How to impress like Clive Hamilton

Don't miss this excellent read:

Journalist
Tony Thomas is a regular contributor to Quadrant Online Magazine and has penned
a crackerjack article exposing a "qualification" used by Clive Hamilton AM FRSA, the shrill, leftie academic with a dangerous notion of democracy.

During the
recent Global Warming oppression where anything but absolute submission to the
mantra from academia avowing earthly destruction, Clive Hamilton AM FRSA had
much to say. His scholarly pedigree duped many who knew little about this
trusted inculcator of student adulators.

Recall the matter in 2011 when Australia's leading climate
change scientists were targeted by the supposed vicious, unrelenting email
campaign that triggered  “police
investigations of death threats”? Although a lie, many believed it.

Conservatives were surprised at the bile spewed forth by those whose
professional lives aspired to creating auras of intellectual respectability.
However, angered beyond reason by deniers the warmistas took leave of their
senses, if that was possible, and flaunted their true colours—bright red!

The troops
rallied. Fairfax columnist Richard Glover called for deniers to have their
views forcibly tattooed across their arms or chest. Ex-News Ltd columnist Jill
Singer suggested deniers be gassed with carbon monoxide. Good Lord!

Such idiocy would be funny if one of the clowns was
not Clive Hamilton AM FRSA, “Business
and Professional Ethics
Justice and the Human Good,” a then appointed Professor of
Public Ethics at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics. Clive advocated a “suspension of democracy” was warranted to silence Global-Warming
skeptics.

The “ethicist” played a role in the Gillard
puppet-show staring, Ross Garnaut, Tim Flannery, and a full cast of lousy
performers who put their reputations on the line and swore we faced eternal
damnation. GC.Ed.@L.

Tony’s excellent piece probes flaws in a pillar of perceived
social reverence.

by Tony Thomas. (Reprinted with permission.)

A bit of a loser myself, I like perving on the credentials of my betters. For example, I noticed last year that the official biography of the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said that he “obtained…a Ph.D. in industrial engineering and a Ph.D. in economics.”

Wow, I thought, not one but two Ph.D’s, both from North Carolina State University, and both in 1974! I emailed the university to check, and got a prompt reply saying, “Yes, he earned two Ph.D’s.” Silly me, to have doubted it.

But 24 hours later, I got a follow-up from the uni press officer, obviously a decent chap, saying that he had checked more closely and his first reply was wrong . In fact Dr Pachauri was awarded only one Ph.D., for combined study in industrial engineering and economics, he said.

I alerted the IPCC about its misleading claim that Pachauri earned two Ph.D’s but the IPCC has, 18 months later, still not got around to correcting it. Busy people, I guess.

My next foray into credentialism involved everyone’s favorite guru, Dr Clive Hamilton AM FRSA.

Dr Clive AM FRSA is an Australian public intellectual, according to his own website and a host of other sources, including his publisher Allen & Unwin.

As a global warming alarmist, he is part of the Weber-barbecue-like tripod of Australian public intellectuals, the other two kettle legs being of course Dr Tim Flannery and Professor Robert Manne. I wondered, re Clive, who ‘public intellectuals’ were. I guess Jean Paul Sartre’s definition, “the moral conscience of their age” seems the best fit. After all, Clive stood for the Greens in 2009 and his “AM” is a clear-cut 2009 honor for his service to the Left on climate-change policy, sustainability and societal trends.

But what’s with that “FRSA”? It looks a bit like that top science gong, “Fellow of the Royal Society” but actually stands for “Fellow of the Royal Society of the Arts”, a different UK body. Being an FRSA seems like something special, since it always seems to be tagged to Clive’s profiles.

However, FRSA is a title you can actually buy on-line. About 27,000 people have done this, the current fee being $A123 as a one-off and $A255 a year.

Last March I put in a test application for an FRSA, for convenience using the name Kim Jong Un, of Pyongyang. The RSA website promised a confirmation within 12 working days.

I got emailed back a form from a Michael Ambjorn, Head of Fellowship at the RSA London headquarters, saying “Although we don’t contact all referees, some may be contacted for a character reference request.” I nominated Clive, his bestie Robert Manne and Ray Finkelstein QC, without knowing of course whether they would support or criticise Mr Kim’s application. “Watch this space”, I told Quadrant Online readers.

“So then what happened?” I hear you cry.

I’m afraid I baulked at the first hurdle, which was remitting the required $378 (Quadrant Online tends to be dismissive of its contributors’ expense claims).

The RSA however remained keen to get the money, and after a pause, I got a pleading letter from its Fellowship Development Coordinator Mark Hall:

“Dear Mr Jong Un,

We noted that you downloaded an application form to become a Fellow of the RSA, and I am just following up to find out if there is anything we can do to help you with your application.

I have included a reminder about the RSA below, but please do not hesitate to contact me to discuss Fellowship in more detail… “

There followed some hard-sell for Mr Jong Un about the advantages of meeting the other 27,000 Fellows, sharing skills for charity, generating ideas “that aim to have a positive social impact”, and so on. Again, I baulked at remitting the $378.

Then I got a further RSA begging letter for Mr Jong Un, “just following up”, as Mark Hall put it. He invited Mr Jong Un to connect with recent Fellows such as Antoinette Saxer FRSA, who is “currently working on the upcoming Good Fashion Show which focuses on eco-ethical and responsible fashion. She talks about why eco-fashion inspires her and what she would like to connect to other Fellows.”

Well, OK, Mr Jong Un is a bit of a fashion icon with his funky, centre-parted hair-do, and he did star in a production of Grease when a teen at Berne International School. He would doubtless appreciate my signing him up as a FRSA, but I felt guilty about further wasting Mark Hall’s time. I sent Mark a reply:

“Hi, Mark,

Thanks for your reminder. I have decided not to join your RSA after all as I am very busy smiting the double-dealing imperialist running-dog lackeys in the United States.

Cheers

Kim Jong-un, Dear Leader of the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea.”

As Hamlet put it, the rest was silence.

Tony Thomas is a smart-aleck. He blogs at tthomas061.wordpress.com

Monash University’s Muslim Handbook

Unless you have an iPad (which I don’t) then you would have missed this excellent story by Daily Telegraph columnist, Miranda Devine that should be read in full:

Quote

Monash University prides itself on its "multicultural learning environment" and yet it produces a handbook for one certain class of students, and not for others.

Salaam Monash is the title of the glossy 50-page "handbook for Muslim students".

"At Monash we understand that Muslim students have specific social, religious and cultural needs," writes Professor Stephanie Fahey, deputy vice-chancellor, in a foreword to the handbook.

The booklet lists Islamic banking and financial institutions, Muslim publications, women's groups and schools. It also lists Muslim medical and dental practitioners, which splits up doctors into male and female groups…

…But there is no similar handbook for other religious or ethnic groups, not for Buddhists, Taoists, Germans, Greeks, Sikhs, Mormons or vegans.

Why encourage one group of people to maintain an identity separate from other Australians?

Good question, Miranda. Why indeed the need for Muslim only handbook.

 

Follow Andy on twitter

Compulsory Union Hooliganism!

Geoffrey-Bondson Voluntary Student Unionism has given students more benefits than compulsory unionism ever did, writes Geoffrey Bondson.

With the demise of Compulsory Student Unionism, university students suddenly have money. When my parents were at UWA in the late 1980s, the Guild Fees were higher and the services poorer. 

Nowadays, with voluntary membership, the Guild actually has reason to provide decent services. Also, given inflation, the Guild fees now should be HIGHER than 20 years ago – but they're actually lower. 
What does this say about CSU? 

It says it's a money-leeching, fraudulent policy that wastes time and resources. In the 21st century, with VSU in action, it is really only the bastions of old-world unionism (ie, prominent Young Labor members) in control of the UWA Guild that cause it to hold a pro-CSU position. 

There is no need for CSU, as is evidenced by higher, more enthusiastic members of university Guilds across the country, post-CSU. Why should people pay for services they do not use? The answer is, they shouldn't have to.

As a result, cashed up students don't have to rummage through the stocks of local op-shops for clothes as they did 20, 30, 40 years ago. Higher rates of pay for casual and part-time workers enable more people to live out of their own pocket, and hence we see many people on campus in high fashion. Or, at least, not charity-bin fodder.

Voluntary Student Unionism is the only way for student Guilds to keep modern and up-to-date. In an age where trade unions are slowly becoming less relevant, to the despair of many of my student colleagues – and indeed many other people in the nation who aren't students – Compulsory Student Unionism is an out-dated, inefficient way of providing for students. 

If the Guild(s) didn't spend so much time and money campaigning in favour of CSU, and instead spent their time working out how to spend that money on services students actually require, then CSU would be unnecessary.

Geoffrey Bondson is a right-wing student at the University of Western Australia who's tired of Guild leftism. He believes that it is time to retake the campuses from the radical left and replace these people with moderate, reasonable people.