As I was contemplating the topic of today’s column, I was struck by two successive headlines in The Age. The first, reporting ASIC’s decision not to prosecute Crown Resort directors and senior executives for possible breaches of corporate laws. The second, the Morrison government’s decision to ignore concerns that the retirement income system is “heavily weighted toward those in higher income brackets” in favour of maintaining provisions that allow a handful of Australia’s mega-rich to use their super funds to minimise tax and hand their nest egg on as inheritance.
Here, in a nutshell, are the two types of corruption — individual and democratic — that have brought American democracy to its knees and, if not addressed here, will hobble Australian democracy too. It starts with distrust. Not just of the basic integrity of our leaders to play by the same moral rules that apply to the rest of us and be held accountable when they don’t. But also, and just as importantly, trust that the leaders will use their power to establish laws that are fair.
By fair, I mean, not “rigged” — the word of the decade for a reason — to give advantages to some that are not enjoyed by others. Indeed, one reading of the rise of demagogic leaders in the Republican Party (a process begun by Pat Buchanan in the 1990s, continued by Sarah Palin and culminating in Donald Trump) was the rage of what journalist Jeremy Peters describes as the party’s “valley trash” at being passed over by establishment members for leadership positions.
But the rage of non-establishment Republicans ran deeper than that, targeting the policy tentacles of trickle-down economics — everything from high immigration to borderless trade — that benefitted the establishment but delivered downward mobility and economic insecurity to them.
Only when such grievances were ignored, the argument runs, did the “base” go nuclear. Nominating and then helping to elect a president whose appeal was tribal. He looked and sounded like them, and proudly trumpeted their religious and racial biases. But most importantly, he was disdained by the same people who disdained them, which meant every time he was up there giving the other side a black eye, it felt like a win for them.
In other words, it was only when rank-and-file Republicans gave up on democracy delivering for them that they lashed out by electing a leader like Trump. A man who, while certainly lacking in experience and integrity, would at least ensure the chronic corruption that characterised Washington would favour them for a change. And if he burned it all down? Well, no loss for them, and at least it would be “wild” — and they’d be in charge.
These tragic yet understandable conclusions are instructive for Australians keen to learn the lessons of America’s democratic unravelling so we can avoid them happening here. The main one is that everyone must have a stake in democracy for it to survive, and that this faith is undermined by individual and democratic corruption.
So, what can we do? The first step is to close the book on what experts commenting on the ASIC decision not to prosecute called “the long-term narrative” of impunity surrounding senior government and political leadership in Australia. No one can be — or be seen to be — above the law.
But the problem runs deeper than that, and goes to the corruption of the democratic process itself. The issue of differential access for the rich and other high-fliers to the policy process, and the distorting impact this has on the nature and type of laws passed. How in a democracy designed to serve the public interest did we end up with a law that allows the richest Australians to both pay less tax and to shelter their enormous wealth? And how can we expect Australians to support that system, especially when it stubbornly refuses to change things, even when the rabid unfairness to all but 11,000 of us is pointed out?
Which returns us to the question of the leaders we need to restore faith in Australian democracy before time runs out. Leaders who act with integrity and an absence of entitlement. Who don’t see themselves or anyone else as above the law and will demonstrate this by creating and adequately funding the agencies — from a federal ICAC to ASIC — designed to ensure accountability from those at the top.
And, just as importantly, leaders who will ensure equal access to the policy process so that the only laws that remain on the books, and are written into them, are ones that are designed to serve us all.
another excellent read, Leslie Cannold thanks
Agreed, now there is a grubby story developing with the Liberal party section process, in NSW. We need Crikey to shine some sunlight on this “rigged” episode.
MAny a fair point, but Trump was a beneficiary of the crooked system. HE was never going to change it, in fact he made the upward rush worse by cutting the taxes of the rich. He was happy to watch half a million die while he trumpeted how mild COVID was then went off for the best hospital care, while trying to remove the care that many people had. I can understand why the voters felt disillusioned, but not why they thought the crook would be any part of a solution.
Trump’s less affluent supporters can be seen as another iteration of ‘The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists’ of the eponymous novel by Robert Tressel, written early last century. Although they have very little, they willingly give and give most generously to those who already have so much and exploit them, while denouncing in the harshest terms anyone who tries to reason with them.
Whenever Trumps supporters get together there is an empty K-Mart someplace. Such is the intelligence of these people.
My dear old Dad used to call them “two bob Tories”.
Plus note Mark 12:41–44, Luke 21:1–4 refer to “..the Widow‘s mite…”.
Not widower nor grandad.
Grandma.
Thanks for that Epipen, we can always rely on you for a bizarre and useless comment.
Without hesitation “Everyone must have a stake in Democracy in order for it to survive . . .” The essential catalyst required to hold our Nation together.
Truth is: Democratic values currently unsustainable. Unless, Federal Govt(s) of the day re-commit to deliver accountability, transparency and integrity. Under-writing every decision they make. Right now it is not happening. For those values to be resuscitated Australia requires a change of leadership. That can only occur, if the electorate commits?
In other words, graybul, if democracy fails and falls in this country, it will be the fault of the majority. What an irony, eh? It will die and disappear because, as a group, we boobed big time in who we chose as leaders. Never then was there such a profound choice before us as there will be at the upcoming election. Do we choose the seeming extrovert because of his populist Court Jester antics and keeping “in the eye” via multitudinous “Photo-optical, Jack of all trades and abilities” displays of little consequence, or to the somewhat duller and not so brazenly appealing with less froth and bubble, “other contender”. What is needed now like never before is some calm and careful reflection on who and what will serve this Australian democracy best. Our future depends on it.
Indeed, ironic. Or, as one lady said: ‘I always vote Blue’?
I think/ hope you’re right, graybul.
But the “debt and deficit” that a new government would inherit is D&D enough to need 2 terms at least to get to grips with and to get over. I don’t know that the voters would give any party the time or opportunity to achieve this. Return of the COALition would see more of the same lack of accountability, pork barreling, lies, cuts to services like health, education, cuts to support to low-income earners and the unemployed,infrastructure(apart from park-and-ride in COALition seats) disgraceful attitudes towards women in general and towards women and staffers in particular and a firm determination to keep their seats filled by the Liberal executive over the wishes of the Liberal voters, as has just happened in NSW. To say bothing of preparedness for climate upheaval or new and infectious diseases such as the world has just seen – indeed is still seeing.
ScottyFromMarketing managed to pull the rabbit out of the last election hat. No “miracle”, just spin and lies with whatever promises he made (a Federal ICAC?) were not kept along with so many others since then. That’s another long list.
Ooops as an official “oldie” I forgot to list aged care. Now that is SAD (Joke!!)
I’ve pointed out a few times on Crikey that I think the reason the Victorian state government performs so strongly in polls is because they made achievable promises prior to election, and acted on them straight away after elected. When people see useful infrastructure happening right before their eyes and when they were told it would, it inspires trust. Whether that trust is ultimately earned is up to the government concerned to manage. But I do think that the federal opposition needs to stop making stupid motherhood statements like Albanese did yesterday about being like Hawke and Howard, and actually make some commitments to action they can take immediately after being elected to government. And then, when elected, they need to do it straight away without setting up timewasting committees and inquiries. Internally, they need to commit to taking back into government hands elder care, child care, disability care, and job seeker services. But these policies should not be discussed prior to election, because the greedy pricks who run these sectors have big war chests.
Anatole France said in 1894, “In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets, and steal loaves of bread.” Even if the various iniquities set out in the article were to be addressed, so that making laws and their implementation did not explicitly favour the rich, and access to the law was open to all, there would still be a fundamental issue. But it would be a huge improvement over the current system where to be rich and well-connected is to be, in many ways, above the law.
Still, some countries manage to be a lot more equal than others.
Faith is the wrong word because politicians rely on the faithfooled. What about integrity instead.