Sour Grapes

Being cooped, as I am, in an air-borne submarine, I have taken to the ‘papers’.

Well. It seems that no one likes our new Australian of the Year.

Not the loopy right, the radical middle, the red left, nor even the green first world problem.

That’s my perception after reading the opinions pages, which are probably written by a bunch of people that believe they are more qualified.

The ‘independent’ panel that decides these things is being labelled ‘mediocre at best’.

The ‘states’ are also being blamed since that is where the nominations mysteriously originate (although, ha ha, you can’t self-nominate).

Other more deserving candidates are being suggested. But each looks decidedly self serving and extraordinarily narrow in their interests and achievements.

One explanation is that as a nation we are less homogenous than we’d liked to think we are.

Or maybe there simply isn’t enough collective social karma in Australia to get behind one one-hundredth of a single award winner.

Noting that the agreed ultimate goal in personal achievement shared by most in Australia is the accumulation of wealth, where does that leave the awards panel?

Those that might be nominated are either idiot savants that worry about one issue, ad nauseum.

Or very wealthy egocentrics using their money in an attempt to buy the award.

My suggestions;

1. Only give the award to former politicians, most that have trained hard to be qualified clowns (say Tony or Kevin), or

2. Make sure the award comes with a one-way ticket to Northern Canada and a one-year’s igloo experience, or

3. Give the award only to organisations or communities, and not individuals. Like when the EU laughingly got the Nobel Peace Prize.

4. Have a chook raffle.

5. Kill the whole thing. Interestingly none of the articles suggested this option.