John Howard - Australia's John Galt

Welcome Instapundit readers!

Former Prime Minister John Howard is the target of much left-wing hatred, for good reason.

Today, across Australia, state Labor governments and teacher's unions encouraged public schools to feature Prime Minister Rudd's apology to the "stolen generation" and to "educate" its pupils of the historical importance of this largely symbolic gesture. The kind of impetus and vigor with which this was pursued has not been seen in Australian life for well over a decade. Not even the "Public Schools: A National Priority" campaign was so shamelessly promoted.

Tonight I attended a Quadrant dinner where I had the great pleasure to have a informative conversation with a successful businessman on the apology and its related issues. He remarked that today's affairs have made a fallacy of the argument that the Howard government had offered very little in terms of bold policy platforms or reform and that therefore its November 2007 defeat was long overdue. Howard was very much Australia's John Galt: it was against his shoulders that movement leftists railed and to which he yielded not an inch. Howard's removal he argued unravelled that Newtonian relationship, foisting insane ideas, held back for 11 years by Howard, straight into the most vulnerable demographic - our children. Almost from swearing in of the new government, the leeching and corrupting the youth has recommenced.

It is not hard to see why Howard was so hated by the left: he was the centre-right's buttress against leftist stupidity and indoctrination. It will be a long three years.

Update 14/02/08 12:00PM AEST: The teacher's unions are striking again in Victoria. Admittedly this is a state issue, but highlights the regressive behaviour in Australia is getting worse.

Comments

[Chuck Pelto]

TO: Manny
RE: Soooo....

.....when are they going to have a similar event for not establishing Sharia Law in Australia a generation ago?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Bad resolutions are more likely to be supplemented than repealed. -- Oaks's Laws]

[Jim O'Sullivan]

From over here in the States, I was said to see him go. A good, reliable, and unapologetic friend.

[SWLiP]

If not for an inconvenient clause in Art. II of our Constitution, Howard might have had a good shot at the White House, this year. His plain, blunt style reminds us of what people used to (grudgingly) admire in Americans.

[Gregory Koster]

Dear Manny: Why so pessimistic? So far as corrupt youth go, do not forget that the notorious Corey Worthington:

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23064389-2862,00.html

"grew up" if you'll pardon the phrase (hatched might be better) during Howard's tenure, and Howard's presence didn't prevent him from becoming an imbecile with appetites, with a first class seat on the Hell-bound train...

I hope you will not mind me, an American, commenting on a domestic Australian matter, i.e. the Rudd government's apology to the "Stolen Generation" of aborigines. I have read Noel Pearson's thoughts on this:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23196221-28737,00.html

and agree with Tim Blair that they make "massive sense." (Many thanks to Mr. Blair for linking this.) To apologize without offering some sort of compensation is grotesque, but Mr. Pearson makes the case that compensation is most unlikely to come from Australia's parliament. This leaves the courts. I am not familiar with the Australian court system, and do not know if the apology opens the door for hordes of rapacious lawyers to whoop with glee while running wild in the public treasury, the taxpayers being shackled to a turbine powered lemon squeezer. Could be; it could also be that Rudd & Co. are content to let this happen so when the damage awards begin flying out of the courtrooms, and the dismayingly large bill is presented to the taxpayers, they can shrug and say, Well, it's the courts that are making us do this, not our fault.

Finally, I think John Howard would be indignant at your comparison of him to John Galt. John Galt was a fantasy, created by an author whose grasp of the real world was weak, as her notably gaudy private life showed. The only way Rand could make John Galt work in her book is to have him discover "a new principle of power" generation that would make him master of the world. In the old days, such notions were called "magic wands," and recognized as such. No "new principles of power" exist as Rand has described them. No, Howard was successful because he was a politician of great skill, determination, and energy. This is what brought him four terms in office, not any semi-mystical semi-bunkum qualities by Nietzsche out of Richard Wagner. You are right to think that Australia owes him a debt. But the book of Ecclesiates, chapter 3, is also right:

"To everything there is a season, and
a time to every purpose under heaven..."

Howard's time was (and is) done. For what it is worth, I think he will have a high place among Australian and world leaders.

Many thanks.

Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster

[Manny]

Jim - Even from the city of Sydney, it was good to have a "good, unapologetic and reliable friend". John Howard knew where Australia's priorities should lie, he had a clear understanding of the jihadi threat and was a canny Kulturkaempfer. As Glenn noted in his post, it easier to appreciate Howard after he's gone.

Greg - Whether or not Howard would be indignant with the comparison I made with Galt, is largely irrelevant. The comparison rests on two Galtian characteristics: his damming of leftist tripe and the left's unruliness after he is taken away. However, agree that he will have a high place among Australian and world leaders. I was at a Young Liberals meeting two nights ago and it was remarked that posterity would call John Howard Australia's best prime minister. I am not sure about that: Sir Robert Menzies set him a high bar. But he got pretty damn close.

[nevadasestamibi]

I was truly sorry that he lost his own seat as well.

I invite him to settle in the US and let Australia's loss be our gain.

[wayne corey]

I certainly agree that John Howard should have the opportunity to run for U.S. President. We are outsourcing more and more work - why not the Presidency, especially considering our current candidates? Besides, John Howard speaks excellent English.