I am examining the issue then it would be hard avoid exercise my opinion
Is it useful to make judgments of others first and then apply critical thinking to the facts or would the other way around work better? I try to avoid that but sometimes it is more fun to judge first
Am I reacting emotionally first and then justifying what I already believe? Emotion is hard to avoid but I try to avoid it too much. It can cloud the thinking.
Is this reaction of justifying my preformed opinions a useful framework in which to solve problems? Why you assume that that my preformed opinion is incorrect? Sounds like you are breaking the 1st rule above. Opinions can change but they have to be there first before they can change.

These 2 sentences

Also, fascism is not an ideology. It's a way of thinking that can apply to a great many ideologies.

seem disjointed. Could you clarify please?

Communism is just one belief system that can easily be poisoned by fascism, much like Christianity and conservative political ideologies.

If communism is poisoned by fascism or vice-versa they would die.

 

[Tigers!]

These are good questions. If you are a conservative the answers to the questions are always,

1. Is the cure worse than the disease? Yes.
2. Is there an alternative than might solve the issue at hand? Yes, if the alternative is doing nothing.
3. Is there really a problem or just the bleatings of a self-interested mob? Yes, bleatings​

I wonder how many conservatives, esp. Burkean ones, you have ever met? Perhaps you met some caricatures of conservatives?