Friday, 6 June 2025

Post No. 3,131 - An example of political activism

On my now inactive political blog, I used to post examples of emails etc that I wrote as examples of activism. I don't want to do that too much here, but I have prepared an email I will be sending to candidates for an internal representative body for a political organisation that I am a member of when they contact me asking for my vote. 

In the following, note that the very last question 4(e) has been left entirely open, as I wish to see who will or won’t mention what is happening in West Asia, and what their views are, and that I may yet omit or change question 4(d). 

 

START EXAMPLE  


Thank you for contacting me about your candidacy.  

I have four questions (the last being in five parts) which I would appreciate your responses to, if you have the time. If not, that is OK, as I understand how busy candidates are during these campaigns.  

Also, some of this is likely to be raising awareness on particular points for some people, so I do accept that not everyone will have thought about some of these points to provide a considered reply now, in the heat of a campaign, which is OK.  

 

1. Do you accept that the climate crisis is an existential risk to humanity’s survival, or at least the number of humans who will be alive in a century and their quality of life?   

  • If no, please outline your views.  

A couple of additional, lower priority questions follow – feel free to ignore or respond as you wish:  

  • Australian houses have been described as functionally little better than tents, relying on energy consuming heating & cooling rather than eaves, double glazing, geostabilisation of temperature, and properly insulated walls (Earthships, earth covered domes, and various forms of compressed earth have better performance). Before I retired, one of my projects took me to Mongolia, with temperatures down to -30°C, and an ex-pat colleague of mine there commented that the coldest he had ever been in a house was in Australia.
    Would you support policies that improve Australian housing - INCLUDING allowing smaller homes? (The bigger, flashier housing for social status thing is amathiac, untenable, and actively anti-equality and harmful to our future generations, IMO.)  
  • Do you accept that there is a limit to the resources we have available on this planet, and, no matter how efficient we become with their use, at some stage someone is going to have to be mature enough, far sighted enough, and caring enough of our future generations to start finding a way to live within the Planetary Boundaries?  

 

 

2. Are you aware of the term state capture (see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_capture&oldid=1292425084)?   

  • If yes, would you oppose it to the best of your ability? Keep in mind that such capture could be by media or other powerful interests.   
  • If no, would you undertake to become familiar with the term and its ramifications?   

 

 

3. I am of the view that the current US regime is not only ‘a’, but ‘the’ biggest fascist threat to the world. Do you agree with that?   

  • If yes, how do you consider we should manage the (currently) dangerous interconnections and links we have with the USA, and what (if anything) should we do about the harm the USA is doing in the world?   
  • If no, please outline your views.   

These are not formal questions but I would appreciate your thoughts - including if you differ - if you wish and have time:  

  • The removal of US support has shown the vulnerability of the United Nations - and the veto power of the “big five” has always been a major problem. Should the world consider a new organisation, possibly one not geolocated in one venue and not vulnerable to the influence of any one nation (possibly organised along the lines of the very complex European Union), or perhaps consider major reforms to the existing organisation (which does provide a lot of services people do not know about)?  
  • I share a view I read recently that the best military in the world today is Ukraine’s, with Russia second, because of their drone capabilities - which is very described by Danish military analyst Anders Puck Nielsen at https://www.logicofwar.com/nato-has-missed-the-drone-revolution/. Would you support - in principle - Australia’s defence forces being reoriented towards drone and similar technology at large enough scale to be a primary form of weapon?  

 

 

4. I am of the view that human rights are ESSENTIAL to ensuring a properly functioning democracy - not only around issues such as ensuring voters have the necessary access to information for their decision making, but also to protect minorities from the biases (possibly unmanaged unconscious biases) or discrimination/bigotry/hate of larger groups or “the majority”. This leads me to the following four specific issues - and I acknowledge that there are others.  

 

4(a)   I consider our future leaders - at all levels of government, including local - should be comfortable with and fluent in human rights issues (e.g., that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [which WAS based on global cultural research] was codified into “the twin covenants” [i.e., the “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” and the “International Convention on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights”,   the basic mechanics of Australia accepting international conventions [i.e., signature, ratification, and possibly enabling legislation,   that Australia played a key role in the formulation and adoption of the Genocide Convention,   etc) and able to discuss these issues and their effects on economic and reputational matters in both conventional press and social media. (I consider this of particular importance with regard to maintaining our primary vote in coming years.)  

Do you agree with this? If not, please outline your views.  

A couple of related questions on that are: 

  • at present, we rely on specialist groups advocating for their rights, and then respond to those groups that the capability of doing so effectively - and those that cannot tend to get left behind. Is it time for us to consider a national human rights charter, perhaps similar to the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (see https://www.humanrights.vic.gov.au/legal-and-policy/victorias-human-rights-laws/the-charter/)? 
  • as a first step towards that, would it be appropriate to have policy committees specifically for human rights (to act in conjunction with, not in lieu of, existing committees which cover that)?   

 

4(b)   The rejection of the Voice referendum has been devastating and harmful to the First Peoples of this land - and has given racists and white supremacists a sense of empowerment.  

On the other hand, the Treaty negotiations in Victoria are progressing well, and I have been very pleased to witness and support that, including making several submissions to Yoorrook Truth Commission.  

What are your views on racism, anti-racism, and how best to address discrimination (including past)?  

 

4(c)   I have the gravest of concerns about the global trend towards transphobes having increased power, and using that power against transgender, gender diverse, and non-binary (TGDNB) people - and especially against life saving gender affirming care for TGDNB youth and children. The hateful bigotry of transphobia has been with us for centuries, but its growth in recent years is, IMO, connected to fascism. The following is from something I wrote recently:  

One of the key characteristics of the fascist ideology is insistence on stereotypical patriarchy, with only cisgender identities and heterosexuality being considered acceptable. As a result, those inclined towards that extreme right ideology often are fanatical transphobes and LGB-phobes, considering even the existence of TGDNB and LGBTQIASB+ people are threat to their personal (toxic) masculinity - something I described in a recent talk that I gave as follows:  

In terms of how the trans landscape interacted with the broader social landscape, those who do not like change or difference were a problem.
In many cases, they seemed to me to be like someone who likes having a green fence feeling that their green fence is threatened by the existence of a purple fence somewhere else. They resented having to accept the fact of the existence of that purple fence, and strongly resented having to adapt more than once – perhaps someone adds a lilac fence.  

More broadly, it means that the connection between transphobes and other anti-LGBTQIASB+ haters and neo-nazis/fascists/other far & extreme right individuals/groups/ideologies is an inevitable outcome ... - it is not deliberately planned, but their shared ideology on this point means they will be drawn to each other, and they very highly likely will cooperate.  

That means the struggle against transphobes and LGB-phobes is NOT just a matter of looking after TGDNB and LGBTQIASB+ people: it is a matter of fundamental importance to the safety and wellbeing of our democracy as well, including protection against extremist violence and possibly even terrorism.  

We are, indeed, the canary in the mine of social safety.  

In addition, the gender critical ideology has been identified by the Lemkin Institute as genocidal - see   “Statement on the Genocidal Nature of the Gender Critical Movement’s Ideology and Practice”   https://www.lemkininstitute.com/statements-new-page/statement-on-the-genocidal-nature-of-the-gender-critical-movement%E2%80%99s-ideology-and-practice       

Against that, the Victorian government has been outstanding in its support for TGDNB people - and more generally LGBTQIASB+ people - from the late 1990s. The Australian government at a national level has been generally reasonably supportive of LGBTQIASB+ people, although it is reasonable to say many people consider that support could be better.  

I also note that many religions - including quite a few Abrahamic religions and my minority religion - are supportive (sometimes quite actively so) of TGDNB and LGBTQIASB+ people & rights, and those who claim religious justification for discrimination do NOT speak for all people in their broad faith.  

I am aware that both State and National platforms are supportive, although some changes at the last State Conference took around 18 months to be implemented, but there are areas which, in my opinion, need addressing - such as the potential biases of US soldiers who are on Australian soil, and the dangerous and life threatening actions of the Queensland government against TGDNB youth.  

What are your views on TGDNB and LGBTQIASB+ rights?  

 

4(d)   I consider authoritarianism as a personality trait to be a major cause/enabler of the fascist and other human rights and inequality problems of the world. I also consider that this, along with almost all forms of discrimination/bigotry/hate, to be largely taught to children by parents and peers, and to be so unquestioned that it becomes (unmanaged) unconscious bias.  

Having personal flaws is not a matter to be legislated, except when it extends into harming others (e.g., denying children proper medical care [including denying trans children gender affirming care], hate crimes, and discrimination) - as Martin Luther King put it: “It may be true that the law cannot change the heart, but it can restrain the heartless”. However, I consider we should aspire to better in those who are leading and governing our state and nation in the public service sphere - and the whole hearted embrace of hate by the US governmental system is, in my opinion, an indication of how disturbingly widespread authoritarianism and (unmanaged) unconscious bias are. It is possible to manage (unmanaged) unconscious bias - the New York police department has demonstrated that, complete with academic reviews (which found that inclusive legislation was still required). 

Do you have any thoughts on how this? I realise this will likely be new to you, and thus you will quite rightly wish to take time to consider it - time which will likely not be available during this campaign.  

 

4(e) Is there any other human rights issue you would like to comment on?  

 

Thank you in advance for any response you are able to provide.



END EXAMPLE 



Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider: 

  • there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”;  
  • I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below, and there’s also other options. 

Note that I am cutting back on aspects of my posts - see here. 

(Gnwmythr is pronounced new-MYTH-ear)  

Remember: we generally need to be more human being rather than human doing, to mind our MÓ•gan, and to acknowledge that all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk & accept that all insistence on the use of “trans” as a descriptor comes with commensurate use of “cis” as a descriptor to prevent “othering” (just as binary gendered [men’s and women’s] sporting teams are either both given the gender descriptor, or neither).

#PsychicABetterWorld   and   may all that I do be of value and actively BPM used for and by the nonphysical  BPM  because   #KindnessIsThePoint   

Copyright © Kayleen White 2007-2025     NO AI   I do not consent to any machine learning aka Artificial Intelligence (AI), generative AI, large language model, machine learning, chatbot, or other automated analysis, generative process, or replication program to reproduce, mimic, remix, summarise, or otherwise  replicate any part of this post or other posts on this blog via any means. Typo’s may be inserrted deliberately to demonstrate this is not an AI product.     Otherwise, fair and reasonable use is accepted under Creative Commons 4.0 on an Attribution-ShareAlike basis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/  




 

Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,