Not the full quid

20 Apr


Ceci n'est pas un chien. Image: Daniel Munoz

Ceci n’est pas un chien.
Image: Daniel Munoz

Barnaby Joyce is always saying something remarkable for its inanity, and the last couple of days he’s done nothing to cause me to reassess my low opinion of his tortuous thought processes.

I watched him on ABC News 24 as he descended into red-faced blather on the subject, yet again, of Johnny Depp’s damn dogs, free associating like a unicyclist careening around the pavement whilst juggling plates about at any moment to topple, on the dangers Depp’s canines presented to our biological security. Not that I wish to play down Depp’s arrogant offences but Barnaby in the mix can reduce almost any topic, however serious, to farce.

Barely recovered from that comedic interlude, I was almost immediately subjected to Barnaby’s strident claim that Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull should be returned as PM on the grounds that he, unlike Opposition leader Bill Shorten, has made a quid in his life.

I confess myself somewhat unnerved by this narrative newly entering our politics and seeking normalisation, that the only requirement for holding high office is the demonstrated ability to make a quid, or rather, millions of them. It matters not how the quid is made, indeed the less said about that the better, it’s merely the having of the quid that counts because having lots of quids equals substance and talent sufficient to run a country.

By this measure it is only a matter of time before one of the Kardashians runs for public office.

Those of us who have not made a quid, and I use the phrase as a metonym for wealth rather than the middle-class comfort that aspires to and imitates the shenanigans of the wealthy, are in this narrative called upon to respect the rich and accept the fact of their greater wisdom because after all, nongs like us are disqualified from power having not earned it, because we haven’t got the nous to acquire the requisite quids.

This attitude has been joyfully embraced by right-wing Christian fundamentalists, who have now incorporated as evidence of God’s love and favour the possession of wealth. You have quids because god wants you to have quids and if you don’t have quids it’s because god doesn’t want you to have quids because you haven’t been sufficiently subservient to him and you haven’t done his will.

This combination of politics and religion creates a powerful discourse in which having quids is normalised as a measure of  sacred and profane achievement. Ultimately it relieves both religion and politics of the burden of giving a damn about anybody with less quids: either you haven’t earned it when you should have, or god doesn’t love you enough to let you have it so why should we?

As we approach the next federal election, assume the crash position and kiss your arse goodbye, because barring a miracle, this poisonous narrative will have found the normalisation it seeks, and the majority, who continue to show themselves as being far from the full quid, will keep the conservatives in place, normalising inequality, normalising lack of health care and education, normalising draconian police powers and further normalising the outrageous privilege of those with quids.

It is astounding how some people most disadvantaged by conservative ideology continue to support its rhetoric.






34 Responses to “Not the full quid”

  1. helvityni April 20, 2016 at 9:39 am #

    “…Barnaby’s strident claim that Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull should be returned as PM on the grounds that he, unlike Opposition leader Bill Shorten, has made a quid in his life”.

    Hearing that I had to ponder about the low standards of our politicians, is it possible to get any lower… Sadly the answer is: yes, we can and we will.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jennifer Wilson April 20, 2016 at 10:09 am #

      We have a fair way to go yet, Helvi. Fasten our seat belts…


      • helvityni April 20, 2016 at 3:47 pm #

        Alpacas are intelligent and gentle creatures, even so female alpacas are known to spit at the males when not wanting to be mated…
        If the black alpaca in in the picture is a girl, she would not want have anything to do with Mr Jones…

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Mark Summerfield (@patentology) April 20, 2016 at 11:27 am #

    “…joyfully embraced by right-wing Christian fundamentalists, who have now incorporated as evidence of God’s love and favour the possession of wealth.”

    This is hardly a new notion. The idea that the acquisition of property (wealth) is a fundamental human drive and moral imperative, and that it is God’s will that we follow and realise our ‘nature’ to the maximum degree possible, dates back (at least) to John Locke in the 17th century.

    Given that Locke is regarded by many as the single greatest influence on the US ‘founding fathers’, it is hardly surprising that this is where you will also find the purest expression of this idiocy (and, in its general deleterious effect on social cohesion and environmental sustainability, ample evidence that Locke got it wrong).

    It is a strange world in which the people we call ‘conservative’ are not conservative at all. Indeed, the mere use of the word ‘conservative’ to describe these people constitutes an insidious form of propaganda. By which I mean, it’s a lie! They are radical libertarians who want to reshape society into a plaything of the privileged and wealthy who, on account of their massive head-start, are best-placed to fulfil God’s plan by becoming the biggest winners. Remember: “We’ll have so much winning, you’ll be bored with winning!’ – Donald Trump.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jennifer Wilson April 20, 2016 at 3:15 pm #

      Radical libertarians – yes, much more apt description than conservatives.

      I’m referring to the relatively recent popularity of fundamentalism in Australia, religious home of Scott Morrison et al, as opposed to traditional churches with their social justice agendas.


      • paul walter April 20, 2016 at 4:23 pm #

        It’s imported in buckets from the US Bible Belt, the spiritual home of this claptrap.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. diannaart April 20, 2016 at 12:36 pm #

    “…has made a quid in his life…”

    We’d better advise all our volunteers, care-workers, teachers, anyone stupid enough to work in the service industry – they are wrong, so very wrong, the point of existence is to “make a quid”.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jennifer Wilson April 20, 2016 at 3:01 pm #

      Yep. If you care about anyone else’s welfare you’re an idiot, apparently

      Liked by 1 person

      • paul walter April 20, 2016 at 11:00 pm #

        Nice stuff..continues as a logical response to Mark Summerfield’s comment.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. townsvilleblog April 20, 2016 at 3:59 pm #

    Ole’ Barn is typical of the mind set you see in the bush, for example Townsville the largest city in northern Australia last election voted 56% for the LNP candidate, to the displeasure of we 44% but still we ‘all’ get branded as the ‘redneck’ capital of N.Q. ole’ Barn is a slow walkin’ slow talkin’ cowpoke’ type of bloke who doesn’t know much but has made it to Deputy Prime Minister of Australia. The tories have to go at the 2nd of July election, surely progressive Australians won’t put up with this nonsense of we paying for our Medicare levy and paying again for pathology tests like blood and Pap smears and X-Rays etc, all this while corporate Australia 40% of whom have paid no tax since the tories got in in 2013, give us a fair go, theu must be ousted.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. paul walter April 20, 2016 at 4:21 pm #

    The small caption under the pic , in French, says it all. If you understand it, look at Barnaby’s face and all is revealed- Jennifer is superb at identifying the right back drops for a posting.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jennifer Wilson April 20, 2016 at 4:34 pm #

      Ah, you got it PW. Of course you did. 🙂 The French comment is mine, btw.


      • paul walter April 20, 2016 at 10:58 pm #

        I did identify a meeting of minds.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Moz of Yarramulla April 20, 2016 at 6:57 pm #

      The look on Barnaby’s face is priceless. I started laughing even before my brain produced “baiser un canard,” as an addition to the caption. Apologies for the crudity, but I have this mental image of a very broad Aussie accent speaking the French. Perhaps helped by never having actually heard Barnaby speak.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Arthur baker April 21, 2016 at 2:06 am #

      Ceci n’est pas un chien. Well, 50% right. The alpaca isn’t, but the politician is.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Marilyn April 20, 2016 at 4:45 pm #

    When Gough Whitlam called a double dissolution election in 1974 he held a joint sitting to pass laws to enable medicare because the stroppy liberals refused.

    When Truffles recalled parliament at vast expense it was to pass the ABCC which almost no-one knows anything about and cares even less.

    It’s about time the media in this country got that Truffles and the liberals in general are lazy born to rule losers.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. doug quixote April 20, 2016 at 7:05 pm #

    If making money is the criterion, Gina Rinehart should be the leader.

    Carlos Slim and Bill Gates should divide North America between them, and Amancio Ortega should rule in Europe.

    Baaarnaby will soon lose his seat; a sheep in wolf’s clothing.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. FA April 21, 2016 at 10:14 am #

    If Joyce made a slightly different point, I could agree, but otherwise I’m on board with the idea that makin’ money doesn’t equate to good country leadership. What I do think is relevant is to have experience outside of the political machine. Shorten has 18 months working as a lawyer before professional unioning and politics became his whole life. Likewise, I doubt someone like Wyatt Roy has much experience that he can really offer to parliament, especially as by the time he stops being a junior (ignored) member, any practical youth experience he could offer would be well out of date. In this regard, Turnbull does have more real world experience.

    Term limits on politicians as well as being barred from certain kinds of professions (e.g. paid lobbyists) both before and after being in parliament would be a big help. I’ve often wondered if parliament should be selected using a similar system to selecting juries. Effectively a lottery, but with some screening. I’d rather see more Jacqui Lambies than Bill Shortens in parliament, I suppose.


    • doug quixote April 21, 2016 at 4:42 pm #

      One Lambie is enough, the parliament should not be a sheep run!

      Exactly how would a country be run with 150 Lambies??


    • LSWCHP April 22, 2016 at 6:32 pm #


      Douglas Adams postulated in The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy that anybody who *wants* to be President of the Galaxy should never be allowed to have the job, because the pathological narcissists and psychopaths who want the job are totally unsuited for leadership. I’ve restated his words, but you get the gist.

      We see the truth of this in our own leadership, and all around the world. How can any rational person believe for a second that Abbott and now Turnbull should be entrusted with making the decisions that affect the fate of our country? Or Shorten, for that matter. Who in Parliament appears to be honest, decent, trustworthy and deserving of respect? Brandis? Abetz? Bernardi? Joe Ludwig? That damn fool Conroy? They’re a pack of worthless greedy idiots who are in it for self aggrandizement and the accumulation of wealth and power. With perhaps half a dozen notable exceptions the members of the Senate and House of Reps collectively aren’t worth two knobs of goat shit.

      National leadership is a burden that should be assumed reluctantly, performed diligently and then discarded gratefully. And the bloody twisted nutters like Abbott who devote their whole lives to getting their rancid dripping claws on the job should never be allowed anywhere near it. Look what they’ve done to us. 😦

      Liked by 2 people

      • Jennifer Wilson April 22, 2016 at 9:36 pm #

        Well said. I especially like the rancid dripping claws.
        There’s a very good argument for psychologically profiling wannabe politicians. Most other high power jobs require applicants submit to it.


        • paul walter April 23, 2016 at 5:18 am #

          That will never happen. You would hear the sound of a pin dropped in the silence of an empty Parliament, but the funds-robbed mental health system would collapse under the weight of simultaneous admissions.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Jennifer Wilson April 23, 2016 at 11:05 am #

            I can’t argue with any of that. Sadly.


            • Hypo May 17, 2016 at 8:44 pm #

              Ban[al] (yes) Abbey (yes) Joys(nay)


              Fun (the creepy kind)
              Dum(b) sets the bar
              Mental-A List (exceeds the threshold)

              Under Joyces watch QLD rural vista will look like
              the wind blown dunes of a dead Middle East in 1.5 tenures.
              Water grows on trees.Oh wait!
              As it is, the human plague cannot be stopped from fulfilling its own perverse destiny,no matter how we vote.
              A FG meteor smashing us right in the cake hole is our greatest hope of moral salvation.

              Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: