Gerard Henderson and anti-semitism and sectarianism is all the go ...

(Above: Doonesbury takes a view. Remaining panels below. More Doonesbury here).

The pond is determined to maintain its carbon-free status, because never has so much hot air been expended over a tax which does precious little of anything - everyone leaves clutching a kewpie doll - and which, despite being heralded as the end of western civilisation as we know it, is really an excuse for Dr. No to barnstorm up and down the country at tedious length, now matched by a PM determined to wear out matching boot leather.

Why even the anonymous editorialist at The Australian agrees:

... for all the hot air, the environmental and economic impact of the carbon tax and emissions trading scheme will be limited in the foreseeable future. In the national interest, attention needs to shift to more pressing challenges. (here)

Dear sweet absent lord, the anon edit! And as the media source of much of the hot air - enough to produce a one degree increase in the temperature - has been the Murdoch press, the anon edit knows whereof he or she speaks ...

Enough already, especially as the loons are out in force, no doubt to the surprise of jolly Joe Hockey, lathering up the crowd to a level of high anxiety and rage, and then startled when one loon decided that now Australia was marching in parallel with the American revolutionary war, and no taxation without representation - thereby managing to ignore the way a jolly band of representatives had been sent to Canberra to deliberate on such matters:

"What is the Coalition going to do to try and stop the people of Australia taking up arms against their government the way the Americans took arms up against their government 200 years ago?" he said. (here)

Yes, what is the Coalition going to do to stop the next Eureka stockade?

Mr Hockey said he understood the man's anger but said Australians were a peace-loving nation who fought with words.

Fight with words? At last the truth of John Howard's disarming of the population stands revealed as a conspiracy to deny our constitutional right to bear arms (it's in the constitution somewhere, I swear it).

Is it a surprise that this first radical step towards revolution took place at the Mary Mackillop - blessed be her name - College Hall in Queensland?

Oops, I see - thanks to our prattling Polonius - that I've committed a mortal sin.

Yes, there he is getting indignant about the fate of Jews and Catholics in the lucky country, in Jews know acceptance still has its exceptions.

According to Henderson, it's a mortal sin to draw attention to religion as part of a political debate, never mind that the beliefs and the practices of that religion might have direct political consequences - per the Zionist posturing that led to the theocratic state called Israel, or the musings of the Pell heretics and the Jensenist nepotics on any number of political matters, including climate change in the case of Pell, and any mildly modern cause in the case of the Jensenists.

Naturally this view that religion and conservative true believers deserve a free kick has to involve pompous historical blather of a pompous kind only Henderson could manage:

A century ago, Australia was a relatively tolerant society. Even so, Jews and Catholics were banned from Protestant-dominated gentlemen's clubs in Sydney, Melbourne and elsewhere. In other words, discrimination against certain minorities became acceptable and fashionable. Consequently, it was rarely commented on or even noticed.

Yes, in the world of Henderson, being banned from clubs is the height of discrimination - I say, old boy, wot wot, sorry it's the black ball for you.

It goes without saying that, unless you happened to be of the genus WASP, Australia was a relatively intolerant society a century ago, and it wasn't just the gentlemen's clubs, and it didn't suddenly become acceptable and fashionable. It was a tradition handed down from the old Dart, and it was constantly commented on and regularly noticed, especially by those who wanted to keep Australia white, and in the hands of the Empire, away from the evil Asiatics and hot blooded European types.

Really, how could anyone scribble such a fatuous opening remark, and still gain regular employment in the Fairfax press?

Much later in the column, we find that Henderson is adept at playing the victim card:

As is its practice, Britain's irreverent Private Eye publishes anonymous reviews. Whoever had the task of assessing the latest offering by the atheist A.C. Grayling made a perceptive point about modern Western manners. He or she pointed out that, for the likes of Grayling, Anglicans, Catholics and Methodists make easy targets.

Uh huh. It's come to this, Henderson quoting Private Eye, to establish that the true believers are victims as they consign their enemies to hell for all eternity.

Of course the point about local varieties of religious types is that they are local, and conform to the requirements of the local food movement. Why graze abroad, when all around there are loons rabbiting on from a conservative religious base? And so remind us that those who derive their conservative thinking from religion are likely to sound the same on matters of sex and social structure and orderly behaviour, whether Catholic, Methodist or Hindu.

Every so often, an odd bod like the Indian Health Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad will bob up and draw attention to themselves, and then attempt a classic western-style political retreat, in which said statement will be called a mis-quotation, a mis-translation, a misrepresentation, a distortion, etc etc, having served the purpose of running prejudice up the flag and dog whistling to willing listeners (India's Health Minister Calls Homosexuality 'Unnatural')

It almost goes without saying that Azad panders to Hindus, and in 2008, his government attracted attention when he announced plans to transfer land to the board of a Hindu shrine, resulting in violence in which seven people were reported killed (wiki here).

But why stroll across the street, when the likes of the Pells and the Jensens provide rich plums on this side, even if the rights of the Inquisition in the matter of tortures and killings have been limited in the lucky country?

Back to Henderson channelling Private Eye:

The reviewer added: "The wise would quite like to be equally contemptuous of Muslims and Hindus, but these persons generally have brown skins and thus criticism of their religious beliefs is better avoided." Australia's very own born-again atheist Catherine Deveny admitted as much on Q&A in February when she said she was "flat out" attacking the "Catholic faith".

Actually, it turns out that most likely Jesus had a brown skin, but does this mean that criticism of the religion he set up is best avoided?

The attempt to conflate religion and race is of course the last refuge of the scoundrel, so naturally Henderson goes at it full tilt, managing to confuse in his own inimitable way, protests against the state of Israel with anti-Semitism, and the mockery of Tony Abbott's religious views - which infuse and infect his politics - with a kind of 'below the belt' tactic which members of the gentlemen's clubs around the land must automatically deplore.

In the process, logic goes out the window:

Danby's point about double standards is well taken. There is little doubt that most ABC and Age journalists would regard a violent boycott of a kebab shop, in opposition to Hamas rocket attacks on Israel, as both a provocation and newsworthy.

This is by way of reference to a protest organised outside a Max Brenner store, and it's passing strange to see Henderson get so upset on behalf of the fictitious Brenner, since in Newtown it's home to all those inner city urban elite trendies he routinely despises.

But that's the rub. Max Brenner is an Israeli restaurant chain (wiki here), and so is utterly unlike a neighbourhood kebab shop, run most likely by family members. Now if the Palestinians had managed to get their act together, and produced a major chain of kebab shops, perhaps under the name Max Filafel, that might be a convenient way to protest about the policies of Hamas ...

As it is, the pond reserves the right to boycott Gloria Jean's Coffees, on the basis that in Australia it's closely associated with the activities of the Hillsong church, including the Mercy Ministries, which just so happens to be an evangelical, charismatic Christian organisation of the most irritating kind ...

Ditto, even though there's no necessary connection, Domino's Pizza - in the United States a 500 store chain - was begun by a conservative pro-life Catholic philanthropist, one Thomas Stephen "Tom" Monaghan, and the pond feels free never to eat the chain's pizzas.

The upside is that the pond would automatically ignore the kind of coffee and the big lumpy cheese-saturated pizzas on offer in any of the chains, preferring a decent Arabica blend. Oh dear, that's starting to sound very Max Brenner, isn't it, and somehow sinister, since it seems to be a favourable mention of Arabs (well they do great coffee).

The point of course, is that people are entitled to protest the business activities of organisations and businesses perceived to support religions or attitudes or points of view at odds with the liberal mantra, live and let live, and this might well include chain stores that support the current follies of the current extreme right wing conservative Israeli government.

Naturally Henderson is also free to call out Peter Reith, and set the dogs and the bully boys on to the wharfies for interfering with his right to get unfair trade chocolate.

But to dress such posturing up as racism or anti-Semitism alone, and to drag in historical parallels, such as Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists is disingenuous at best, offensive at worst.

Or worse, completely ironic, as just at this moment the Knesset has passed a controversial law that will make it a civil penalty to call for a boycott on Israel or its settlements:

The bill allows any person to sue another for declaring a boycott. The bill would also strip any business calling or participating in a boycott against Israel of any government funds. (here)

Uh huh. Of course this is exactly the sort of behaviour one might expect of Hamas, and one which would see Hamas roundly abused around the world. Naturally there were some strong reactions:

— MK Ilan Gilon said: "We are dealing with a legislation that is an embarrassment to Israeli democracy and makes people around the world wonder if there is actually a democracy here."

— MK Hanna Sweid said: "This is the government of Senator McCarthy, but with kippas."

— MK Nitzan Horowitz said: "Right-wing MKs are bringing garbage to the Knesset under the guise of wanting to protect our national honor. This is a nauseating bill."

Oh dear, anti-Semites the lot of them, except that they happen to be Semites living in Israel, but I guess that's what happens when you confuse Benjamin Netanyahu and his government's policies with the state of Israel and anti-semitism.

But you have to hand it to Henderson. Digging back to Sir Oswald Mosley is a clever ploy, as a way of avoiding a breach of Godwin's Law. But let's face it, Mosley was intermingled with the British royal family in fine 'rut like noble rabbits' style, to the point where we sometimes feel like organising a boycott of the Queen.

Or maybe not. Perhaps we should dig back into the past and note that the current alarming trend in right wing behaviour in Australia - what with a call to arms - owes a lot to the right wing extremism typified by Francis de Groot, who cut the ribbon at the opening of the Sydney Harbour Bridge before Jack Lang could use his scissors.

It would be a long bow, or perhaps a long sword, but no longer than Henderson's brand of name calling for anyone taking a different view to his, as if making a protest in a democracy is somehow undemocratic ... as it seems it might now be in Israel ...

(Below: and now to wrap up our sectarian joke of the week).