Australia has a new political party, The Secular Party of Australia. They believe in:
- Separation of Church and State
- Individual Freedoms and Choices
- Progressive Economic Policies
- A Fair and Equitable Society
- Global Solutions to Global Problems
Check out their platform.
I particularly like their ideas for the Middle East:
"The only possible long-term solution to the Middle East problem, consistent with principles of honesty, compassion, freedom and justice, is a unitary secular state in which all people have equal rights. This will perhaps require a degree of compromise that most Jews will find painful to accept. To allay Jewish fears that a specific homeland is required for their security, the Secular Party proposes that a coalition of countries be formed that will guarantee their asylum in the event of their persecution. In the proposed unitary secular state, no religion should be presumed authentic and no rights or privileges should be granted on the basis of claimed ethnicity or religious belief.
"The primary obstacles in achieving this solution are Judaic beliefs that presume exclusive territorial entitlement, and irreconcilable Islamic beliefs that also necessitate superior claims to territory. The key to dissipating this irreconcilability is simply to put forward the proposition, which is impeccably based in reason, that the beliefs on which the conflict is based are false, unnecessary, undesirable, harmful, and based on nothing more than ancient mythology. Astoundingly, it seems that perhaps no political leader anywhere has ever put forward this proposition."
- Individual Freedoms and Choices
- Progressive Economic Policies
- A Fair and Equitable Society
- Global Solutions to Global Problems
Check out their platform.
I particularly like their ideas for the Middle East:
"The only possible long-term solution to the Middle East problem, consistent with principles of honesty, compassion, freedom and justice, is a unitary secular state in which all people have equal rights. This will perhaps require a degree of compromise that most Jews will find painful to accept. To allay Jewish fears that a specific homeland is required for their security, the Secular Party proposes that a coalition of countries be formed that will guarantee their asylum in the event of their persecution. In the proposed unitary secular state, no religion should be presumed authentic and no rights or privileges should be granted on the basis of claimed ethnicity or religious belief.
"The primary obstacles in achieving this solution are Judaic beliefs that presume exclusive territorial entitlement, and irreconcilable Islamic beliefs that also necessitate superior claims to territory. The key to dissipating this irreconcilability is simply to put forward the proposition, which is impeccably based in reason, that the beliefs on which the conflict is based are false, unnecessary, undesirable, harmful, and based on nothing more than ancient mythology. Astoundingly, it seems that perhaps no political leader anywhere has ever put forward this proposition."
8 Comments:
Ha! They talk about religions having contradictions - I see two of the major planks in their manifesto contradicting each other straight away, that is:
- Individual Freedoms and Choices
AND
- A Fair and Equitable Society
I'm not sure what they mean by "progressive economic policies", but if they mean it in a literal sense, then that contradicts "individual freedoms and choices", too.
Also, I love their ideal solution to the Israeli-Palestinian land dispute - a unitary secular state - the creation of which the Jews are holding up, what with their old fashioned religious beliefs. Unlike the uber-tolerant and progressive Muslims... I wonder how consistent Sharia law is with a secular state. Anyone?
What planet do these people come from? Are they even remotely aware of the Islamic doctrine? Have they never stopped to ask themselves why there are no secular majority-Islam states in the ME? They make it sound as though the Palestinians are all revved up for happy and free cohabitation in a greater Israel, but those nasty Jews are holding them back with all their oldfashioned religious beliefs. Absolute rubbish.
No political leader has put forward the position they mention because it's fallacious and they'd be laughed and hooted off any podium they made such a claim from. This is a party of morons, for morons.
Sorry, when I said
"I'm not sure what they mean by "progressive economic policies", but if they mean it in a literal sense, then that contradicts "individual freedoms and choices", too."
I meant
"I'm not sure what they mean by "progressive economic policies", but if they mean it in a literal sense, then that contradicts "A Fair and Equitable Society", too."
PIMF.
But who actually are they? Who alerted Ant to their existence? Have you ever heard of a new political party with an anonymous leader? Seems pretty gutless to me.
Before you know it, they will have a publishing contract with MUP!
Stev - Angela is quite right. You really should read between the lines. Their whole wishy washy, unspecific manifesto shrieks leftist collectivism - cloaked in the garb of libertarianism. Pity its veneer is millimetre thick.
The fact that they would allude to such an event - given their current statements - makes it quite obvious that they're cognizant of the way the scenario would unfold if their desires for that region ever came to pass.
We're talking about a political party. Stop being so naive.
Stev - it was your analysis of the party's ME plan that made me say you were being naive. The fact that the Secular Party proffers a guarantee of asylum to the Jews and not the Muslims speaks volumes about their true allegiances and what they consider is a likely end result of their unitary state. I personally think it's very naive to take the position that such a one sided plan is evidence of merely "understand[ing] there is potential for problems with any plan". Where's their plan to resettle the Muslims if it doesn't work out? Why should the Jews have to leave if the Secular Party's great project fails? This is what I'm talking about when I say you need to stop being naive and start reading between the lines. What the Secular party is tacitly hinting at is plainly obvious to me.
DBO: yes. When leaders try to engineer a fair and equitable society, this is always done by limiting individual freedoms and choices. Think about it.
IMO a fair society is one where individual freedoms and choices are seminal.
Stev:
"I simply answered Angela's question."
Yes, and I don't think you answered the question adequately, thus the question still stands.
"And your simplicity in paraphrasing their plan as 'resettling' the Jews 'if it doesn't work out' is equally naive."
How so?
"The plan speaks of equal rights for both groups in this proposed nation."
Yes, but I'm not dealing with that part of their manifesto. I'm dealing with the part where they clearly state their policy of forming a coalition of nations that "will guarantee their [Israeli Jews] asylum in the event of their persecution." They're clearly talking about resettlement in the event the unitary state collapses and the Jews are persecuted. I don't see how the way I paraphrased this part of their manifesto is "naive".
"The plan speaks of equal rights for both groups in this proposed nation."
The point is that it only alludes to a contingency plan for one group (the Jews) if the plan goes awry. They also foist all the blame for the tensions in the conflict on the Jews and the Secular Party's perception of the Jews' attitude. Like I have repeatedly said, it doesn't take a genius to read between the lines to understand what these guys really think.
How can there be a party if there are no leaders and no members? All I see is a high school standard essay. Who are the ideologues? Why are they afraid to be known? Are they wearing the metaphorical niqab?
Stev : that post's way too long for me to wade through bit by bit. I will say a couple of things, however.
In regards to one snippet, I partially concede the point. You're correct, I was wrong to say that the party wholly foists the blame on the Jews. Call it a fault of my skim reading - I missed the bit where they suggested the crisis over the Israeli land was also due to the Muslim outlook.
Having said that, I'll still say that if one observes the number of words dedicated to describing the issues on either side; compare the Israeli Jews, their manifest faults, the origins of these faults and what currently drives them - which are covered in several paragraphs - and the Palestinian "issues", which they briefly mention in about half of one sentence. Instructive, no?
Also, you don't deal with the seminal point - which I mentioned at least twice. Okay, it's sensible to have contingency plans for any policy. My point is; why haven't they mentioned, as part of their platform, that they will organise with the surrounding Arab countries a guarantee of a place of asylum for displaced Palestinians should the plan go awry? Why are the Jews and the Jews only targeted for an evacuation plan should the Secular Party's amazing idea that no one else has thought of (haha) go tits up?
Going by my analysis (and I never claimed anything to the contrary), this thing stinks of an anti-Israeli bent - even though it's not explicitly stated. Of course, for this kind of thing it often doesn't need to be. Look at what they're saying about the US, who just happens to be the major supporter of Israel. Once again, it's simply reading between the lines.
I don't know why we're arguing about this - we both seem to believe that this party and their manifesto constitute a pathetic joke.
Post a Comment
<< Home