POLITICAL DINOSAURS And the human condition

For decades, Australians have been denied the freedoms and self-evident truths their nation was founded upon. While a parade of political dinosaurs, claim to be their defenders. But the problem runs deeper than politics. Selfishness and egocentricity are corroding our civic life just as collectivism and co-dependency sits on the other side of the pendulum. What does genuine responsible citizenship look like and who's standing in the way?

A conversation with Sam Belfield

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:14

Sam Belfield, and Sam is going to be discussing the human condition and the decline of responsible citizenship. Sam, welcome to the show.

SPEAKER_00 0:22

Good morning, Cheryl, and good morning to the listeners.

SPEAKER_01 0:25

Sam, it's an important issue, isn't it? We talk about responsible citizenship, and we've been hearing a lot about Australian values, and I'm still a little bit confused as to what we're expected to believe that they are and what responsible citizenship really means. There's a lot in this conversation. So perhaps we can start with what the difference is between rights and responsibilities, or do they go hand in hand?

SPEAKER_00 0:54

Um well I think they go hand in hand. I think it's a it's a it's a an aspect of this, in a sense, this the two sides of the coin of responsible citizenship versus irresponsible citizenship. And um it might be helpful a short definition that that uh you know John Anderson, the former Deputy Prime Minister that you mentioned, he he writes of responsible citizenship as uh and I quote, when our energies are dedicated primarily to the virtue of living up to the duties that when met facilitate a healthy society. And um he refers to this sort of balance between uh rights and responsibility, and I think he would, you know, just to sort of try and simplify it, would suggest that responsible citizenship is when we uh what's ascendant is uh as a consider an outward consideration of of responsibility, of civic engagement, um, of virtue and values, and on the flip side um there's rights where we're in a sense inwardly focused, selfishly focused on um you know what's in it for us and and not uh looking outwardly. And so that's sort of I suppose the the the two poles of this this um balancing act between you know rights and response and responsibility that you mentioned.

SPEAKER_01 2:09

Yes, you explained that quite well. Civic engagement on one hand, and then an internally focused individual on their own rights and their personal goals in in essence. And this is sort of where it comes down to ego, doesn't it? And also Ayn Rand talked about selfishness and and she put another spin on selfish and it wasn't about being self-centred and having inward rights, but the selfishness being someone that is prepared to pursue the responsibilities that you speak of with civil engagement, conditional that it doesn't impact somebody else. So you go full bore as a responsible citizen to be the best you can be, have the best life you can have, and you do that because you have the right to do so. So we can't really separate the two, can we?

SPEAKER_00 3:02

Um I suppose I think it's just a case of looking being able to look at the the two of them and um I mean certainly my uh what I feel uh John Anderson does quite well is he he he's identifying that there's a psychological reason to why there's been a um uh a decline of responsible citizenship and and and what he refers to as the rise of the sickness of um irresponsible uh citizenship and that there's an underlying the language he uses um very much points to a an under underlying decline and he highlights that that's uh you know very serious. You know, he uses the words of you know of our society, our civilization being at a at a crossroads. And um from my perspective, uh my area of interest in terms of supporting the work of Australian biologist Jeremy Griffiths is is actually saying look, we need a deeper analysis of um, you know, you touch on selfishness. So in on one sense you can say, okay, there's a there's a health healthy selfishness, which might be to sort of overuse that word in terms of Ayn Rand, but there's also uh a detrimental selfishness, and there's this um this underlying concept of the upset of the human condition, and that as that escalates, we get to a tipping point where um it becomes unhealthy, and you know, hopefully we can expand on that a little bit more.

SPEAKER_01 4:21

We we really are talking about moral virtue, aren't we? But more importantly, you mentioned uh a psychological element that's involved here, and I know that your dedication to Griffith's work and the way you explain things helps us to better understand what it what the symptoms might be. So uh if we're uh outwardly focused in terms of having responsibility for ourselves among a community, but there's an internal angst and psychological pain, that must be a part of this conflicting essence that we are experiencing at the moment, particularly.

SPEAKER_00 5:02

Oh definit that's c that's correct, um Cheryl. So I mean um I mean when I mean John Anderson refers to sort of the symptoms along the lines of you know aggressive individualism, um atomization, um you know, decadence, hedonism, uh moral corruption. So that's the sort of language he's using to sort of I think there's two important elements of that is that he's suggesting that it is internal, and also that that language, in my view, indicates that this is something uniquely human. It's it's a it's something tied up with our unique human faculties of moral morality and also our our conscious thinking mind. So while other people might sort of suggest that we're you know uh selfish and and uh brutish or you know egocentric because of that's just rooted in our um animal nature, that we've got you know savage instincts and that's why we're competitive and selfish, um that's overlooking the fact that um we we we readily acknowledge, I mean, we've got this, we refer to words like virtue, value, our humanity. Now that that suggests that um we've actually got this innate dimension of us that is um you know morally aligned to being you know cooperative, selfless, caring of others, outward looking. And that's very much where sort of Jeremy Griffith's explanation comes in. And there's just two m fundamental principles he's putting forward is that look, we've got a a moral loving nature, and that to the extent that we're selfish, upset, egocentric, that's uh not rooted in our nature, that's a psychological problem, and it's actually that's a good news story in the sense that that's healable.

SPEAKER_01 6:43

Yes, it's and look, we could talk all day, couldn't we? You've got so much to share with our our listeners and and you've come back to John Anderson quite a bit. I'm noticing as well as you are, obviously, that he is quite vocal in this space at the moment, and he is one of the founders of the Australian Research uh sorry, the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship, isn't it?

SPEAKER_00 7:05

It is, that's correct, yes.

SPEAKER_01 7:06

With uh with Jordan Peterson in Canada. So we've got an Australian A Canadian and their launch was in the United Kingdom. So that's an interesting triangle, isn't it? The USA was cut out of this. What do you ta what's your take on that?

SPEAKER_00 7:23

Um well I suppose I'm not I I couldn't probably pinpoint that. I just think that um I think it is an interesting um mix of people who you know, you've got a psychologist, you've got um, you know, John Anderson's obviously, you know, a a a committed um you know Christian in terms of his worldview, and I mean he I just see him as someone who's deeply concerned about you know where Western civilization in particular is headed and is trying to you know dig deeper into that. And um I don't know, I suppose maybe there's more of a philosophical pre predisposition in just you know, there's a bit of a generalization in those three countries to actually trying to um you know uh f follow the the the nose there of you know where where is this this deeper problem that if you want to call it Western civilization has got you know where is that coming from and trying to um do something about it.

SPEAKER_01 8:18

Yes, look, it's it's quite interesting. Have you been to any of these events?

SPEAKER_00 8:23

I've not actually attended the events. I mean I'm fairly or very familiar with the the content and and in a sense what I understand that they're they're trying to do and um have found that very interesting.

SPEAKER_01 8:34

Yes, it's I I attended one in Sydney and it was quite an experience, I have to say, Sam, because it was uh all the faces we would expect to see John Howard, Tony Abbott, uh you know John Anderson, Jordan Peterson, of course, the list went on. And the narrative was all about, as you say, ri being responsible and let's all come together and lots of kumbaya. But this is from people who have been in power, who have selfishly sought to keep in power, using any strategy possible to ensure that they use public funds to promote their goods, to get re-elected, to remain career politicians, and now suddenly the world is turning inside out, upside down, this strategy is being exposed, and they've decided they now have virtue. Now the big one for me is globalization and responsible citizenship. The two don't go hand in hand when we're selling our country and we're selling our soul. So these politicians, etc., with the Australi with this uh Alliance for Responsible Citizenship are some of the most irresponsible people we've had in the country now telling us that they're responsible and how dare we not follow them? How does that work?

SPEAKER_00 10:13

I think you make a very good point, Cheryl. The way I would frame that is that I think um w w in a sense uh we're we're everyone's aligned. There's this no-go zone. There's this we we can identify the problems and we can drill into it and we can talk about selfishness, we can sort of coin these phrases like responsible citizenship. But ultimately we hit a wall, and I suggest it's because of this underlying issue of the human condition, where it's like a no-go zone. So what happens is w in a sense we're we're limited to trying to use policies, um, you know, laws, we've got all these mechanisms to try and sort of, if you like, stage manage the excesses of the of the human condition, and that's shot through with compromise because at the end of the day, we are all afflicted by the human condition. So the these issues of of cynicism, if you look at the the the immense moral compromises and even material compromises involved in globalism, for example, they are all just I would suggest are just expressions of the um this underlying issue of the human condition, and that we've sort of in a sense got this bias in our mind, we've got this conflict in our mind that is compromising our our decision making, if you like. And and so everyone uh rallies around and says, Yeah, look, we've got a really serious problem here, Western civilization, we're not telling our own story, we're what have you, come by us to sort of overstate it to to use your language, but then everyone's sort of pointing in the direction of sort of where we need to go, this inner dimension. But we all intuitively know that's been an off-limits uh domain, uh, and it in a sense raises questions and problems that we haven't had a solution to. So everyone's had to sort of just revert back to type uh and trying to do more stage managing to um to to deal with it. And and they're talking about the need for moral renewal. But I suggest that in order to actually achieve moral ri renewal, we need the ability to open up this domain of the human condition, which I'm and and I'm suggesting that's what Jeremy Gripp has actually done. He's made it safe for us to go into that no-go zone so that we can rather than stage managing, we can really get down to the nitty-gritty of of having an honest conversation about who we are, we can get rid of the virtue signaling, the the the the denial, and in you know, to to your point, have a real conversation about what's actually going on rather than sort of in a sense kicking the can down the road.

SPEAKER_01 12:49

Well, that's right. I couldn't agree more, and I wonder if what that really means is getting these people out of the way. They've had their turn, they screwed up, and it's about time we had some new voices and new faces instead of con consistently bringing them to the fore and putting them up on the pedestal. John Anderson talked very much back in 1999 uh regarding the difference between global and international. And this was uh all relative to the Asia crisis, to the way in which the uh United Nations was expanding the World Economic Forum. We had an event in Melbourne where John Howard said that the way forward was globalization and the you know the amount of effort that he made to ensure that that was the message that was shared with Australia was incredibly, incredibly powerful. So companies have followed suit, people have followed suit, and while our politicians have forced us to think of globalisation, locally there's less work, there's less manufacturing, less export, uh codependency on government. So we've got this global initiative with a socialist agenda locally. And it's not just Labor. And I'm not a big I'm not a fan of either political party. I used to be a big fan of Liberals, I have to say. And I woke up, couldn't believe uh the hypocrisy. So, Sam, how do we deal with this? Exactly as you said, you know, this whole responsible focus that we have to look at and this decline of responsible citizenship, we have to be very critical. How do we learn to do that?

SPEAKER_00 14:34

Um well, I suppose the only way I can sort of answer that is I mean, obviously at a political level, a societal level, hopefully there can be um a return to sanity, but I I think we need to that said what what is ultimately more important, because if if we accept on the face of it, the even this language of you know decadence, selfishness, um, moral corruption, internal decay, breakdown of trust, you know, increasing cynicism, um, the lack of self-reliance, the lack of civic duty. Um you touched on the you know the the citizens being sort of disconnected and engaged with um you know what's going on in the political realm. Ultimately, I believe that's a psych this that is a product of an expression of this psychological uh malaise of the human condition, this this internally distressed state we've got due to a conflict between our instincts and our intellect. Um and there's a if you like an escalating upset that's resulting from that. That's not a bad that's not a if you like a bad thing or a an evil thing. It's actually it's solvable, it's sealable through insight. And we need to look at why the pendulum has swung and um you know why is it that people are handing over to government? Why is there, you know, Australia has, you know, in terms of the Australian character, we've prided ourselves on a can-do, self-reliant, um, you know, uh a sort of a healthy skepticism about author authoritarianism and what have you, and then you look at what's happening in Australia psychologically, you know, spiritually, if you want to put it that way, all of a sudden we're finding in ourselves where we're handing over to government this you know and and uh without getting sort of politicizing it, you can look at examples like the NDIS, and um, you know, I think a stat was quoted the other day of 42% of the people on the NDIS are uh are 18 and younger. Now alarm bells need to be ringing in terms of now I'm not suggesting that that's not an important screen uh scheme, that's beside the point. It's that's just a a symptom of a of a very serious underlying problem. And in order to actually deal with I mean you you refer um Cheryl to first principles and I think the uh the first principle is we've actually got to get to grips with um what's going on. But in this case that involves entailing you know entails uh addressing the human condition and that's where I think we need to go and I think we actually can go now.

SPEAKER_01 17:08

Yes, indeed. And I think I I'm sure you would certainly agree with me, Sam, that to start we have to go back to the start, and that is the family unit. And the respect that we have for the family unit and there's so much external focus on others, particularly politicians and government systems and social systems that we don't have a day-to-day uh control over, yet we are totally dependent on because it's been constructed that way. So what does John Anderson, just to wrap this up, what does John Anderson think of the family unit, and I wonder why he never ever pushed to repeal the Family Law Act, which has destroyed Australian families?

SPEAKER_00 17:50

Um well the the extent that I'm aware of that, Cheryl, is more is just that I mean he he's very much um I suppose as far as I'm aware, sort of championing the the actually the the cornerstone importance of um the family unit. Now, there may be things that are contradictory to that, but it certainly is to the extent that I'm aware he he sees that at least in the literature and and and listening to him in sort of the current context. Um and I suppose and I think you and I both would agree with the importance of that princip uh the principle of and and that again trying to have a an honest conversation around what is the the foundational importance of uh a functioning, loving, secure um uh childhood, a family unit, and and that and that is actually foundational to our society. That if we look at issues like trust and and civic engagement, I think you can they ultimately come back to this um the sort of the exposure to the human condition, particularly in our in our childhood, and that's that forms our our views and in many ways our path uh both individually and as a society in terms of our ability to be outward looking and engaged. Um and again it's just it's another we've struggled to recognise the the critical importance of the family unit again because of this um this difficult issue of the human condition.

SPEAKER_01 19:18

Look, it's again I could talk to you all day about this, Sam, and I tell you what we have to do is we have to uh do a pre-record, I think, and spend a good couple of hours unpacking this together because you bring such wealth of commitment to this topic. And my listeners would no doubt agree with me that when you speak of responsible citizenship, you do it with eyes wide open and a very, very uh when I say heavy heart uh tremendous commitment. And I thank you. Every time you come on the show, I walk away having to go away and do more research on this uh can human condition, but more importantly, as you said today, the decline of responsible citizenship and the conflict we're in. Great to have you on the s the show, Sam, and uh I hope you'll take me up on that promise to do a pre-record for a couple of hours and have a really good conversation.

SPEAKER_00 20:09

I'd love to do that, Cheryl, and thanks as always for the opportunity to talk about these issues.

SPEAKER_01 20:14

Pleasure. Thanks, Sam. You're a gem. Have a great day and God bless.

SPEAKER_00 20:17

So yeah, thank you.

SPEAKER_01 20:19

That was Sam Bellfield, a leader in the human condition, and he's got an extraordinary ability to bring everything back to how he views the world and how he views how he views what it is to be a person who is rather complex but also needing to be responsible, but also to balance out with the rights that we have to be responsible. And Sam has always had the ability to make sure that uh his messaging is quite clear, whether we agree or not philosophically to everything that is shared. What is important is that we must not forget history and we mustn't just hear what people are saying today, and I'm speaking of John Anderson particularly. If you go back in time and follow through his beliefs and the efforts he has made, I'd love to hear him discuss that and perhaps talk about the mistakes that have been made that have led Australia to where we are right now.