#lexus

Colonialism and Comcars

Image result for robert menzies car

Senator Mattias Cormann has admitted he was behind the decision to change the colour of our government Comcars – which ferry politicians around – from white to dark grey in order to remove any remnants of our colonial past, which in his words were “a better reflection of a modern, forward-looking Australia.” Forget the fact that most government cars were painted black, including Sir Robert Menzies’ Bentley (above). Might have been better to channel the founder of the Liberal Party as inspiration instead some woke nonsense. Or just let the drivers, who need to clean and maintain the vehicles, choose. 

Seriously though, what % of Australians have ever thought that our white Comcars harked to a colonial past? Best put it to a plebiscite and waste more time. 

Dark Grey? Isn’t that a gloomy hue? Should Aussies prepare for dark days ahead? Truth be told the colour is probably quite representative of where our economy is heading, even without coronavirus.

Interestingly, according to car insurer youi,

Our accident frequency research reveals that dark coloured cars are more likely to be in an accident than lighter coloured cars, likely because they are less visible to other drivers on the road. Grey coloured cars topped the list, followed by black and charcoal.

Who says that politicians don’t make sacrifices for us?

If we study where the proportion of cars coloured in colonial white is highest, perhaps parliament should be spending up big on a reeducation program in Tasmania for their unconscious colonialism. youi claimed,

Tasmania has the highest percentage of white cars at 33.80% versus the national average of 30.45% (silver 19.4%, blue 11.29%)

White cars seem to be connected to toxic masculinity too. Best run a campaign on unconscious sexism if youi is to be believed.

Compared to females, white is more popular for males relative to other colours (34.34% for males, 26.46% for females)

Take it a step further and question how much more Cormann could have done to reduce the racist footprints of colonialism.

Why are we buying cars from a maker that powered the Nazi Luftwaffe, SS and Wehrmacht, based in a nation that at the time was hell-bent on world domination and genocide? If we went for Lexus or Toyota we’d be buying cars built by a country that was also determined to colonize The Pacific. Jaguars or Range Rovers would be off the list, even though the Indians now own the brands. Rolls-Royce & Bentley are German-owned. Italians were colonialists. Maserati, Fiat, Lancia and Alfa Romeo banned. The French? Colonialists. Renault and Peugeot-Citroen are out. The Spanish? Colonialists. No SEATs, although that is owned by the Germans. America? Someone is bound to raise an issue with their CIA operative endorsed post-war military hegemony. So no Caddies, Fords or GM cars, especially after the axing of the Holden brand. China? Buying Haval or Great Wall cars would at the very least cut down on the overall cost of Comcars, especially with the generous 10-yr unlimited kilometre extended warranty.  That is how we cut the budget deficit. 

Maybe we should just buy Volvos. Maybe that way we could appeal to be supporting the home team of climate activist, Greta Thunberg to shore up the youth vote while acknowledging that the Viking hordes of 1000 years ago was far back enough in history to upset anyone today. If we’re lucky, the Swedish Riksbank may consider buying our sovereign debt again

Seriously, haven’t our pollies got anything better to do than conjure up such illogical nonsense like this? Given we’re at this level of discourse, perhaps walking, cycling or public transport would be a better bet for our lawmakers. At the very least it would put them in touch with how commoners live.

Return to the nanny state – perhaps the ASB should consider envy not safety

424331EB-8C7F-4FD2-996D-82F21D6D8EE0.jpeg

Coming back to Australia often reminds me  that even when it is not a nanny state it is full of wowsers. This snippet is from Motor magazine. As one can see it highlights how some are compelled to whine over trivial things. Lexus, of all companies, is being bashed for encouraging speeding and the Advertising Standards Board has caved in (although I’m guessing it didn’t  take much to pressure them into the move) . Lexus was then bashed again even after removing the speedy bits.  I’m sure prospective Lexus buyers are waiting for footage of being stuck in a traffic jam

One would be pretty hard pressed to find a car company that doesn’t promote “performance” in its sportier range because by definition it’s kind of the point. Even Tesla for all of its supposed green credentials will brag incessantly about how it’s faster than any other road car to 100km/h, including exotica.

To say advertising “encourages speeding” just takes people for idiots. The moaners are surely aware that speed limit enforcement here is stricter than most. Speed cameras, highway patrols and red light cameras. Drivers here are constantly in fear of their lives. Autonomously driven cars will be a godsend as owners will not have to live in fear of being fined!

On top of that in order be able to buy a Lexus sports car like the LC500 probably requires $200,000. To afford such wheels presumably means that’s someone has half a brain. In traffic congested Tokyo Lamborghini and Ferrari are commonplace . The most impractical vehicle one can imagine but they still sell a tonne of them.

Perhaps we should look at the bright side that only the car company was only criticized for promoting speed rather than being hauled over the coals for not promoting the car in Saudi Arabia with a newly liberated female driver. We shouldn’t hold our breath. When Lexus advertise the LC500 again the next complaint will probably be that it focuses too  much on white males rather than diversity.