Bob Brown has just announced his retirement from politics. It comes as a shock, but such announcements usually do. I can’t do justice to Bob’s thirty or more years of activism in a blog post, but there have been few people in political life who’ve achieved as much while not compromising their integrity to secure political support. The Green Party which Bob effectively founded and has largely embodied for many years, has made a big positive contribution to Australian political life
Given the rubbish in the comments threads recently, I’m going to be ruthless in moderating this one. There will be plenty of time for critical thoughts on Bob Brown’s political career and on the Green Party. If you can’t wait for a more appropriate occasion, take such comments to the sandpit. Anything in this post that crosses my subjective line will be deleted with prejudice.
John Quiggin 
what is interesting about Bob Brown’s career was that he saw social change as requiring action outside as well as inside politics. Bush Heritage Australia stands as a massive achievement in furthering habitat survival.
I think the actual electoral evidence that is available would support Paul Norton rather than Hermit.The Greens have a substantial presence at the local government level that provides a level of grass roots engagement that the Democrats never had and that KAP are never likely to have outside far north Queensland.
Bob Brown is a great man and the new leadership team have very big shoes to fill.
Welcome to the delusional Daily Tele universe. Simon Benson is your tour guide:
Heaves huge sigh ….
The investigative media gives us the truth once more. The Greens watermelon inside is now out!
The reds are back under our beds. Keep one eye open as you sleep!
Paul Norton @ #48 said:
Hmmm…tricky to call at this stage. But on balance I tend to support the Norton view. The GRN vote is an index of more general electoral polarisation, varying inversely with the ALP and directly with the L/NP.
GRN prospects in 2013 depend on how well the public take their carbon tax medicine. If the voters spit the dummy then I guess the Green vote may increase a bit as the electorate polarises between Green GRN and “Brown” L/NP. If they swallow it without protest then I predict the Greens vote will plateau or maybe slump a bit as Green Lefties drift back to the ALP. Why vote for a Brown-less GRN party when the ALP is delivering the proper policy, without the charismatic figure of Bob Brown to adulate?
OT: One thing that stands out when comparing Brown to the Rest of the Green leadership group is his sombre and sober demeanour which greatly assisted the Green cause. Many of the Greens policies looked far-out at the time and it would not have helped if their spokesman had come out sporting dread locks, juggling fire sticks or blipping furiously on everyones gaydar. The fact that Brown was a GP and came across like a WASP undertaker with a “Green” eye-shade reassured many people who might otherwise have been disposed to discount his views.
As Oakeshott remarked, “some politicians, like Pitt, laughably called “the Younger”, are born old and are eligible to engage in politics almost in their cradles”. Brown is one such the GRNs should resist the temptation to pander to the yoof vote, whose opinions on politics are, in any case, vastly over-rated. SH=Y looks perpetually young and in any case she is bossy-sounding and wants it too badly.
Ever since labor walked away from their values there has been no party for the centre-left. Under brown the greens were gradually becoming that party. I hope that continues, and best wishes to brown for steering them this far
Peter, what are the values that Labor walked away from.
Peter what are the values you would like to see Labor have.
As a former American, let me tell you what Mr. Jack Strocchi sounds like:
An embittered old school Republican still carrying on about drugs and hippies- and projecting (as is their wont) the characteristics of their own demonstrably failed policies and regressive movement onto others.
Dime a dozen in the states- but alas, since the Republicans have gone quite literally delusional, people like Strocchi really have nowhere else to go. No other outlet.
And the irony of course that any longtime observer of politics can see, they brought it all on themselves.
@Catching Up
For the sake of keeping the thread manageable in size, perhaps you could identify what values the ALP has not walked away from.
Alan, I am not making the statement. All I am asking is that they identify what they mean. Is that too much to ask.
I am very comfortable with the values of Labor today.
Surely it is not too hard a question to ask.
Perhaps it is not the right thread for a debate on labor values. But I don’t know what labor stands for or believes in, and find the ‘ working families’ mantra disingenuous. JQ has blogged about julia’s value-vacuum a few times and I agree with him. Recent state labor governments have exhibited the same hollowness – worst in NSW.
Returning to the thread topic, Bob Brown has done a lot to turn the greens into a party that can aspire to fill the vacuum left by Labor (and the Democrats). He has done this despite the fact that the greens carry some extremist baggage.
I never raised the topic. I take it that one does not really have an answer.
It is just a throw away line that one uses to condemn Labor. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
@Catching up
Rather than derail here, I’ve had a go at answering your question over in the sandpit.
@Megan
Megan,
The reason I can name all the Senators from my territory are that we only get two, and they are elected on 3 year cycles, not 6 year cycles, so their names stay fresh.
The Senators in question are Kate Lundy (ALP) and Gary Humphries (LIB), both decent, hardworking people.
Actually the catalyst for me joining the Greens many years back was a series of conversations with my then physiotherapist, who is a close friend of Bob’s. My physio recounted numerous Bob stories during my visits to him over a 12 month period. He told me one story of how Bob was so happy to see a possum scampering along a branch that he leapt on the tree and climbed it with all the enthusiasm of a little kid. That’s what I like about Bob; his uncomplicated decency and simple, wholesome goodness. One hopes the Red cadres never gain control of the party and change it into something Bob would never have approved of.
I too will greatly miss Bob Brown’s influence on Oz politics. Being relatively “green” I cannot remember a time without him and cannot imagine who might fill his shoes.
An interesting development in my adopted homeland of Germany; for the first time the Pirate party has overhauled the Greens in the polls. Have the Pirates surfaced in Oz yet? Nobody is really sure what they stand for, but surely an official “protest vote” of 15% is significant in a modern democracy.
@Catching up
If ALP has centre-left values, it doesn’t dare admit to them. Both Greens and LibNats say this, though with but opposite animus.
I think it is very important that the post-Brown GRNs do not succumb to the temptation of embracing the fashionable liberalism of the Rainbow Alliance push. There is no better way to turn off the common folk than obsessing over nth order derivative issues like same-sex marriage and asylum seekers. Ecological policy is critical to AUS’s national interest and is too important to be held hostage to the ideological fantasies of the inner-city lycra-wearing, latte sipping media-academia complex.
The idea of making common cause with the drought-threatened bush or the job-threatened manufacturing sector against the foreign owned mining oligarchs sounds good to me.
Jack, I agree with your final para but would add that it is the bush AND the manufacturing sector .
Large multinational agribusinesses have no connection with the land but they threaten the viability of smaller family farmers who generally have a love of their property in the environmental sense.
Same goes for Multinational manufacturing which has no loyalty to Australians.
I too would be happier to see the Greens put more emphasis on environmental issues and in the context of the damage which Neoliberal policies and Growth economics are doing to it.
I think this is Christine Milne’s forte.
Gotta say Christine Milne comes across well as a public spokesperson. Very practical, down-to-earth and easy on the eye. I think this is a Tassie thing.
And six toes? Any other typically tassie characteristics?
Jack: Yes, Christine Milne is a woman. And she leads a political party. Which aspect do you think is going to affect us more?
I’m a little sad to see Bob go, but at the same time I’m glad to see him step down and retire while he can still enjoy it. Better that than quitting the way Rod Donald did. I’m sure he’ll hang around and make his presence felt, but hopefully get to spend more time relaxing and having fun.
Okay sorry to let the personal intrude on the political. Almost forgot we are dealing with devotees of the Plato cult.
The sound of one hand typing.
Plato? Please explain?
Freelander @ #24 said:
Platonists hate judging things by their appearances as they believe appearances are always deceptive and are a pale shadow of the underlying true reality. They truly believe that transactions in the human world ought to be conducted on the basis of their conformity to pure abstract ethical ideals uncorrupted by the passionate appetites of those poor forked creatures, mere mortal men. Hence the phrase “Platonic love” to indicate an affection for a person based on admiration for their purely intellectual qualities, not the superficial aspects of their base appearance.
Most ordinary people regard taking Platonic philosophy seriously as a sign of incipient madness and indeed it is in many of the paranoid inhabitants of psych wards. But it is an absolutely routine method of judging certain types of political behaviour among media-academia types. Which is one major reason why ordinary people regard media-academia types with mistrust, how could they talk about normal human affections and aversions as if they were a sign of moral corruption? Obviously they regard themselves as better than regular folk.
So Platonism is really a form of intellectually camouflaged social snobbery.
So when I make a common-place remark on the agreeableness of Mrs Milne’s appearance this is not greeted with (at worst) an extended yawn. Instead the Platonists are driven out of the woodwork and queue up to denounce me for judging politicians by their appearances.
Elections as beauty contests ; I guess each voter is entitled to use their own selection criteria.
i’m no platonist (i’m a ‘pataphysicist) but you have judged a politician by her appearance, as on the previous page of this thread, in reference to sarah hanson-young:-
“she looks way too young to be in a position to have a large say in running the country.”
a.v.
The “ruthless” moderating seems to me to be either on holiday or switched to selctive bias.
Apart from the quote chosen by a.v., what’s this?:
“My advice to her is to get married again and lose the roving eye. Women pick up on it and it is not a vote winner.”
I’m heartily sick of what I refer to as ‘fascists’ getting away with blue murder in the name of ‘fair and open debate’ while the rest of us have to mind our Ps and Qs (Ooops, a pun!) for fear of upsetting the fairness and balance of allowing them to get away any outrageous rubbish they like.
I’m calling BS on letting neo-con fundamentalists and faux libertarians have the run of the roost while the reasonable people have to walk on eggshells.
Stuff that, this thread was supposed to be a place to comment on Bob Brown’s departure from politics or to be silent if you have nothing sensible to say.
Like many things he has done in life Bob Brown has made sure that he has created a party strong enough to survive the departure of its creator. I am not sure why the Murdoch Press is gleefully sowing the seeds of the thought that this will create disunity and lead to the party becoming defunct. Perhaps they are annoyed that they didn’t see it coming and couldn’t speculate about it for weeks beforehand and also that the leadership change appeared to be smooth. Strange that the issue of gender has arisen as an issue for the Greens in this thread with silly remarks by Jack S and yet the fact that there are now two women leading government policy is surely ground breaking.
@Megan
The most effective way to ridicule some, is simply to let them speak. This may be basis for some of JQ’s moderation decisions.
Alfred Venison @ #27 said:
Whoopy do. Build a bridge and get over it.
S H-Y’s performance as spokesperson on (“accidents will happen”) asylum-seekers has been disgraceful and it is an act of charity by me to put this folly down to her comparative youth and inexperience.
Every sane person on earth allows appearances some weight in making an overall judgement of of a person’s capacity to perform. The public are not gifted with second sight, so to some extent, we can only follow the tell-tale signs and go with our gut feelings.
A politicians presentation to the public is not the only thing we judge him by. But you would be mad not to notice it and take it into account as one of things you judge him by.
The duties of political salesman – boosting the political demand side – is at least 50% of a politicians job statement. Which requires attractive presentation. The policy production side is mostly hidden from sight and does not require all that much in put from politicians. Thats what we pay bureaucrats and academics for, and perhaps accounts for their limited sex appeal.
So if Bob Brown had one day decided to present in public as high camp then this would have made no difference to your judgement of him? And if Menzies had been cursed with a high-pitched voice, it would have been irrelevant. And if Gough Whitlam had been five foot four instead of six foot four then, again, no big deal.
Brown’s lugubriousness, Menzies melifluousness and Gough’s imposing stature were essential parts of their persona and crucial to their appeal. Brown’s persona, which is uncannily like a Presbyterian minister, was especially worthwhile, both in itself (I trust Presbyterian ministers) and as a way of breaking down unappealing stereotypes of gays and Greenies.
Its weird and kind of creepy that crypto-Platonists are so desperate to deny the bleeding obvious in this, as in so many other things.
Jill Rush @ #29 said:
Oh for God’s sake read what I wrote woman. Appearance is not a gender issue per se.
I am introducing appearance as an issue in judging politicians performance, specifically Bob Brown’s v S H-Y v Christine Milne. To a certain extent their appearance is predictive of their performance, with S H-Y coming across and actually being a bit of an air-head.
FWIW, I am a huge supporter of Gillard as PM. But her appearance (including especially her voice) does let her down. Quentin Bryce’s appearance is flawless in every respect and is a large and well deserved factor in her popularity. The GG’s job is ceremonial and we expect celebrants to look the part.
Anyone who appears in the public eye has to make the best of their appearance. Anyone who disputes this is on a fools errand who should retire to a barrel in their futile quest for a Platonic person.
@Jack Strocchi
I think that was Diogenes …
The remarks on appearance are incipiently misogynist of course …
Of course, thats why I referred to Bob Brown who was all the time appearing in drag. How silly of me not to notice.
Fran @3/53, the only thing that should be turning red is Benson’s face after writing such a barking mad column. He’s out-Akermanned Akerman.
thanks for elaborating deeper, jack.
a.v.
@Jack Strocchi
Calm down Jack,you’re never going to get anywhere with those fact type thingys on this blog.
A collection of praise here for Bob Brown from the Tasmanian Times.
http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/bob-browns-legacy-a-politics-based-on-love/
Jack S #33 – You rather prove the point that you have “issues” in regard to women by deciding to use a hackneyed phrase used often in the past against uppity women. Possibly you don’t even realise that you are patronising – your impatient response suggests that this is the case.
While all politicians will be judged on their dress – Paul Keating springs to mind – it is trivial and particularly nasty in regard to Julia Gillard. But to focus on my gender in your answer suggests that there is a long way to go to reach enlightenment. We will certainly miss Bob Brown who has managed issues in regard to his sexuality and I am sure that Christine Milne and the PM will stay calm as well. However it does mean that some men will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.
What I have found amazing is that the Oz has endless articles this weekend on how they loved Bob and that no-one will be able to replace him and keep the Greens together. This is surely the height of hypocrisy from a paper that declared a campaign against the Greens, while he was the leader, because it was so left wing. It seems that the Murdoch Press are cross that he didn’t consult them first and they have a new approach not suggested by them.
dear Jill Rush
nice point about keating’s wardrobe; they didn’t like his interest in 2nd empire gold clocks, either, seems that too was supposed to have made him an inauthentic advocate for the working class. yeah. but for the australian to couple the lie that, as you put it, “they loved bob” together with the self-serving speculation that “no-one will be able to replace him and keep the greens together” signifies to me that their faux (fox) encomium itself is indeed just another grubby, cynical manoeuvre in their unending campaign to discredit & destroy the greens. the australian lies as a matter of course to further its master’s political interests; this is no exception. its not hypocrisy, its class war.
yours sincerely
alfred venison
Why do they want to smash the Greens? For the same reason they’ve gone after Labor and before that, the Democrats.
Because they abhor ANY questioning of the imagined prerogatives of capitalism, let alone reasoned inquiry from organised sources who might have them employ even a fraction of their profits for OHT, fair wages, compensation or environmental preservation.
Several aspects of the Tasmanian ‘green’ scene have never received the publicity they deserve. Up until 1975, for example I accepted their unambiguous nation-wide claims that Lake Pedder Dam would produce far more electricity than Tasmania could possibly use. Only after I moved to Tassie in 76 did I realise that this was completely untrue. An effective rallying cry for a ‘noble’ cause, no doubt, but simply not true.
Then they invented the ‘last wild river’ slogan for their Franklin River Campaign. This wasn’t true, but once again it was an extremely effective slogan.
After they sent a collection of beautiful photos around the country and overseas showing delightful spots about to be flooded by the Franklin Dam, but none of them were actually in the area which would be flooded, I visited the Tasmanian Wilderness Society Office in Hobart to see if I could find a photo of something which would be flooded. On the wall was the biggest map of Tassie I’ve ever seen; but I had to show the four TWS staff where the Franklin River was — perhaps because they were all from Victoria?
This wasn’t surprising, mind you, since the biggest TWS branches were in Sydney and Melbourne.
Most amusing of all, however, was their position in those days on the greenhouse gas effect. They were advocating the construction of a Thermal Power Plant using the notoriously dirty Fingal Valley coal. Since I’d debated Senator Harradine on television when no one else would do it, the ABC approached me re a debate with the brownish ‘greens’. Guess who thought that wasn’t a safe idea, so it never took place?
Finally, I’d suggest checking the Tasmanian Hansard to see what Bob Brown argued during the First Gulf War. It might cause readers an even bigger shock. But I must give credit where credit’s due, and concede that he’s a consummate politician.
@Jill Rush
So where do you stand on Gillard calling Pyne a mincing Poodle,the abuse that Howard and Abbott have to put up with and were you one of the people who roared with laughter when your cheerleader Germaine Greer said”You’ve got a big arse Julia,get used to it”.I thought that was a disgusting thing to say about anyone,let alone the prime minister.
@JB Goode
Goode, Goode, Gum Drop …
This thread has to a certain extent stagnated into a Bob Brown love-fest. Brown is a formidable figure on the Far Left, comparable to Whitlam on the Centre-Left as a constructor of a political constituency and articulator of a policy platform. My question is what are the flaws or pitfalls in the GRNs political strategy, largely crafted by Brown.
They have certainly done well to break out of their sub-10% minor party ghetto. But much of this is down to the way the ALP dropped the ecological policy ball with its double back-flip on carbon costing. So their recent success is a function of the sins of omission by their political bed-fellows, not their own “graces of commission”.
My argument, endlessly banged-on, is that the GRNs have limited their political appeal by their “organic” association with the inner-city Left-liberal constituency whose status-ascendant concerns have limited resonance with the rest of Australia and whose growth prospects are also limited (demography is destiny). I think they might get a more enduring niche if they broke out of their inner-city ghetto and grabbed a chunk of outer-suburban and rural-regional votes.
OTOH perhaps that is as good as it gets. Maybe the GRNs national-historic role is that of One Nation, to shift one part of the the political spectrum to the Left and force the main political parties to adopt key aspects of their platform. But ON depended on Hanson as a leader in a way that the GRNs do not depend on Brown as a leader. Of course bushies tend to be a little harder to organize than the so-called free=thinking “indies”, so no leader would ever be good enough, Katter take note.
The key test is going to be the GRNs performance in the after-math of the embedding of the carbon tax. That is, do they have ideological-psephological self-sufficiency to carve out a living as ecological custodians?
If they maintain their political constituency after carbon tax is institutionalised then their political future is secure. If they slump then the Turnbulls and Rudds in future incarnations of L/NP and ALP will scavenge the bulk of their vote and the GRNs will go the same way as the DEMs.
Strocchers, while I agree with much of your analysis, I believe that the quarternary section of the economy will grow more quickly than any other economic sector. These folk are your archetypal latte sippers. Moreover, they represent the aspirations of outsiders in much the same way as the new classes of the New Left in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
While they’ll never be a statistically dominant class, they will nevertheless punch above their demographic weight.
In short, there is still growth potential for the Green-voting demographic.
@Norman Hanscombe
As you are aware, the online record of the Tasmanian House of Assembly Hansard begins in 1992.
Bob Brown was a member of the Tasmanian House of Assembly when, on 4th April 1991 he gave the speech you might be referring to.
He was as opposed to Hawke’s Gulf War as he was to Howard’s Gulf War.
If you are going to make the assertion you have, the onus is on you to provide the link rather than force me to go down to the local law library and copy out proof that you are wrong and dishonest.
Please provide the full text of his speech which makes out your argument, thanks.
Megan
I had absolutely NO idea when Tassie’s online Hansard began began, because I’d left by then. Your anonymous sniping re my honesty doesn’t concern me. A fe years back when I received similar challenges from Bob’s devoted true believers I contacted a friend working for a NSW politician (who like you was initially doubtful about the story) but had no difficulty tracking down the speech in which Bob urged the Australian Government to back moves to remove Sadam without expressing any of the concerns Bob showed later in the Federal parliament for a UN resolution backing it.
Bob’s disciples dropped off then, as I’m sure you will IF you track down what Bob actually said.
JB Goode #44 – Germaine Greer has always been shocking but her comments on the appearance of the PM in such trite sexist terms was a true revelation. Rather disgusting. One wonders if the mouth on wheels will dish it out to Christine Milne as well.