junior rates

Readers disagreed on a few issues yesterday. Are young people willfully disengaged from union movement, or is there a revolution coming? Is Labor responsible for capitulating to the Coalition on national security, or are they simply doing what’s necessary?

Whatever you believe, we can surely be united on one thing. This assessment of Pauline Hanson, in light of her backflip on tax cuts, was truly the best call of the day:

There's more to Crikey than you think.

Get more Crikey for just $199 $99.

Subscribe now


On union efforts to attract young people

AR writes: Anyone who thinks the “coming generation” is the hope of … anything might be interested in some bridges I have to sell.

Fletcher Beverley writes: It always surprises me how quick people are to dismiss the “coming generation” as being of little use… I’d bet that millennials (born in ’82 and later) will lead the next big working condition changes.

You have a generation facing systemic disadvantage and complete exclusion from all the wealth capitalism was supposed to bring to the working class. A generation facing the greatest existential threats humanity have faced: global warming and nuclear war. And then having some pretty dire economic threats coming soon too: Automation, increased casualisation, gig economy, job insecurity, flat wages…

A generation where alienation is the status quo while also making up more than 40% of the workforce… Bit silly to arbitrarily write them off, especially if union movement is serious about having a more serious impact on working conditions.


On Labor’s “rollovers” on national security

Marilyn writes: The two major parties are nothing but a cartel and if either move out of line with the ranting Murdoch rags on “national security” they are crucified. So much easier for the lazy trash to crucify us.

Gjb writes: It seems ironic that a organisation called “Labor” does little or no actual work. Definitely nothing that benefits the general working public who it so inaccurately believes it represents.

CML writes: What crap! If Labor had fought any of the issues articulated here, the author, and the vast majority of the MSM, would have “crucified” them forever more.
IMHO Labor has more important battles to fight in the lead-up to the next election…getting elected and saving the nation to begin with.

When they return to power, I expect them to dismantle the Dutton edifice and return the country to some semblance of normality. If they drag the chain, their supporters will be there to set them right. BTW…does anyone believe that Ged Kearney’s speech was her just shooting off at the mouth? Roll on July and the ALP National Conference!

Terry Mills writes: To suggest that the offshore detention issue is off the Labor policy platform is far from the truth, but until Labor achieve office, they can’t introduce reasonable and sensible resettlement policies for those on Nauru and Manus without being subject to an onslaught of misinformation and scaremongering from Peter Dutton.

To be clear, Labor policy requires the continuation of sovereign borders and the turnback of boats with the cooperation of Indonesia who have, to their credit, worked well on limiting the flow of irregular arrivals. Indefinite detention is a failed policy and the Coalition know this but it is one of the few emotive issues they have going for them.


On the not so revolutionary royal wedding

Josephus writes: Pertinent article, Helen. Wonder if the homeless and the red food bus are back in Windsor by now. Yes the flowers sewn onto the enormous train do invite reflection.

We watched much of the wedding, noting mainly the ludicrous, vulgar hats and the mostly plain faces beneath. The spiritual choir was lovely, as was all the music. However I cannot understand how any journo could see anything the least bit revolutionary in Bishop Curry’s emotional sermon. I detected only one mild reference to black slavery, though not mentioned as such — the rest was all about loving one another. Including the homeless and refugees, I expect.

Will the Pope or any person of faith speak up about the veneer of modernity and its contradictions as exemplified by that wedding? I wish the couple well, but hope that they spread their wealth a bit, e.g. to the fund for the Grenfell Tower survivors.

Andrea writes: A little ray of sunshine in this poncery is Samantha Markle. You can always rely on a Sister With A Bone To Pick to keep it real. She’s made it her business to ensure the spectacle doesn’t go to Meghan’s head, and to stick it to the the royal establishment. Go Samantha!

Rais writes: If there had to be coverage of the marriage of an unemployed ex-serviceman and an actress on the other side of the world your coverage summed it up nicely Helen. You watched it so I didn’t have to.


Send your comments, corrections, clarifications and cock-ups to [email protected]. We reserve the right to edit comments for length. Please include your full name.

There's more to Crikey than you think.

It’s more than a newsletter. It’s where readers expect more – fearless journalism from a truly independent perspective. We don’t pander to anyone’s party biases. We question everything, explore the uncomfortable and dig deeper.

And now you get more from your membership than ever before.

Peter Fray
Peter Fray
Editor-in-chief of Crikey
Get more and save 50%