Fear of flying?

Gillard’s “strong policy leader” decision would fit nicely with someone who is “intolerant of ambivalence and ambiguity”. The “real” Julia?

And, as Kelly noted, Gillard has never written anything “philosophical” – or, as far as I know – “free-ranging, creative and inventive”.

Troy Bramston, a former speechwriter for Kevin Rudd, wrote that Gillard is “at her best - developing personal relationships and communicating her warm personality, intelligence and integrity.”

Dixon wrote of the “the relationship between conformity, authoritarianism and the tendency to yield to group-pressures”.

Is Gillard really preoccupied with being part of an “in-group”? Is this the reason she puts a lot of effort into “developing personal relationships” with members of such groups!

VALUES

Kelly wrote that “in the past Gillard has denounced (former prime minister) Howard's social views on many occasions …(and) her origins on the political Left and her personal life choices led many to assume she was a dedicated social progressive. Yet Gillard backs welfare reform and personal responsibility”.

Kelly wrote that as “a childless atheist living in a de facto partnership” Gillard is nevertheless “a political conservative” on many social issues.” “Her views, as she says, are tied to her past and identity. ... her belief in personal responsibility, rejection of the option of state-sanctioned killing, support for biblical and cultural dimensions of the Western canon and the belief that social heritage should keep marriage to an institution between a man and a woman. She is an atheist who likes the Bible ... happy to accept the brand of ‘traditionalist’. Explaining her family background in a pro-union, pro-Labor, conservative household, Ms Gillard said: ‘We believed in politeness and thrift and fortitude and doing duty and discipline. These are things that were part of my upbringing. They're part of who I am today.’"

Dixon wrote that “it seems that authoritarians are the product of parents with anxiety about their status in society. From earliest infancy the children of such people are pressed to seek the status after which their parents hanker. . …the values inculcated by status-insecure parents are such that their children put personal success and the acquisition of power above all else. They are taught to judge people for their usefulness rather than their likeableness. … They are taught to eschew weakness and passivity, to respect authority, and to despise those who have not made the socio-economic grade. Success is equated with social esteem and material advantage, rather than with more spiritual values. Then again, they are imbued by their parents with rigid view regarding sex and aggression.”

So, is Gillard essentially a “product of parents with anxiety”?  Are the apparent contradictions noted by Kelly really the result of Gillard’s attempts to position herself in whatever way will, at any given time, bring “personal success and the acquisition of power”?

AFGHANISTAN, the AUSTRALIAN / US alliance etc

Kelly wrote that “despite her long and strong origins with the Victorian Left, Gillard has become a champion of Israel, the American alliance and the war in Afghanistan. Having declared no passion for foreign affairs she now works to leave her mark on foreign policy. Pledges to the US alliance, operates in lockstep with the Obama administration and speaks to the US congress with a more pro-US line than anything (former prime-minister) Howard said.”