Fast trainspotting

Crikey readers love their train spotting and weigh in on the possibility of fast trains in Australia. Plus, what is happening with ASIO and the difficulties with the abortion debate.

6 comments

Leave a comment

6 thoughts on “Fast trainspotting

  1. Malcolm Gillies`

    Dear Guy,

    Helter Skelter. Charles Manson. QED.

  2. Harvey Tarvydas

    Asylum seekers:
    David Coady writes: Re. Yesterday’s editorial.
    In such a short written event as Crikey’s Wednesday editorial the accurate complex history of modern refugees wasn’t going to happen. The ‘errors’ don’t send messages but the editor to his credit and courage was attempting to grab the media and aberrant pollies firmly by the nose and point their pathetic heads in the right direction. So I congratulated the editor with
    Crikey, A TOP EDITORIAL — again, thank you Crikey.
    An excellent intelligent media contribution to our ‘all of our’ national problem which like all national problems is so totally a global one. Particularly …..
    “…In the meantime, though, the media will continue to obsess about symptomatic and ultimately trivial issues like the Oceanic Viking and the political point-scoring that trails emptily in its wake. …”
    The media is more than obsessed, it’s mentally ill (obsession to extremes) about refugees or asylum seekers. Just as it has been about the little harmless piglet flu, the truly deadly bird flu and just about anything that it thinks it can freak the population out over.
    This ‘freak index’ needs to be studied to discover if the terror caused competes for a terrorists title. Related words and concepts Freak – Terror – Terrorist.

    The obsession serves no one and hurts everyone especially the refugees/asylum seekers.

  3. shepherdmarilyn

    They keep whining about our “generous” refugee program which is nothing at all.

    Just an expensive hoax that picks the few best and brightest and lets the rest die.

    1185 Afghans out of 4 million were granted a right to live here last year.

    Humbug.

  4. Harvey Tarvydas

    Asylum seekers: David Coady writes: Re. Yesterday’s editorial. Your editorial claim that countries “like India” are “fearful that they, like us, will become a destination for asylum seekers” is quite extraordinary.

    Dr Harvey M Tarvydas:
    (Here it is again in case it was deemed I was posing as David).
    In such a short written event as Crikey’s Wednesday editorial the accurate complex history of modern refugees wasn’t going to happen. The ‘errors’ don’t send messages but the editor to his credit and courage was attempting to grab the media and aberrant pollies firmly by the nose and point their pathetic heads in the right direction. So I congratulated the editor with
    Crikey, A TOP EDITORIAL — again, thank you Crikey.
    An excellent intelligent media contribution to our ‘all of our’ national problem which like all national problems is so totally a global one.
    “…In the meantime, though, the media will continue to obsess about symptomatic and ultimately trivial issues like the Oceanic Viking and the political point-scoring that trails emptily in its wake. …”
    The media is more than obsessed, it’s mentally ill (obsession to extremes) about refugees or asylum seekers. Just as it has been about the little harmless piglet flu, the truly deadly bird flu and just about anything that it thinks it can freak the population out over.
    This ‘freak index’ needs to be studied to discover if the terror caused competes for a terrorists title. Related words and concepts Freak – Terror – Terrorist.
    The obsession serves no one and hurts everyone especially the refugees/asylum seekers.

  5. Stephen Feneley

    Given his sniffy put down of autodidacts, it’s entirely predictable that Guy Rundle you would accuse me of being asinine. As for the shelf of books that would enlighten me about so-called high culture having no greater moral force than more populist forms of creative endeavor – Bananarama standing shoulder to shoulder with Beethoven – if I had a dollar for every essay I’ve had to wade through on this stuff (with death-camp references thrown in) I could afford to bankroll a library devoted to it.
    But let’s move on to the real point of this riposte. Rundle says my inability to get the argument is a common failing of the “purely aesthetic”.
    Where’s his proof for that? If he’d read or seen even a fraction of my work, including my contributions to Crikey, he’d know what a dumb thing that is to say.
    If my concerns about art were purely aesthetic I would have had a considerably less bumpy ride in my career.
    Had I not been so concerned with going beyond the object to explore the broader context, including the institutions and power relationships surrounding art, I wouldn’t have found myself so at odds with senior management at the ABC, annoyed, as they very often were, about my treatment of their mates in said institutions. Often those arguments were over questions I’d raised about the level of state support for traditional art forms, exactly the sort of stuff which, , according to Rundle, I would regard as deserving of uncritical celebration.
    Me thinks Guy’s accusation that I am too preoccupied with aesthetics is based on comments I made to him in a five-year-old email that he never bothered to answer. I’ll admit it, in the offending email, I did make a case for art-for-art sake, not to the exclusion of all else by any means, but simply to argue a place for it alongside all other cultural product in a program purporting to be about art. If that is the sum total of Rundle’s understanding of my views, he’s got a lot of reading (& viewing) to catch up on.

  6. David Coady

    Since I appear not to have made it clear the first time, I will try to explain again what is objectionable about the Crikey editorial.
    The idea that India (and “similar” countries) should be taking some or all of the asylum seekers who are now inconveniencing us is wrong because (a) they are already taking (voluntarily or not) hundreds (and arguably thousands) of times more asylum seekers than we are, (b) they, unlike us, are already massively overcrowded, and (c) they, unlike us, are very poor.
    The editorial also claims that the underdeveloped world is leaving the problem to the developed world. This is just a joke. Almost all the world’s refugees are stuck in the underdeveloped world.
    Finally, the editorial’s only practical suggestion is to get developing countries to sign the UN refugee convention. Yes, Australia, unlike India et al., is a signatory to this convention, but since Australian governments have routinely violated both the letter and the spirit of it, that nothing to boast of. At least the governments that don’t sign aren’t hypocrites.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...