John Howard to head ICC?

[stephen]

I hate it that people call Howard racist. He certainly was not. Immigration to Australia increased vastly during his reign, and much of that from Asian countries. He had to deal regularly with many foreign heads of state during his time. If he truly was racist, why did he work towards building Japan and China to be our largest trading partners?

I can accept that people think Howard was cruel or harsh (though I would disagree), but he certainly was not racist.

 

[silentstriker]

I don't know much about Howard's politics (I know he was right wing), but surely a Prime Minister would have excellent man management and organization skills and would be ideal.

However, the head of the ICC has virtually no power - I don't think a former Prime Minister would be very happy being in a situation where he has very limited scope and authority. So while it may be a good choice for the ICC, I'm not sure if it'd be a good choice for him.

I love how people say he won't be a puppet - what exactly is he going to do without the consent of the boards? He can't rewrite the ICC constitution himself. Good luck with that.

But of course, if he is OK with the amount of flexibility and powers he has, then I think anyone who has achieved that much would be a good choice.

 

[Aritro]

He certainly made cynical use of divisive race politics a number of times during his leadership. I have no doubt that his targetted criticisms, at various times, of Muslim, Asian and African immigrants, and his opposition to the values of multiculturalism are a huge part of the ugly Anglo-centric nationalism that's made contemporary Australia a far more intolerant place than it used to be.

He was also crap at Indiginous issues.

 

[silentstriker]

And people who are bashing Howard on his policies, and I'm sure you're all right, but have you looked at Pawar's political career?

ICC needs someone with the proper financial and man management skills at the top who can be a good organizer. The ICC cheif has almost no power, so it doesn't really matter.

 

[stephen]

He certainly made cynical use of divisive race politics a number of times during his leadership. I have no doubt that his targetted criticisms, at various times, of Muslim, Asian and African immigrants, and his opposition to the values of multiculturalism are a huge part of the ugly Anglo-centric nationalism that's made contemporary Australia a far more intolerant place than it used to be.

He was also crap at Indiginous issues.

I personally know a number of people of Asian origin who liked Howard. They did not perceive his comments as racist.

His opposition to "the values of multiculturalism" as you call it were in large part a reaction to the self loathing of the left. Keating basically believed that all cultures should be promoted, except the culture of the majority of the people who live in the country. The fact is that Australia, despite its flaws, is founded on a culture of mateship and treating others as equals and most people in this country expect those who wish to live here to be aware of those values and to some extent share them. I do not see that as racist. If I was to become a Japanese citizen I certainly would expect that to do so I would assimilate somewhat into Japanese culture.

I do not want to live in a country that has racial divides that tear it apart like many other countries. We are the most plural society in the world, with people of all ethnic backgrounds, religions and cultures. I do not believe that the colour of a person's skin defines their worth. I do believe that we should keep the aspects of our culture that are worthwhile and even ask those who wish to live in this country to respect that.

I do agree with you though that his handling of the Aborigines was poor at times.

 

[Top_Cat]

I personally know a number of people of Asian origin who liked Howard. They did not perceive his comments as racist.

Have quite a few Nunga relatives who voted Lib when Howard was around and thought he was awesome.

I do agree with you though that his handling of the Aborigines was poor at times.

And, I might add, none of that, not the Native Title Amendment Act nor refusal to offer a parliamentary apology definitively proves he was racist. But geez, there's some serious, somewhat unexplained stubborness going on there, especially for what was a completely symbolic (read: but not meaningless) act.

He just seemed to be right smack bang in the middle of many issues of culture and and ethnicity. Moreso than other leaders of the country. Either he was wading into discussions about issues he was better served staying out of or there was something more personal going on.

 

[Son Of Coco]

ICC could return to Lord's | Cricket News | Global | Cricinfo.com

Little Johnny is actually more qualified than I thought - he's used to taking over from financial incompetents

I'll run away and hide now whilst the ALP supporters try to justify Oz's $360 billion in debt

I wish Johnny was in power now so we could see his financial brilliance at work.

Christopher Columbus discovered the rest of the world existed hundreds of years ago by the way. Liberal supporters still think Australia is only place in the world (suffering financial problems).

 

[Son Of Coco]

I hate it that people call Howard racist. He certainly was not. Immigration to Australia increased vastly during his reign, and much of that from Asian countries. He had to deal regularly with many foreign heads of state during his time. If he truly was racist, why did he work towards building Japan and China to be our largest trading partners?

I can accept that people think Howard was cruel or harsh (though I would disagree), but he certainly was not racist.

Well, for a start there may have been financial gains to be made by doing so.

Korea is a very xenophobic country. Generally speaking, they believe Korea is the best and if you're foreign you can be treated poorly at times. That doesn't mean that they're that stupid they don't recognise the benefits of dealing internationally and getting brands like Samsung, Hyundai, Kia, LG and so on globally recognised. I can guarantee they're dealing with a number of nations they neither like or respect (like Japan).

I'm not saying Howard was racist by the way, but he did some ordinary things to people who weren't Australian. As well as to people who definitely are Australian but not the same colour Australian as I am. Actually, for the last group it was more a lack of effort than an effort to be bad.

 

[social]

I wish Johnny was in power now so we could see his financial brilliance at work.

Christopher Columbus discovered the rest of the world existed hundreds of years ago by the way. Liberal supporters still think Australia is only place in the world (suffering financial problems).

Mate, it was a low bait

I live o/s and know how relatively well off Oz happens to be (in the fortunate position of being China's quarry) compared to many other parts of the world but have an ingrained bias towards the ALP because of their history of ****ing things up/corruption

As for Johnny, no love from me and still cant believe that the opposition was so totally undesirable that such a self-serving **** survived for so long (carbon copy of my thoughts on Bob Carr actually)

 

[silentstriker]

Do people really think he is not going to be good for relations between, for example, subcontinent and non subcontinent countries? What power does the president have that can't be overriden by the boards anyway?

As a non-Australian, the way I see it is having someone with that type of political influence, as well as obvious political ability, can only be a good thing for the head of the ICC.

 

[social]

Do people really think he is not going to be good for relations between, for example, subcontinent and non subcontinent countries? What power does the president have that can't be overriden by the boards anyway?

As a non-Australian, the way I see it is having someone with that type of political influence, as well as obvious political ability, can only be a good thing for the head of the ICC.

The problem with pollies, IMO, is that they are more concerned with populist policies which get them re-elected than "doing the right thing."

Given that this is a position with a fixed term, who knows, they may actually grow some cajones and combined with their other skills, it could turn out all right

 

[silentstriker]

The problem with pollies, IMO, is that they are more concerned with populist policies which get them re-elected than "doing the right thing."

Given that this is a position with a fixed term, who knows, they may actually grow some cajones and combined with their other skills, it could turn out all right

I think it's a non-starter, there is no bigger politician than Pawar, and really, you absolutely have to be a politician to deal with people with the types of agendas that people bring to the table. It shouldn't be a bad thing that you're a politician.

If you're a do-gooder who only has the game's best interests at heart and aren't willing to deal with practical problem of political agendas of all the parties, you're just not going to be effective and nothing will ever get done. Frankly, if Pawar gets to be President, you can't even complain if Chingoka comes next.

 

[silentstriker]

He's just saying it so we get to see Yuvraj push Howard off the stage when he presents the Champions Trophy to us at some point.

That would be the greatest thing I've ever seen. It could actually make me rate the guy as a cricket player.

 

[silentstriker]

ITSTL. Don't like Howard, but at his xenophobia will maybe split up the BCCI monopoly.

Serious question - what policy enacted by the "BCCI-monopoly' would you like overturned?

 

[Burgey]

ICC could return to Lord's | Cricket News | Global | Cricinfo.com

Little Johnny is actually more qualified than I thought - he's used to taking over from financial incompetents

I'll run away and hide now whilst the ALP supporters try to justify Oz's $360 billion in debt

Haha, we've had this discussion before mate, won't rise to the bait this time.

They're too busy explaining why we are the only Western economy in a massive recession.

At least, that's what they'll be explaining all year in the lead up to the election

 

[Burgey]

I hate it that people call Howard racist. He certainly was not. Immigration to Australia increased vastly during his reign, and much of that from Asian countries. He had to deal regularly with many foreign heads of state during his time. If he truly was racist, why did he work towards building Japan and China to be our largest trading partners?

I can accept that people think Howard was cruel or harsh (though I would disagree), but he certainly was not racist.

Yes, he was. In the sense he built on fears and prejudices against people from certain parts of the world, and he did it for base political motives.

I stll remember Howard in the 80s saying Australians didn't want Asian immigration - not immigration, Asian immigration. Fraser annointed Peacock his successor partly because he abhorred Howard's racist views.

God I despise that man.

 

[Faisal1985]

What happened to Lalit Modi...........?

 

[NasserFan207]

Disagree with Jonnie's ideology all you want but he was a very, very good politician. And if there's one thing the ICC needs more of, it's politics.

Really? I'd rather have someone who actually knows about cricket.

**** off John.

 

[Streetwise]

You are such a **** poster.

Can predict your posts everytime.

I guarantee the majority of people who dislike Howard will be Australians, and not "anti Australian posters."

****ing hate this ****.

You seem very intolerant of anyone different to you.

 

[Streetwise]

And, of course, you don't. Oh wait, here's yours;



MONEY MONEY MONEY, ON NOM NOM NOM.

Not as much as some cricketers. You must be supporting the massive monies going to the cricketers. Sounds like you have a conflict here.