Some people think the electoral contest between Chis Minns and Dom Perrottet is the equivalent of a long-running version of Beauty and the Geek. But it’s more than that.
Perrottet and Minns are battling for the supreme prize of NSW politics. No, not the Premier’s office after the election in March. It’s the 2022 Wokely Award.
Perrottet got off to a flyer with his announcement of a new Aboriginal flag and flagpole on the Sydney Harbour Bridge, costing $25 million. It must have been gold-plated and manufactured by the last mob running NSW: Keneally-Obeid Enterprises.
This went beyond virtue-signalling. It had the woke advantage of also wasting huge amounts of taxpayers’ money, at a time when Indigenous communities in Western NSW are being destroyed by child sexual abuse, welfare dependency and drug and alcohol abuse.
Why couldn’t a mega-expensive flag on a bridge 1,000 kilometres away sort out this conga line of human carnage? In the genius of Perrottet-land, he thought it could. It became his government’s top priority in Aboriginal Affairs.
Perrottet is a conservative surrounded by the wokeness of Matt Kean’s Liberal party faction, forcing him into the odd burst of political madness.
How do we know Dom’s instincts remain conservative? He has a sense of humour, something impossible if he was on the Left.
At Macquarie Street’s recent Christmas Party, Perrottet thanked those who made his job possible: ‘Like most MPs, I wouldn’t be here without acknowledging the vital role of our partners. I wouldn’t be Premier without Helen and Daryl’. As in Maguire.
The Labor MPs present were known as our ‘designated drivers’ or, as befitting an opposition, Plan B. For me, it was safer than catching a cab.
Chris Minns has taken the bold step of placing an alcohol ban on Labor members, effectively telling the electorate he has so many drunks in his ranks only a Temperance Society can control them.
Who can trust the ALP to run our schools, hospitals and transport system when they can’t trust themselves with a Peroni or chardonnay bottle on their lunch table?
Both Perrottet and Minns are obsessed with the personal behaviour of MPs. Both have endorsed the findings of the Elizabeth Broderick Report into ‘respect at work’ in NSW Parliament.
No matter where she goes, whether at universities, military bases or government departments, Broderick always produces the same report. All men are lechers and all women are set upon for sex.
The problem with her findings is definitional. Sexual harassment is categorised as looking at or standing near an attractive woman for too long. But how long? Sixty seconds? Three minutes or a bit of old-fashioned perving for five minutes?
Sexual abuse is also defined as telling ‘sexist jokes’, as in ‘three blondes walked into a bar…’ or the gifting of ‘sexist presents’ such as a replica of Michaelangelo’s David.
Given that a high proportion of relationships, traditionally, have started at work, the danger in Broderickism is obvious. It’s a formula for breeding out our species, which one supposes, in the eyes of the Green-Left, is the ultimate meaning of net zero.
Whether in Canberra or Macquarie Street, behaviour control is the latest parliamentary fad. The Left are clever in how they use these new forms of authoritarianism.
Like political correctness, ‘respect at work’ is designed to limit the space and means by which the woke can be criticised.
This is now a regular feature of NSW parliamentary debate. Legitimately criticising a left-wing female MP, supported by facts and argument, is said to make you sexist. It’s a shield the Greens use for hiding the incompetence of their female members.
Naturally, these tactics are directed at me more than most. But as the great Miranda Devine has pointed out, I am an equal opportunity bagger. I criticise everyone equally, whether male or female, black or white, straight or gay.
If you put up a dumb argument, devoid of research and evidence, I pride myself on pulling it apart, no matter who you are. My critiques are the epitome of equality and inclusion: No dummy ever feels left out.
Playing the gender card in parliament is a massive insult to most women, who are capable and purposeful. Whenever I tell my daughter about gender quotas and affirmative action, she says, ‘That’s ridiculous, Dad, everyone knows girls are better than the boys.’
Recently, in response to the Greens MP Abigail Boyd giving the upper house a sob-story about her personal experiences with ‘coercive control’, another alpha female sent me the following message: ‘No one cares about her trauma. Deal with it. Don’t let her project her mental instability onto others, let alone the rest of the country. Society has become extremely narcissistic. People that have power use it entirely for their own agenda.’
Among the Left, the push for more female MPs is not about the best interests of all women; it is about the personal interests of a certain kind of woman.
Boyd has only two types of speeches: the giggling one and the crying one. In the latter, she regularly complains about unnamed ‘bad men’ driving her into parliament and then pursues revenge against them with a series of bills and reports – from Broderick to coercive control and so-called positive consent.
That is not what democracy is supposed to be. It has become the embittered plaything of individuals, driven solely by their own mishaps and misjudgements, projecting new misandrist laws onto the people of the state.
Despite rhetoric and promises to the contrary, the gene pool for women coming into parliament has actually narrowed, down to the damsels-in-distress, those so feeble and incompetent that they scream ‘sexism’ as soon as someone disagrees with them.
Strong, capable women (the true feminists) look askance at this process, turning their backs on the possibilities of parliamentary service. The Left’s gender-based push has been counter-productive.
Regrettably, in playing along with this nonsense, we can’t go past Perrottet and Minns as joint winners of the 2022 NSW Wokely.
Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.
Get 10 issues for just $10
Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for the next 10 magazine issues, plus full online access, for just $10.
You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first month for free, then just $2 a week for the remainder of your first year.
Comments
Don't miss out
Join the conversation with other Spectator Australia readers. Subscribe to leave a comment.
SUBSCRIBEAlready a subscriber? Log in