In this episode we discuss:

(00:00) 398

(00:43) Intro

(10:31) Global Warming

(14:13) Newscorp and AI

(16:38) Sinead O'Connor

(20:00) Australia USA Relations

(34:34) Trump Polls

(36:46) Indigenous Education

(48:53) Proposition 209

Chapters, images & show notes powered by vizzy.fm.

To financially support the Podcast you can make a per-episode donation via Patreon or donate through Paypal

We Livestream every Tuesday night at 7:30pm Brisbane time. Follow us on Facebook or YouTube, watch us live and join the discussion in the chat room.

You can sign up for our newsletter which is basically links to articles that Trevor has highlighted as potentially interesting and which may be discussed on the podcast. You will get 3 emails per week.

Suburban Eastern Australia.

An environment that has over time evolved some extraordinarily

unique groups of homo sapiens.

But today we observe a small tribe akin to a group of Meca that gather together

atop a small mound to watch question and discuss the current events of their city,

their country, and their world at large.

Let's listen keenly and observe this group fondly known as the

Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove.

We are back episode 393, the Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove Podcast

where we talk about news and politics and sex and religion.

I.

I'm Trevor, a k a, the Iron Fist with me as always, Scott, the Velvet.

Glove.

Good day, Trevor.

Good day, Joe.

Good day listeners.

I hope everyone's

well.

We're all well and Joe the tech guy.

Evening.

All right.

So yes, another episode.

What are we gonna talk about tonight?

What's been going on in Australia and around the world?

Let me see.

We're gonna be talking about, just a quick mention about global warming,

a little bit about AI News Corp.

Richard Miles defense minister.

A bit about, indigenous education and a little bit about

California and Proposition 2 0 9, I think it was, what was it?

California was Proposition 2 0 9, which was when they removed affirmative

action and replaced it with.

He's sort of a diversity score, so, or no, an adversity score.

So we talk about that.

Alright, if you are listening on your podcast app, you'll see chapters

don't like any of those topics.

You can skip over 'em and you'll see pictures occasionally with the chapters.

'cause sometimes there's some graphs or some charts.

So you'll see those Thanks to Nick at Izzy.

Hello Nick who listens occasionally before we get onto stuff, got contacted.

Remember I said that Liam, one of our listeners, gets

frustrated with Scott because he.

Who poos the greens that in reality probably should be voting for them.

And, and it's quite dismissive of them.

Shouldn't be voting for them.

It's quite dismissive of them without good reason.

It was felt by Liam and others probably no doubt.

So, I suggested Liam should have a debate with you and he, he got in contact

and said, yeah, that's a good idea.

So Scott, he's emailed you with some topics and thoughts and hopefully next

week he'll come on and you'll have to justify this obstinate position you have

for no good reason against the greens.

I've got some very good reasons.

We'll see how good they are.

That'll be fine.

Yeah,

exactly.

And you know, it's, it's like in his email and all that sort of stuff, I

don't disagree with a hell of a lot.

He is written there, but yes, there's just one overriding

reason why I can't trust them.

So anyway, I'll leave that till next week.

Oh, okay.

Well what's the one, what's the one overriding reason?

Just remind us.

Don't have to give a secret.

It's all open.

Okay.

Alright, that's fine.

We wanna a full and frank

discussion here.

Alright, well what's the one, what's the

one overriding reason?

They are the party of protest and you know, you have only have to look at

the way they're two elder statesmen, Bob Brown and what's her name?

They're woman that took over after he left Christine Mill.

Right.

You know, the way the two of them hold up protestors, like they're some

sort of sacrosanct person that can't be ever criticized or anything else.

And you know, I tend to agree with them over their opposition

to the state governments that are trying to crack down on protesters.

But surely protest is something that's only temporary and.

While I agreed with, a lot of the climate change protests that were

actually going on, you know, the sort of infantile manner in which they blocked

traffic and did that type of thing.

I honestly believe that that sort of protest, it's just

designed to piss people off.

It's really sticks in people's throat and it doesn't do anything.

So that sort of protest, I can understand why the state government

wants to crack down on that.

You know, the Adani coal mine disaster was an absolute fucking joke, and that was

Bob Brown that was actually pushing that.

Mm-hmm.

You know, now that was an absolute disaster for the

Labor Party because the greens.

Were asked not to do it.

They went around, gave the middle finger back to them and said,

no, we're gonna do it anyway.

So they drove their electric vehicles up through, set up

through Central Queensland.

And

so their main reason is you feel I have an infantile style of

protesting, which is counterproductive.

Yeah, absolutely.

They do.

Does that it in a nutshell, that's it in a

nutshell, and part of it is already starting to creep into Parliament with

Max Chandler, whatever his name is.

You know, it's What did he do?

Infantile in Parliament.

Well, okay.

It's just the whole process that they're saying that we've got to, you know,

they, they've, they've blocking, they're blocking Labor's policy on housing.

Mm-hmm.

They're blocking it because the, the Labor Party will not let them have a

rent freeze and that type of thing.

They're refusing to listen to anything.

They're just demanding

rent freezes.

Blocking it once, got 'em an extra $2 billion.

Well, no.

Got him an extra $2 billion, but that's nothing, you know,

it's one of those things.

Yeah.

Okay.

They blocked it once, but now it's blocked and they, they're

now gonna block it again.

And what's the point, you know, all it's done is given the, is given the

government, the double dissolution trigger, which they probably

won't pull because they've bet everything on the, voice referendum.

So I don't think that they'd be stupid enough to go in for, I don't think

they'd be stupid enough to also go in for a double dissolution while that

was on the, on the table, because they're probably gonna lose that.

So I don't think they're gonna actually do that.

But would it really matter if they did actually take

them apart on housing policy?

No, I don't think it

would.

Alright.

If that's the, that's your main complaint against the greens

is the, the style of infantile?

Yeah, absolutely.

Productive protest.

Mm-hmm.

Okay.

Well that'll give Liam something to work with.

Yeah, no, you,

you, you setting me up for failure, which is fine.

No, I'm just saying he's got, giving him something to work with.

That's now he knows your position more clearly.

He can try and convince you despite you.

Well, he can try, but he's going to fail because I'm not interested.

Oh,

was it, was it with you the other day?

I can't remember where this happened, where I, I had to admit

that I don't think I've ever changed anybody's mind on anything.

Was it, were we doing that live on this podcast or was that in

private at a pizza function?

I can't remember, but,

well, that was probably at the, pub when we were there on Saturday, weren't they?

Yeah.

Just like, I really can't remember changing somebody's mind.

So, Liam, in all the years I've been doing this podcast and all the arguments

I've made and the 50,000 downloads or whatever it is, I really don't know

that I've changed anybody's mind.

On anything, if they were had a firm opinion, if they were a bit 50 50

and were ready to be swayed, okay.

I might have tipped somebody one way or another, but I don't know that

I've actually turned somebody around.

So in a significant way, Trevor, what's your best

evidence for that?

Because,

' cause nobody's ever told me, nobody's

Maybe they've surely they would if they had, here's your chance in the chat room.

Have I changed?

Have I ever changed your mind on anything?

Mind ranting John.

He agrees with, he agrees that the Velvet

Glove on that one, so that's fine.

So,

Shay's there.

Good day, Shay.

How are you?

Yeah.

Shay's there as well.

Shay.

Shay felt that a lot of my arguments, while logically correct,

fail to take into account the passion and the emotion of people.

And because you're soulless.

Well, I was thinking, I was thinking of it, Shane.

Just, just call me Mr.

Spock.

Is that, is that, is that the argument, Shane?

That it's a,

it's a Mr.

Spock.

I don't think Mr.

Spock would actually be opposed to Ukraine actually fighting back, you know?

Oh, well that's another one we can argue about.

Dan, Dan in the chat room says, have you ever turned anyone?

Well, that's a very leading question.

Yeah.

Not that, not in that way, Don.

not in that way.

Yeah.

So look,

that's enough chitchat.

Fair enough.

We're quite confronting, Shay, you know, I, I'm gonna deal with

that, that accusation over time.

You've cut me deep with that one.

Hang on.

You're saying you feel that Yeah, I do.

I do feel it, and Mr.

Spock wouldn't feel it.

Right.

So there you go.

No, Mr.

Spock is actually half human, half Vulcan, so he still has some part

of him with his human Yeah.

He understands human emotion.

He just presses them.

He understands and just works with it.

Mm.

He says, well, of course you're gonna charge off over that hill

madly without even thinking about it.

Off you going, I, I know you're gonna do that.

Maybe I, maybe he'll occasionally apply one of those Vulcan grips to sort of knock

Kirk out to stop him from hurting himself.

But otherwise he, he's sort of fully aware of human nature

and just takes it into account.

Anyway.

Yeah.

Yeahing out anybody out there if I've changed your mind on

anything of significance anyway,

you have changed my mind over China, but I'm still disagreeing with you over

Taiwan because the Republic of China is an independent country and should be left

alone.

Mm-hmm.

Okay, let's talk about, oh, I had these in the wrong order, but let's talk

quickly about what's been in the news lately and I reckon, global warming.

Yeah.

In the news lately was no, doesn't know exist.

No, no, it doesn't exist.

So there's a chart showing, the temperature in a red line for 2023,

which is way past what the last, and, and all those gray lines are basically

temperatures since the 1940s every year.

And the colored lines are recent years.

The red one is the current 2023.

Clearly we are, a couple of degrees higher than we were 80 years ago

and or, yeah, about eight years ago.

And, you know, stories coming out of Europe with incredibly hot summer and.

Hi.

Many events happening, it's all just gonna get worse, and I can't see anything being

done of any significance to change it.

And, you know, at 59 years of age, I turn later this month,

give me another 20 on this planet.

I'll probably not see the worst of it, I'd say.

But, it's the younger people who are going to be paying the

price and it's gonna get ugly.

And I, I'm

curious as to how they calculate the global temperature.

I think they've got a, a statistical bias of, weather stations

in the Northern Hemisphere.

Mm-hmm.

Because of course, in the southern hemisphere it's winter and therefore

you'd think that the warmer day would be assuming the same number of stations

north and south of the, the equator, that you'd get kind of a, a, a permanent

balance.

Wouldn't it just be an average of all of the surface temperatures over the globe?

Yeah.

What I'm saying is on average, they're two, two degrees higher.

Oh, no, no.

But if you look at it, it's 17 degrees.

Oh, I see what you're saying.

Of the, well, our global surface air temperature, I guess on the oceans.

I, I'm just thinking that, you know, maybe we've got half a million stations

north of the equator and, a quarter of a million south of the equator

just because there's less land mass.

Mm-hmm.

I don't know, Joe, I,

I would've expected the average to be lower, is what I'm saying.

Oh, I see.

Lower than 17 degrees.

Yeah.

Hmm.

Yeah.

I don't know.

I assume the statistic, the guardian grew up because Yeah.

If

you look 1st of January, average temperature 13 degrees, 31st of

December, 13 degrees, middle of June.

Or middle of July 17 degrees.

Mm.

So it's obviously fo following a northern hemisphere heat cycle.

Hmm, good point.

Yeah.

Just curious.

Mm-hmm.

Well, that's, yeah, that's

clearly, it's clearly something that they've taken from the

northern hemisphere, isn't it?

Yeah.

Mm.

But it does say global.

Mm-hmm.

Good point, Joe.

We'll look into that statistic.

Hmm.

See what the story is.

Okay.

Well, it'd be interesting to see what the,

what the, data was from the Southern hemisphere.

Wouldn't it?

You'd assume that it'd be higher in December and January, but lower in July.

We'll see what the explanation is for that one, but yeah.

May.

Yeah.

Point.

Jane, you're right.

North and south, equaled out.

Should be.

Yeah.

Hello?

Somebody sent us some, spam.

Spam and he's really going for it.

Glorious.

Spam.

Spam.

Spam.

Alright, onto the first topic.

well that was global warming.

AI is in the news a lot.

Scott, are you using any AI in your day-to-day work?

No, I'm not.

Mm.

Joe, are you sorry, using ai?

Right.

So I get the feeling, people are using it to construct initial emails,

which they then massage or maybe reports or things they have to do.

They want something to start, give them a head start on something

that's typical use of ai.

using it to clean up things.

Maybe they've prepared a report or an email that they want sort of the

grammar checked or just tightened up.

So, anyway, from the shovel, they've, they've done some investigative work and

News Corp Australia revealed this week they're using artificial intelligence

to generate 3000 articles a week.

That's actually true.

So they admitted that they're doing that and they're saying that it's

sort of overseen by real people, but a lot of stuff is generated.

3000 articles a week.

The News Corp generated by AI and, the shovel claims they were leaked.

A chat G p t screenshot showing the prompts used to write one of the articles.

This is the real skill I think, Joe, with, AI and Chat G P T is the prompts

that you ask for the little recipe that you use to get what you want.

Mm-hmm.

And, this is apparently what people are using in News Corp.

For example, write an article about how wokeness is causing

inflation in Australia.

Must include the words.

African gangs cancel culture, Anzac spirit, young people

just don't wanna work anymore.

And it's not racist because Muslim is not a race.

The article must also link rising inflation to the increase in the

number of gender neutral toilets.

Demonize a prominent Australian woman for speaking her mind

without asking permission.

Include three entire paragraphs on the A, B, C.

Use the word elitist unironically when referring to people who criticize

mining and media billionaires and include a wildly inaccurate pie chart.

I think they also left out, must somehow criticize Credit Thunberg along the way.

So I think that, I think that's actually how they probably

are producing them in there.

Hmm.

Scott Ade O'Connor, were you a fan?

She passed away.

Well, I knew she died and all that sort of stuff.

I couldn't work out how she died.

No.

because she apparently became a Muslim and all that sort of stuff later in life.

Mm-hmm.

So, Assume she was not a well woman.

I assume that,

sorry.

Said she was not a well woman.

Yeah, I

know.

And I knew she had been institutionalized and all that sort of stuff throughout

her life, so I thought to myself, maybe she might've topped herself

with drugs or something like that.

But they, the family has, has not given a cause of death.

So it's purely just speculation

as to how she actually died.

Seems to be when that's not revealed that the assumption

is it's something like that.

Yeah.

So on the plus side in 1992, she ripped up a picture of John Paul, a Pope John

Paul II on US television in protest against the pedophile church officials.

A week later, she was booed off the stage at Madison Square Garden during

an all-star tribute to Bob Dylan.

The crowd didn't like her, ripping up a picture of the Pope.

So

that was before, spotlight.

Yeah.

You've seen the movie?

Yes.

Probably at the time people thought, what are you talking about?

It couldn't possibly be pedophilia in the Catholic church.

What terrible thing to suggest.

Mm.

You know, what, if it pop started today, probably still protest

and get booed off the stage.

Why accept the truth?

Don't

know.

Actually,

I think

there'd be a very different sort of behavior now because we've,

you know, everyone's accepted it that it is a fact of life

that,

the priesthood is fi full of kitty fiddlers.

So as a result, I, I think to myself that they, they don't have any, any leg to

stand on Really.

Yeah.

But in America, Trump is still leading the polls.

Yeah.

With all that's going on.

So it doesn't matter that Yes, the, the Catholic church is guilty of pedophilia.

There would still be, people will be going.

Well, we're still to vote for him.

You can't do that.

You can't abuse our, our religion even.

That's, that's the, to do with the primaries, isn't it?

This is where he is got the

Gallup leading, isn't it?

Well, he is leading the Republican primaries.

Yeah.

But if there was a vote today on the current polls, he would win.

Really?

Yes.

Okay.

Well, that's a concern.

Yeah.

So who knows what would happen if, if a pop star abused the Catholic church

in the anything's possible in that country, but on the, sort of, on the

minor side, in 2018, she converted to Islam, calling it the natural conclusion

of any intelligent theologian's journey.

There we go.

God knows how.

Mm-hmm.

You trouble we

saw, we never saw her wearing a hijab or anything like that, did

we?

No.

There are photos of her wearing hijab.

Oh, there are other, okay.

Is, and she changed her name as

well.

Mm-hmm.

And this is kind of the point that somebody made, is that in Western media,

the photos that have come out of her are all, all ignore that aspect of her life.

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

And perhaps a sign of just a western, bias, if you like.

Fair point.

Mm-hmm.

closer to home Australia, u s a relations.

So it was announced that U Ss a spies are now gonna be embedded

in our defense force to help us.

that was how it was originally reported by the A, B, C.

And then they changed the headline shortly afterwards to call it u

s A analysts rather than spies.

But hey.

Spies embedded in our defense force.

'cause heaven forbid, analysts Yes, heaven forbid we couldn't possibly do it ourself.

And we,

and I thought it was a s d they were being embedded in

mm-hmm.

A s d Australian

Signals Directorate.

It's the same as the N Ss a.

Okay.

Is that part of defense?

It is.

So they monitor

enemy communications.

Yeah.

So let's just have another country's, you know, well, we've already got

patriotic citizens within our own.

We've already got

what's said, haven't we?

What's the huge N s A

gap?

Post pine gap.

Yeah.

At least, at least with that, it's theirs and they run it.

And we don't even pretend, but Well, but having them wandering

around our own corridors, snooping around on our behalf sake.

Five.

Five Fires was all about spying on your own citizens, which

of course is against the law.

So you get another country to do it on your behalf and pass you the information

they've found and you do it for them.

Ah, I see.

I can hear.

And that's exactly

what they do.

They've got the British, that spy on the Americans and the Canadian

Spy on the Americans, you know, over here probably the ki we spy on us.

We spy on them.

Hmm.

Anyway, it's just ludicrous to have U Ss a spies embedded within our own apparatus.

It's insane.

we're gonna make some missiles to sell to them apparently.

I dunno how we're gonna suddenly acquire the skills to make missiles,

but we're gonna make missiles to sell to the US and well, I thought

that was what, URA was all about.

It was a missile test range down in, south Australia.

I.

Yeah, but that where we making

that, we tested the, that's where we tested the British A bomb,

wasn't it?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Well, next door to that was a missile test range, and I thought that was for testing

Australian missiles that we'd built.

Okay, well we're gonna be building some for the Yanks and Okay.

that's, you know, supposed to be happy about that and excited because there's

a shortage of ammunition now as the war in Ukraine has apparently shown.

And, despite all that, when we ask the US, Hey, what about Julian Assange over

there rotting way in Bel Marsh Prison?

You reckon you could let him go?

Where they say, oh, there's a risk to security and, you know, we have our own

interests there, and, you'll just have to understand there's nothing we can do and

our authentic Australian government just

rolls over.

He's, he's rotting in a British

prison, isn't he?

Yes.

Yeah.

Bel Ma is British.

Yes.

Okay.

' cause he hasn't been extradited yet.

Okay, so the, the Britts are arguing about his extradition in the courts, are they?

Well, it's an appeal appeal process at the moment.

So

yeah.

They'd agreed that he could be extradited and then yes,

obviously this is the appeals.

He has to exhaust his appeals because he said effectively, he's committed no crime.

Yes.

Well, what's more, it was supposedly a US crime and he wasn't in US territory.

Well, supposedly

he was arrested for a

Swedish crime.

Mm-hmm.

But the reason why the Yanks want him extradited is for a US crime.

Yes.

Which he supposedly committed, even though he wasn't in US territory

and, and wasn't a US citizen.

Correct.

When you talk about the, the long reach of the Chinese police state,

and here we've got the Yanks.

Grabbing an Australian citizen outta Britain was supposedly

committing a breach of a law.

And he was never in the u s a.

It's extraordinary.

I, I was listening to a podcast about a Russian citizen getting picked

up 'cause he was wanted for hacking and he eventually got, oh, I can't

remember what country he was in, but basically he got arrested there

and they were going to expel him.

And effectively, as soon as they expelled him, the F b I were

waiting in the country to grab him and extradite him to the US Right.

Or, sorry, not extradite him.

'cause they had no extradition treaty to grab him, put him on a

private jet, fly him back to the US

and, and get details out of him or, oh, this was credit

card fraud.

Right.

Okay.

So he was, he was wanted for, selling.

Millions of credit card.

Mm.

On the black market.

Yeah.

So Bernard Keen in Crike wrote an article about Richard Miles and, and linked with

this whole sort of Julian Assange and, and our relationship with the U s A.

So, so we had a recent visit from Anthony Blinken, US Secretary of State.

And according to Bernard Keen and Crikey, Anthony Blinken is a liar to be specific.

His statement at the weekend that Julian Assange's actions in leaking

the US cables, quote, risked very serious harm to our national security.

So that is what the allegation is from Blinken, that what Assange did risked very

serious harm to our national security.

It it did, it made them look like idiots.

Yes.

That's the only harm it did was just embarrass them.

Yes.

So, So what we've got is Bernard Keen lists some of the evidence that

there was actually no genuine harm to US security, just embarrassment.

And he's got four points to make that sort of along that argument.

He says, this was a Barack Obama's defense secretary at the time, Robert M.

Gates said, I've heard the impact of these releases on our foreign

policy described as a meltdown, as a game changer, and so on.

I think, I think those descriptions are fairly significantly overwrought.

The fact is governments deal with the United States because it's in

their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust

us, and not because they believe.

We can keep secrets.

Other nations will continue to deal with us.

They'll continue to work with us.

We will continue to share sensitive information with one another.

Is this embarrassing?

Yes.

Is it awkward?

Yes.

Consequences for US foreign policy, I think fairly modest.

That was the defense secretary.

Then the Department of Defense in a secret report obtained by Buzzfeed in

2017 said there was no significant impact.

disclosure of the Iraq data set will have no direct personal impact on current and

former leadership, US leadership in Iraq.

The third proof was, officials of Lincoln's Department of Briefing Congress

in 2010 and said, we were told the impact of the WikiLeaks revelations

was embarrassing but not damaging.

And at the trial of Chelsea Manning, the US military officials said,

I don't have a specific example.

When asked to confirm the much of wanted claim that the releases had placed

the lives of US sources in danger.

So, and of course it's been pardoned.

Yes, yes.

So the US government itself, on multiple occasions has said

it's embarrassing, but no.

Significant damage has been done.

He's a journalist releasing information.

and now this week, labor government, albanese and Miles

just don't see the greens.

Wouldn't stand for

it.

The

Yes.

Liam, jot that down.

Or probably Scott maybe doesn't care that much.

I don't know.

Do you, you care about, you have a strong opinion about Bil Assange?

No, I, his predicament, Scott didn't

say strong, but I, I think he's been in prison long enough.

Mm-hmm.

You know, it's, it, it's one of those things.

And, and you're not outraged.

yes and no.

I, I just think to myself that he did something bloody stupid.

He poked the bear or he poked the eagle and you know, now he's complaining

'cause the eagle's bitten his

stupid or brave.

Definitely valuable.

Well, of course it was valuable

because you know, that that, that footage that was released in the us over

the us you know, collateral damage or whatever it was

called when they shot up, when they shot up those three guys in, in, in that Iraqi

place, multiple, multiple war crimes have been exposed.

Yes, yes.

Exactly.

Yeah.

So I've got no problem with that.

And I also think to myself that, he's been awarded a international

prize for journalism, hasn't he?

Mm-hmm.

Various one.

Yes.

So that means that, the Yanks can't prosecute him because he's a journalist.

Well, yank can do whatever they like, don't they?

Yeah, I know

that.

I know that's what

they

try to do.

I'm just, I'm just, I'm just interested.

Joe, are you outraged?

You're not saying I'm outraged you.

Ah, I'm just appalled by it.

I am appalled by it.

And, come on.

Even barnyard joke is appalled by it.

Barnyard joke.

Barnaby Choice.

Yes.

Oh, Barnaby Joyce, right?

Yeah.

It's, it's one, one

of the most outspoken politicians.

Mm-hmm.

Mm.

Yeah.

Apparently one of the WikiLeaks early on was about Richard Miles.

So the US diplomats had meetings with him and there was a cable that

was released by, WikiLeaks from 2009 that, revealed that in the opinion

of the us he was a non-entity.

Yes.

And that he was overwhelmed and was an under informed parliamentary secretary.

And, at the time, miles said he wanted Australia to depend

less on commodity exports.

When asked what other areas he'd like to see exports grow, he

couldn't think of any, said he had to keep reading the material.

so according to Bernard, keen Miles has hated WikiLeaks ever since.

'cause it exposed this terrible opinion that the US had of Richard Miles.

So, it's not that fault.

Might be something to that.

yeah.

what else would the other thing in that, it's just still on Richard Miles, in

that, in that release from WikiLeaks somewhere, I've got too much time.

My hands, 'cause I saw the link in Bernard Keen's article and I

thought, huh, have a quick link look.

So I was looking at the, at the, leaked report.

And one of the interesting things in there was, well, I found this interesting.

Was that, in talking with the Consul General, Richard Miles said that, he has a

very close relationship with Joe De Bruin, the shop distributor and Allied Employees

Association, national Secretary, i e the Shoppes, who we all know are this crazy

religious union that has been the, a major problem for everybody because they've

been very socially conservative and, yeah,

but they're communists.

Come on.

They,

they're, they're unions.

Well, a very, Christian, conservative union, Shoppes, who

by the way don't represent their members very well at all, and.

are powerful because they have so many members.

Like there's lots of people working for Coles and Woolies, but they actually

get really poor results for them.

If sha

I'm sure the Red Union will stand up for them.

The bread union, I'll tell you what one the red unions, you know?

Yeah.

Oh.

So, nurses and teachers in particular, this is a former member of the L N

P who set up these private unions that aren't registered as unions.

There's some weird loophole, I don't know.

and they're taking membership fees that are half what the existing unions are and

they go on about how they're wonderful.

But people have said they're more likely to, bend over to employees.

It was, it was mostly the anti-vaxxers.

It was very much freedom of a choice about

vaccines.

So the setup unions, which won't actually collectively bargain, but will.

Because of discounted union due will take people away from a real

union that will act for them.

That's what the

allegations have been.

Mm-hmm.

Yeah.

Have, have a look at red

unions.

It's quite interesting.

Okay.

anyway, the Shopee, notoriously poor performers for their people

are supposed to represent.

if Shay was in charge, I'm sure they'd get a much better deal anyway.

So yeah.

Richard Miles doing nothing for, Julian Assange, possibly angry

because Wiki leaks exposed that the Americans had a low opinion of him.

And just add to your little kitbag of knowledge about Richard Miles that

he's in sweep with the Shoppy Union.

And that's not a good sign.

I don't think.

So.

More I learned about the current labor mob, the, less hope I have.

yeah, John's in the chat room.

He's a labor man.

He says the shop union is not a union as far as I'm concerned, and Allison says,

I'm outraged at the treatment of Julian.

Good on you, Allison.

And, Shay says, can't prosecute can persecute.

And, and Allison says, I highly recommend Nils Mills's book

The Trial of Julian Assange.

Nils was the United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture.

And there we go.

That's the main ones.

See?

and Robin's there, D and Whatley, there's a host of the usual suspects.

Are there probably Allison's mom and Bev's listening as well.

Alright.

Almost.

Yeah, almost certainly.

Trump, polls I mentioned previously about Trump and how well he's going.

And here's one just on Trump and why he's so hard to beat.

And essentially there is amongst Republicans, a 37% mugger base

that just cannot be shifted.

There's a 37 persuadable component of which, 17% lean Trump, 12%

lean, others 17% favor DeSantis.

And out of these sort of Republican, people, there's really only 25%

that are just not open to Trump.

So 37% base, 37% persuadable, and only 25% never Trumpers.

That's a, that's a really worryingly low figure.

The scary thing is the allegations that.

If Trump gets in for a second term, he has, people have been saying, and they're

going because they've said it, they're gonna claim that's a mandate if he gets

elected, that he intends to use executive orders to dismantle all of the safeguards

that are in place to stop the president.

assuming power.

Yes.

You know, it's one arm of the three arms of government.

and he intends to supersede all the other, go the arms and make it effectively

a dictatorship.

Yes.

And fairly important people in this camp have been openly

admitting that this is their plan.

Wouldn't doubt it.

The guy's such a loose cannon with nothing to lose, everything to gain.

Of course.

He's just, what's, of course he will.

I, I think

worry to have an accident.

It would be in the benefit of most of the world.

Not just the don't go driving, don't go driving past any

grassy knolls, is that exactly.

Mm-hmm.

Allison's, I, I actually

wonder if there really is a deep state how he hasn't had an accident.

Mm-hmm.

Allison was at the Grassy Knolls.

He's been there.

Seemed recall.

I've

been there too.

Have you?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Right.

Indigenous education.

I spoke last week about culture and I've got this article that I was gonna do last

week and we sort of ran outta time, so just gonna read this one and, there's a

fair bit to it, but see what you think.

Did you guys get a chance to read this one or not?

Yeah, I read it whenever you first sent it through.

Okay.

Did you find it concerning at all, Joe?

I, I think I'll let you read it first,

but yes.

Okay.

Alright.

First Nations educators are clear.

They want their own system of education.

That's the main message to come out of a landmark report released today

by more than 51st Nations educators at RA ppa, an annual black only education

conference just east of Alice Springs.

The MK Turner report offers guiding principles, structures, and

recommendations on what makes a First Nations system of education and what

is required to roll it out nationwide.

Here's what it looks like in practice.

Understanding the difference in a standard school day.

A typical school day for a child in the Western education system might

be a car drop off, roll call, class one, recess, class two and three,

lunch, class four, pick up, home give, we'll take a bit of sport and music.

It's heavy on numbers, big on literacy, and all done in English.

A First Nations model looks very different every day begins with

first language in one community.

The school day might start with a bus pickup for both children and parents.

Kids greeted in the language of their country and they travel to

school with family and community.

They don't have to travel 50 kilometers, to go to a brick

building that's not welcoming.

They get to go to a hub box or a space that they know, can.

Gary Woman, Stacey Campton, director of First Nations Education

Organization, children's Ground tells Crikey, rewriting how important

it's for a child to be immediately understand that they are welcome.

A shared meal might come next alongside a lesson on nutrition and health,

or it could be an hour of singing, dancing, and another cultural ceremony.

All done in first language and first language only kids could

help teachers pack the bus for a trip out on country where they're

taught to Hunt, dig and identify bush foods they can and can't eat.

It's a morning of experiential learning and play.

Classroom style teaching might feature later in the day, but first Nations

education consultant, Gabriel Lare woman, auntie Julie Armstrong, explains that

this is all done through the First Nations lens of language, culture, and country.

The most important thing she says is for indigenous kids to know

that they come from the land.

As this provides context for everything connection to people,

elders, identity, and aboriginal law.

You take the time to open your eyes and see what's around you.

You would take the time to smell.

You could then join in song with what's around, and it would be sung in language.

Armstrong says, To really have a purposeful life, you

need to have energy, she says.

And to get that energy is about putting your feet and stomping on the ground.

The full sensory experience, sight, smell, sound, taste, and touch is

critical for indigenous peoples to understand the spirit and soul of

language, country, people and self.

Quote, why we haven't reached our potential is because we've been

trapped within these four walls and a roof and a curriculum which can only

work between four walls and a roof.

She says The founding chair of children's ground, a rane man, William

Till mouth calls it a simulation.

He says, learning without family, community, country, language

and identity is a recipe to lose yourself because you don't know

who you are and where you're from.

there's a lady Armstrong, I'm gonna try and skip a little bit here

'cause I feel it's going on too long.

why do you need a classroom?

People have to love our children.

Now you listen to educators, I don't hear that word often within

this space or within that space.

Armstrong says, reiterating that the message that rises above the

rest is all of our kids are failing.

That's what we as a nation are told.

Our kids are behind.

They're behind the benchmarks, they're behind this.

I wouldn't have any of that language.

It's a similar story for Gamma Roy Woman.

and she says, apart from still having to adhere to learning

metrics such as no plan, the curriculum is set by mob for mob.

And she says, her school stands apart from the academic heavy curriculum

that dominates Western education by privileging culture that is inherently

humble, caring, and nurturing.

And which allows for support of the whole child.

Our kids, they know we love them and we are looking out for them,

she says, and that in itself just makes a huge difference to the

teaching and learning of our school.

And the last bit here is why a teacher doesn't equal a piece of paper in

the Western system of education.

No child, adult, or elder qualifies as a teacher unless they possess

a certificate of accreditation.

Mout says that metric overlooks the 60,000 plus years of knowledge, expertise, and

lived experience that makes an aboriginal teacher because you're fluent in language,

because you're fluent in culture and identity and country, but you don't have

a certificate, you're not considered to be worthy of being called a teacher.

He says they do six years of university, but aboriginal people, our old people

have done 70, 80 years of living under oppression and in extreme circumstances,

And if they haven't learned something, then you know, I'll go, ah, well,

I don't see any of them, any of them ever graduating on to go onto

university to become a, a doctor.

I, I, I think if you're trying to teach people how to live as hunter-gatherers,

then learning to live off the land and your 60,000 years of culture might be

useful if you want them to succeed in a western culture, in a western, well,

not even western, but the rest of the world if you want to them to succeed

The 21st century trading Yeah, exactly.

Trading with Asia, then they have to be fluent in arithmetic.

I, I, I fully understand and empathize.

I, I think kids should spend more time outside.

I don't see why you can't have, lessons out in the bush.

You can certainly have science.

You can have mathematics out in the bush.

You can be doing useful things, not stuck in a classroom whilst, whilst

learning real measurable things.

but yeah.

Yeah.

But I honestly believe that, you know, the whole criticism of NAPLAN and

all that sort of stuff now, you know, it's been years since I've been in

a classroom, obviously, but I don't even fully understand what NAPLAN is.

But I gather it's some type of, test that kids are required to do.

Okay, that's fine.

But you know, if you're going to have an indigenous school set up exactly

the way they're talking about, then those kids are just gonna keep failing.

NAP plan.

You know, it's,

I don't, I totally, the reading that does not give me hope that

those kids are gonna be prepared for the wider modern day society.

No, they're not.

No.

And

you know, the, the, the elders in that sort of stuff are just

wanting to always look backwards.

And this is why one of the things that I really am very critical of the voice

campaigning is that, you know, they, they talk about getting voice then after that,

going onto the truth and reconciliation, which honestly doesn't worry me, but

there's gotta be truth from both sides.

And that is that they are going to have to accept that their

society wasn't all peaceful.

You know, that it wasn't all, it wasn't all, light and love.

You know, it's just one of those things that I honestly believe that we've

gotta get the truth from both sides.

Well, John I think said this would be after school activities and certainly,

I have colleagues at work whose children are half Chinese and they

go to Chinese school on the weekend.

My daughter went to French school on the weekend, which was all about

learning the language, learning the culture, and this was all after school.

and in fact, Queensland Education provides, languages

other than English syllabus.

They provide the syllabus written in English, and then the schools

translated into whatever language.

So there is a full.

Here's how to learn about culture.

So, you know, one, one lesson is the kitchen and you have a drawing of

objects around the kitchen and you translate it into whatever language.

And then you say, in our culture, this is what we'd be cooking.

Mm-hmm.

but this is all after school.

This is all out of ours.

And this is, this is, you're learning English because that is the

language of business in Australia.

Mm-hmm.

That's what you're learning at school.

You're learning mathematics because you need that for business in

Australia to fit into society.

That's what you need.

If you know, if you're gonna educate the kids that way then, and don't be

surprised or complain when 20 years later the, the proportion of kids at

university or in difficult jobs or any jobs doesn't match the wider population.

Because you've given them an upbringing that doesn't match the wider population.

So don't expect to give that sort of upbringing and yet, and yet tick

off a whole bunch of metrics because you just, that's not how it works.

Yeah, I agree.

Just stop giving respect to this nonsense.

but yeah, the, the thing about the kids having energy and it Mm,

they're not settling down in class.

Mm.

I definitely empathize with that.

I know that, years ago in scouts, we always had sports at the

beginning, of the evening, just so we got all the energy out.

'cause we were all hyped up.

It was a Friday evening, we'd got an hour of chalk rugby or whatever, beating

the shit out of each other basically.

Yes.

And then we got down to map reading because if you tried to do that first

up, the kids just wouldn't sit still.

Yes.

And, and so maybe school has become too formalized in that

way and maybe we need to burn off a little of the energy upfront.

Yeah.

I don't know what goes on in a modern school and how often

they get outta the classroom.

I don't know.

But

well then you can always say, always hope you've got students like me that

hated getting outta the classroom.

'cause I thought it was boring and a waste of time.

But anyway.

Mm-hmm.

Yeah.

Alright.

that's education according to those indigenous educators.

right.

Came across, I was listening to a podcast, called Pivot, which was

kind of interesting and, It, referred me on to this, in California.

So in 1996, dear listener, Californian voters approved Proposition 2 0

9, which was a ban on affirmative action at public universities.

So up until that point, there had been some affirmative action where

based on race, people would be getting positions or other things in preference.

And typically, of course, if you are from a minority race, you would get a

position that instead of white person.

So Proposition 2 0 9 amended the state constitution in California

to prohibit state government institutions from considering race,

sex, or ethnicity, specifically in the areas of public employment.

Public contracting and public education.

So kind of anti the voice in a way because the voice is attached to this idea of a

special, group to parliament, a group of public servants, which is a form of public

employment, which will be race-based.

A kind of affirmative action, I guess seems to look like

it to me and in California.

So people are saying, well, for the starters, won't it be

terrible if Australia votes no.

Will just be the or, laughingstock not lock, laughingstock or the

pariah Pariahs Pariah, yeah.

Whatever of the community.

Yeah.

But it's happened around the world, including California, where they basically

had affirmative action, and got rid of it.

But they

also voted Proposition eight, was it?

Which Banning gay marriage.

That was the big one, right?

California is not as left-leaning as we necessarily think.

No,

probably not.

but just keep going on with this, with this, what happened in California.

so when they put that to the public, in 2009 to get rid of affirmative

action based on race, it was passed by the public, 55 to 45.

And then, in 2019, so, you know, over 20 years later, there was a proposition

16 was introduced, which was to get rid of Proposition 2 0 9 and return

back to allowing affirmative action.

They put it to the people and they said no.

We wanna keep it the way that it has been.

So Proposition 2 0 9 survived and it is still today in California, prohibited

for state governments to, consider race, sex, or ethnicity in public employment,

public contracting and public education.

So, what did that do to the ethnic makeup of first year enrollment

at the University of California?

Let me just find the little chart here.

I'll bring it up on the screen.

hopefully that will show up.

But it was 96 that the Proposition 2 0 9 was passed.

If we look at, say, 90, 94, so a couple of years beforehand, enrollment.

First year enrollment, university of California, 4.3% African

American, 37% Asian, 15% LA Latin American, and 36% white.

Now, shortly after Proposition 2 0 9, if you look at years 90, 7

98, 99, 2000, 2001, basically the African American participation

plummeted from 4.3 down to 2.8.

Asian was steady.

Latin American dropped from 15 to 11.

White increased marginally, 36 to 37, but by the time we get to 2021, the

African American percentage wa after.

Compared to 1994, it was 4.3, it's now 5%.

Asian was 37%.

It's now 34.

Latin American was 15%.

It's now 37 in the white, percentage.

First year enrollment in 1994, it was 36% and it's now 20%.

So what did they do?

they basically changed from using a raced based affirmative action policy

to introducing a, an adversity score.

So rather than looking at the color of somebody's skin, they looked

at a range of factors, which, which basically added up the.

Difficulties somebody had to face that weren't race related or what

weren't directly related to, wasn't exactly the color of the skin.

So, so for example, at the medical school, so this is the

University of California Davis.

they created the Socioeconomic Disadvantage Scale or the SS e d and

basically ranked applicants from zero to 99 taking into account their life

circumstances such as family income, a rental education, admissions decisions

were based on that score combined with the usual test scores and.

Obviously if you had two people who were otherwise equal, but one had overcome

adversity to get there, then they'd get in in preference to the other one.

So, according to this report from the New York Times, the disadvantage

scale helped turn the US Davis or the University of California campus,

Davis Medical School, one of the most diverse medical schools in the country.

And so lots, you would've heard, dear listener, that the Supreme

Court ruled against affirmative action programs in the United States.

So a number of places are now looking around at what else has been done.

They're looking at California and they're saying, Hmm, tell us more about this

adversity score and how that works.

So, let me see.

The US university, sorry, uc, university of California Davis Scale

has drawn attention because of its ability to bring in diverse students

using what the school says are race neutral socioeconomic models.

And in its most recent entering class of 133 students, 14% were black, 30%

were Hispanic, whereas nationally, 10% of medical school students

were black and 12% were Hispanic.

So batting above average there on those things.

And, factors include that they use family income, whether applicants come

from a underserved area, whether they help support their nuclear families, and

whether their parents went to college.

let me see.

I, Hmm.

Oh, if you are the children of a doctor, You weren't a adversity score of zero.

and of course a number of doctors complained because their children couldn't

get into a California medical school and had to go to a different state.

Oh.

Because, so they were saying they performed really well on tess.

So Yeah.

Don't, don't forget uc is a public school, public university,

the private universities.

However, and they were saying something like 30% of Yale and

Harvard students are legacies Yes.

Who get in solely on the fact that

their parents went there.

Yes.

But I think in that decision, I think, didn't that affect

legacy enrollments as well?

No, it didn't.

It didn't.

It didn't.

No.

I thought so.

So realistically, you have to get away.

From legacy.

Mm-hmm.

If you want to do

this sort of thing.

Yeah.

So, anyway, there's some food for thought of a system where instead of

looking at the color of your skin, they are looking at family income,

whether your parents went to college, community involvement, other stuff,

as an indicator of your adversity.

And,

I'm guessing they're thinking if your parents are doctors or one of your

parents is a doctor, they can afford to send you to a private school.

Yes.

To a private university as opposed to the the

public university.

Yes.

Yeah.

So, what does it say?

It, it just said here that, It's not easy to persuade medical schools

to upend admission standards, particularly anything that undermines

the value of test scores and grades.

Dr.

Henderson said he had received pushback from his own colleagues.

Doctors say their kids got into medical school elsewhere and they didn't get

in here as the children of doctors.

He said those applicants earned an SS e d score of zero.

So I guess they couldn't, couldn't earn an income score.

They couldn't earn a score because they were the first in their family to college.

they probably didn't earn a score because of a poor public education.

yeah.

So there we go.

Surely they,

they can get in, but they have to be exceptionally academically.

Yes, indeed.

Hmm.

The other, complaint about, affirmative action.

Mm-hmm.

Was that the people who got in were not necessarily, they could

have excelled in a lesser school.

So if, if you are certainly your top tier universities, if you're taking

in people based on the color of their skin, not on their ability mm-hmm.

Then you are taking in people who may not be able to cope with the pressure, and

the expectations of a top level school.

and I wonder how they necessarily, if you are, if you're dealing with people

from disadvantaged backgrounds, they're gonna have the same sort of thing.

Yes.

Quite possibly.

I've heard that before.

Mm.

Coleman Hughes wrote an article once about, how putting kids who

had academically underperformed.

Into advanced classes, they would invariably be at the bottom of the class.

Mm-hmm.

Because they had got there through, race scores or whatever.

And and that was tough on them.

They might've had much happier and better experiences if they'd been with a cohort

of peers who are more of their standard.

Like if you're in a math class and everyone else is a real

genius at math, like it'd be really depressing, wouldn't it?

Like you just think you're helpless.

And what would also happen would be a sort of, basically it, it engineered a

situation where normally in the class, the poorest performers were ethnic kids or,

you know, Spanish Latino and black kids.

and it created a, a sense amongst the white kids that.

The blacks and Latinos are stupid 'cause they're always in the bottom of the class.

But that was because it was a cohort that had been kind of promoted in

a class that they really shouldn't have been in in the first place.

So almost created a racial stereotype Yeah.

In the lines of those.

So there is definitely a correlation between, socioeconomic

background and performance.

Mm-hmm.

And there and there's, there's nothing to do with, race that is inherent in this.

It is purely, yeah.

When your, when your parents are out working all hours and you're

not supervised at home to do your homework, you're more likely to goof

off than if your parents are at home.

You know, if you've got, one parent at work and one parent at home being the

homemaker, they're gonna make bloody sure you sit down and do your homework.

Mm-hmm.

Or they're more likely to.

Mm-hmm.

Hmm.

meanwhile, sorry.

Well, it was

just, how, how do you deal with that at university level?

It's too late by then.

Hmm.

These kids have been disadvantaged from the get go, and unless you give them

the resources to catch up, you know, do you run, do you run a remedial class?

Do you run an additional year for those people from disadvantaged

backgrounds to bring them up to the same educational standard as

their, their peers, their cohort?

Mm-hmm.

But sometimes it might not be possible.

Like, you know, if you're in a really M I t or some of these really top universities

and you're in a really difficult STEM class, all the training in the world can't

make a silk person out of a SOS either.

Like, you just either have the ability for some of these

things or you don't, but Yeah.

Yeah.

So, so people who have the innate intelligence but

don't necessarily have the.

Training.

Mm-hmm.

Who have been let down by their school or by, you know, just,

just their background in general.

Yeah.

I'm just saying that a year's extra training can't make it

rocket scientists out of everybody.

No, I agree.

There, there has to be some in innate

ability there.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Anyway, look at us tricky conversations around race.

Of course culture is a different thing though because culture is where

people do it does influence things.

So for example, in Indian culture, it's quite the thing to do medical, into

the medical profession in some way.

so culture has a real impact on how people perform.

race of course, is just a construct, but.

We talked enough about culture last week.

Anyway, that's food for thought for you.

Dear listener, have you enjoyed us treading on dangerous territory yet again?

next week Scott is gonna tangle with Liam.

That'll be fun.

I'm really looking forward to

that.

as long as you're gonna be a fair moderator,

of course, in my Mr.

Spock fashion, I will be scrupulously fair.

I won't be swayed by emotion.

That's good.

Yeah, it'll be good.

I alright.

I all right.

Until next time.

Thanks.

In the chat room.

You've been good.

Talk to you next time.

Bye for now.

And it's a good night from me and it's a

good night from him.

Good night.