data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/33cd6/33cd63fbee8514b91f0488b77fbe2248bfe6f269" alt="(Image: Tom Red/Private Media)"
“The most famous ad I wrote,” says Jane Caro, as we stride down Park Street towards Hyde Park, “was one for washing powder.” She makes a face. “Where this bloke is in a nightclub and asks a woman for her phone number and she …”
“She writes it in lipstick on his shirt and then…” I said excitedly, suddenly recalling it, clear as dazzling clean whites.
“Yes! Me and the art director put that together. Very proud of that.”
In the ad, as I recall, the young man, staggering home, drops the shirt in a hamper, and in the morning wakes in reverie… and then horror as he hears the machine going. Too late! The power of whatever goop it was has erased his prize. It was very ’90s, high finish, gleaming Anglo couple, the slight naffness of ’90s style, fantasy of another time.
“That opened a lot of doors.”
“I would have sworn that a bloke wrote that.”
“No, that was us. It was designed to try and get blokes to buy more washing powder.”
It occurs to me that may or may not have worked. It’s a castration scenario, of course: the woman, smiling, wielding the lipstick phallus to give the bloke a fake contact, which washes away anyway, the trace of a trace. She got his number, but he never got hers. For the sake of an interview, I decide not to bring this up.
By now, hundreds of red-T-shirted protestors are starting to swarm around us, part of the state’s high school teachers’ strike. We’re on the way too. Caro, not much more than five feet tall, is in an RM Williamsy brown jacket and a tan bush hat, a half dozen of her supporters swarming around her, in teal and white Reason T-shirts, grouping and regrouping as they give out a few leaflets — “Don’t overdo it” — for Caro’s Senate campaign, as part of said Reason Party.
She has a commanding style; it must also be said she has a vague look of Paddington Bear, as though that Peruvian ursine suddenly got militant and joined the Shining Path (Paddingto e la Senderosa Luminosa hasta la victoria siempre).
“Well, anyway, that was advertising, which I’d stumbled into and stayed with for decades, copywriting. There were a bunch of us, women in advertising. We supported each other.” They would have needed to in Australian advertising in the ’80s and ’90s, when stalking the land were big beasts like Singo and co — bloody Singo, have a beer, have 60, wehredya get it? Let’s put the “lunch” on the company account. Are you with me!
Between then and now, Caro, well, you knew her… she’s been everywhere, done everything. Two decades ago, out of frustration with the continued iniquity of the state/private school funding split, she wrote an op-ed on it for the SMH out of the blue in defence of the beleagured notion of a genuinely fully-funded system, oriented to lessening inequality of opportunity, and hasn’t looked back. Since then, a torrent of articles, documentaries, public speaking, spreading out from education, to environment, to violence against women, and beyond.
So when it was announced that Caro was running for the Senate in this election, no one was surprised that she had joined the fray. When it was on the Reason ticket, there were more than a few raised eyebrows. Reason has been largely the vehicle for Fiona Patten, formerly head of the Sex Party, the closest and most successful thing Australia has had to a genuine libertarian outfit. Patten is the former head of the Eros Foundation, which was either a bold champion of liberation or the peak body for some dodgy brothels, with their own expertise on women’s oppression, or a bit o’ both, depending upon your politics.
But as the politics of bohemia shifted, so has Patten’s politics, to a mix of the old libertarianism — championing voluntary assisted dying, for example — while also pushing what it would once have called nanny-stateism, establishing, for example, a state “ministry against loneliness”. Reason is running on — well, what everyone on this side is running on this time: really address climate change; put in a system of real accountability; revive the public sector in health, education and the rest. They have a stronger emphasis on consultation, democratisation and policy detail than the Greens, the old Sexo’s having become a German-style, left ordoliberal outfit. You’re soaking in it.
So the big question for someone like Caro is, why Reason? As a progressive, why not join and build the Greens?
“Because they didn’t ask me. And Reason did.” She says this without rancour or arrogance, though it does not escape a whiff of it, the notion that a party joins you, rather than the other way round.
By now, we were at Hyde Park, an absolute sea of red T-shirts, a few rainbow, some a motley of other colours from specific schools (“Hyde Macquarie Fighting Bolshevik Brigade”). There was a rocking sound system, and hardcore chanting over and over. “When I say teachers, you say power. TEACHERS!” “POWER!” “NO TEACHERS, NO FUTURE” the chant continued, though that one could have been written approvingly by Year 11s.
“Besides, with regards to Reason and the Greens, I did like the idea of a smaller party, and an evidence-based one.”
“Evidence as opposed to…”
“Well, as opposed to a consensus-based party.”
Many Greens would be pleasantly surprised to hear that the bone-crushing Greens Machine is consensus-based, but let that pass.
“But there’s always got to be a political decision in the end. Science doesn’t enact itself…”
“Yes, but –” Jane jumps in, before someone, a cheery young women bustles up. “Oh Jane, I just had to say, you’re an absolute inspiration to me. You put things so clearly…”
I give them a bit of privacy, and talk to a couple of Caro’s supporters. Actually more than a couple of Team Caro here are very Team Caro, relatives and personal friends of the candidate, an increasing trend among these small-party and independent candidates. Suburban warlords with a T-shirt army, ranging over the leafy hills.
Jane is finishing up. “And together we can get the job done!”
She’s imparted some sort of buzz to the young woman, who goes away a little floaty. That’s probably the Caro effect. There’s a touch of the Vegemites there, love it or hate it. For many, Caro is the embodiment of progressivity, and positivity, the sense of liberation coming out of the 1970s, of realising a destiny. She’s a diminutive household god for many in that generation. For some coming later, she represents boomer blitheness, a worldview based on affordable housing, from a time when the atmosphere wasn’t trying to kill you, the personification of a generation that doesn’t get it about how it is now.
To be evidence-based, a lot of that is simply ex-Honi Soit, post-libertarian, Marxist, burnout Twitter, which is about 40% of Sydney Twitter, but they can be vocal about it. Some have been in conniptions about Caro’s latest project, a novel called The Mother, about a heroic mum’s attempt to save her daughter from violent coercive control, and which… well, Jane is no Diane Demetre, who would have had the daughter rescued by a sheikh landing his helicopter in the backyard and whisking the daughter away to found a dynasty in the sparkling desert sands — and could do with it. (I’m onto my third Demetre, Retribution, about a sniper who falls in love with the woman he’s supposed to assassinate. More please, but my God, the number of these new candidates with books. This election has a reading list like a 19th-century novel course.)
The boomer thing is also unfair of course, since a lot of Caro’s long war on the education front has been about the erosion of a commitment to lessening inequality that we were pursuing for a few decades, until it came up hard. “Had I joined the Greens, the advantage for them would have been someone advocating public education among a lot of people sending their kids to private schools,” she says, with a cheeky laugh. But she also mentions that her husband — college sweetheart — as a drinks merchant, introduced Veuve Clicquot to Australia, and if she is victorious, they will thus toast her triumph. Boomers. Nothing like them before, nothing since. “We’ve got John Bell doing a TV ad for us.”
“Look, the bottom line is the Greens have no chance of winning a second Senate seat, so without us it would have just gone to the right. Effectively Reason is a place where lower house teal voters can put their Senate vote.” You can’t really argue with that. The Greens aren’t complaining and, to be honest, you never know what’s going on behind the scenes, really.
The demonstration, not an action but a good old-fashioned, new-fashioned mass demonstration, swells to fill the park ahead of marching on Parliament, and Team Caro dives into the sea of red, a small teal wave. The Greens haven’t arrived yet, but when they do, c’est formidable, about 25 of them, all in green with a green flag on a long pole. Perched on a slight rise in Hyde Park, they look over the minor party formations like the Savoyard cavalry surveying the hapless Piedmontese, about to take them apart.
Team Caro has been swallowed up by the sea of red, but the last thing I hear is from the podium: “I SAY TEACHERS YOU SAY POWER. I SAY — OH, I’VE JUST GOT TO TAKE A FAN PHOTO WITH JANE CARO. SHE’S HERE, SHE GETS THE JOB DONE!”
She does at that. Will she do so come May 21? I’m still enough of a partyista to believe that the left should build the Greens, or further left parties, but as I say, you can’t deny the perverse logic our system demands: unity in difference. In the end, it’s all in the numbers.
I’m surprised you didn’t mention Jane Caro’s long advocacy for older women who end up living in poverty. I have been following her for years and I think she is an amazing woman who has brought energy and compassion into her media contributions and talk circuit- highlighting inequity in society and needed solutions. I subscribed to Crikey as I loved her weekly summary of what was going on.
You sound a bit condescending- Paddington Bear? I’d vote her PM tomorrow if she ran!
what, an article that encapsulated Reason’s argument to distinguish themselves from fellow progressives, profiled the candidate and documented how popular she was in a union crowd? with a coupla jokes? quelle horreur
Sorry to be thin skinned about her- she’s been someone I’ve followed and loved for years- ?
Fair enough! 🙂
from a Green victorian perspective, watching the agonising work of building evidence based policy (hundreds of pages of it) in a consensus based culture where everyone has to be brought along, seeing Fiona take all the credit just because the ALP cannot bear to share a platform with the Greens but are happy to give her harmless wins, has been extraordinaily frustrating.
The Greens convoy through Central Qld contributed to the Coalitions win last time. It was a strategic mistake of the highest order though it may have given many of the Greens good “feels”?
Think that should have said mistaken strategy. It was misguided for a number of reasons.
That was the Bob Brown Foundation, not the Greens. They had no role in it
fair enough, but the Vic Greens should make their campaigns more public, more agitational, and thus get the credit. If theyd run public meetings on VAD, for example, people would know
The “Reason Party” (such a humble name) trades off the ignorance of those atheists who believe that religion is opposed to science – same folks who believe that medieval Europeans thought the Earth was flat, or that its physical position at the centre of the universe (an understandable mistake) meant it was the most important place in the universe.
I think Galileo would disagree with you on that.
You don’t need to believe that “religion is opposed to science” to believe that (organised) religion should not be (an outsized influence) in politics. You just need to believe that private religious belief is one thing (to be at a minimum tolerated if not celebrated), but an attempt to impose the beliefs of a single organised religion on an entire population is an entirely different and more pernicious thing.
https://www.reason.org.au/getting_religion_out_of_politics
Libertarianism is a strange thing, isn’t it. Such a malleable concept. Thus Ms Patten is a libertarian when it comes to drugs and sex work (a stance with which I am thoroughly in agreement), and yet successfully got up a bill which created a no go zone for anti choice protestors around places which provide abortions. I am also in favour of this, whilst having concerns about the precedent it creates. However it’s hardly the stuff of libertarianism. Proving, I suspect, that people who live in the real world acknowledge that libertarianism as a political philosophy is absurd.
Ms Patten has done incredibly well in Victoria, and we are indebted to her for a number of really good reforms. Whether Ms Caro and other Reason Party members could pull off a similar feat if they had a parliament which is as sympathetic as the Victorian one is to Ms Patton’s reform agenda remains to be seen. I am doubtful, but it will be interesting. I think that Ms Patten is probably assisted by some very able researchers and legislation drafters, and I suspect that, should any of the Reason Party be successful in gaining office, they might want to make certain that they choose staff who can do this sort of work, rather than political hacks.
I don’t think Ms Patten actually identifies as a libertarian:
“Libertarian without the civil in front of it becomes a little bit crazy Tea Party to me” – https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/mar/12/fiona-patten-why-she-wants-to-find-a-new-name-for-the-australian-sex-party
As for “a bill which created a no go zone for anti choice protestors around places which provide abortions … it’s hardly the stuff of libertarianism”
It’s certainly hardly the stuff of what often gets called libertarianism in the US, but I do think it’s a welcome nuance for those concerned about meaningful personal liberty – there’s no point having a “freedom” to attend an abortion clinic if you can be bullied out of it by a minority of protestors.
There is absolutely a need to be careful with such bills to ensure that people can still protest against an institution or a policy, but preventing people from protesting against individuals just trying to live their lives is a worthy goal.
Mmmm…she was a bit ambiguous about it for a while, and at the very start of being involved in parliament kind of threw her hat in the ring with the Shooters and Fishers party, but then backed off quite quickly. She clearly had a really good think about what it actually means.
Your very good point about the nuance is why I think that libertarianism is basically meaningless.
you have to go back a bit further than that, to the 80s and 90sm when fiona and political and life partner Robbie Swan were very libertarian indeed
Libertarianism is a product of the Koch brothers, is it not? Dig deep and it’s quite repulsive to Australian values of equality via public education and public health. I am however quite inspired by smart women standing up politically and independently. Go Jane.
No. It’s not.
Well it was infected by them and is now tainted.
I agree, if the term Libertarian is framed the way Guy normally uses political names often lumping US ideology it makes no sense.
Language is his to do what he chooses and can often be interpreted as the opposite , then the sentence doesn’t make sense and spoils what is normally a fun flippant insightful camp bourgeois frolic, so just go with it,. ha.
pot kettle a bit there SC, for that word stew. The Sex Party was libertarian in a classical, simple sense. Reason is a hybrid
I should be able to comment without you firing back, you never check later.. ha, I did use bourgeois there very deliberately in jest, your version of gilding for a entertaining read.
Yes reason is a hybrid and yes you fudged the meaning, marijuana and paid sex rights doth not make a libertarian
You should be banging on about how hapless this system of media ownership and king making is more often, ha cheers
I hope they believed in good tax, I’ve preferenced them before voting.
I would love to vote for an evidence based rational teal senate candidate, wish I had one here in WA. The senate thrives on people who can engage with content and influence others – Caro sounds just the ticket.
Caro is proof that the pompous, self regarding mansplaining, public commenter has an equivalent in the female sex. And they are now finally getting their turn to tell the rest of us what they think on any number of issues they have no expertise in, but their own genius.