Victoria and WA's surging crime stats expose The Conversation expert's claim that Australia is becoming less violent
And today, nowhere is the practice more pervasive than in Australia's universities.
As readers know all too well, these institutions have become safe havens for left-leaning gaslighters, skilled at persuading the public that what they see and hear can't be trusted.
It's a culture built on denial, where tidy theories and carefully scrubbed statistics are paraded out to wash away the fears, frustrations, and daily struggles of ordinary Australians.
The latest example comes courtesy of Griffith University's Samara McPhedran, who confidently informs the nation that violent crime isn't rising.
Such a claim presents a very narrow-minded version of reality.
It's the kind of contrived intellectual thought that can only survive in the stale, insulated air of a lecture theatre, far from the streets where the damage is actually done.
Perhaps Dr. McPhedran should speak with the families in Victoria watching their state's crime rate surge by 15 percent in a single year, each percentage point measured in stolen cars, broken bones, and lives violently knocked off course.
Or she should consider the lengths the Victorian Allan government have gone to recently in an attempt to reduce violent crime, including the bizarre move to place more than 40 bins at police stations across the state so machete-wielding gangsters can safely dispose of their weaponry.
She might then visit the residents of Perth's suburbs, where more than 25 suburbs have endured crime surges topping 30 percent in just 12 months.
Perhaps she should speak with the parents who bolt their doors before the sun slips behind the rooftops, with the shopkeepers sweeping glass from their doorways for the twentieth time this year, with the pensioners who have abandoned the short walk to the corner shop because the risk now outweighs the reward.
Instead, she remains sealed inside a bubble, an elitist echo chamber utterly detached from the realities and hardships of the people whose lives her theories claim to explain.
If McPhedran's analysis reads like a masterclass in sidestepping the obvious, that's because it is.
She leans on decades-old datasets, sanding down the jagged spikes of recent surges with long-term averages that bury the scale of the problem and don't engage with other aspects, such as recent rises in crime rates generally.
In Victoria alone, police logged 627,268 criminal offences over a single twelve-month stretch (a shocking 17.1 per cent jump).
Youth offenders now dominate robbery figures.
In the 12 months to March 2025, according to the Crime Statistics Agency a range of theft offences were up significantly: motor vehicle theft was up 39.3 per cent, theft of number plates up 49.6 per cent and retail theft up 38.6 per cent.
Cost-of-living pressures have driven this type of crime to levels that are breaking small businesses.
Knife attacks have cut through once-secure communities, turning quiet shopping strips into places where tension lingers with every step.
Yet McPhedran waves it away, insisting that reliable statistics aren't always available and that violent crime rates have fallen when compared to decades ago.
When the evidence refuses to fit, she doesn't grapple with it.
Unlike the principal research fellow, the public doesn't have the luxury of retreating into a spreadsheet.
They live with the fallout of policy failure every day.
They watch as the Albanese government's soft-on-crime stance emboldens offenders who know that the most likely consequence of repeat theft or assault is a token caution, not a meaningful sentence.
They see state governments trial diversion programs that sound virtuous in a seminar room but collapse in the chaos of real streets with real victims.
And while those failures multiply, academics step forward to supply the intellectual alibi for political leaders more intent on shielding their ideology than shielding their citizens.
This is the point where the insulated arrogance of modern academia ceases to be an oddity and becomes a political weapon.
Theories that clash with lived experience might remain harmless curiosities if they stayed buried in dusty journals, but they never do.
They seep into ministerial speeches and bureaucratic talking points; they harden into legislative proposals.
They turn genuine public concern into a 'perception problem' to be managed, not solved.
Once that narrative takes root, the facts are bent until they break.
The modern university system is built to protect that narrative.
Scholars who dare to challenge progressive orthodoxy on crime, immigration, or public order find themselves quietly cut off from funding, promotions, and platforms.
Those who repeat it are crowned as 'independent experts,' their words treated as gospel by journalists eager to paint public dissent as nothing more than hysteria.
The result is a closed loop in which those most insulated from the damage their ideas cause are the very ones most empowered to write the laws everyone else must live under.
Over time, this drip-feed of denial trains the public to second-guess themselves—until eventually, we begin to gaslight ourselves.
Mention the knife-wielding teenagers roaming your streets, and you'll be branded a paranoid provocateur.
Point to the boarded-up shopfronts in your town, and you'll be told you're cherry-picking.
Describe a loved one's assault on public transport, and you'll get a lecture about 'isolated incidents.'
The aim is not to convince you you're wrong; it's to make you doubt you were ever right.
This gaslighting reaches far beyond crime statistics; it's now woven into the reflexes of Australia's academic and political class.
The unspoken assumption is always that ordinary people misread reality, while they alone hold a higher, purer truth.
In a university setting, that arrogance is tedious – but in the halls of power, it's lethal.
Crime policy leaves no margin for theoretical blunders; every wrong assumption is paid for in screaming sirens, scared citizens, and suburbs drained of trust.
Australians deserve far more than ivory-tower ignorance.
They deserve leaders willing to face brutal truths—men and women prepared to say plainly that crime is climbing and the nation is hurting.
They also deserve to know that the truth on their streets outweighs the fairy tales pushed by officials whose paychecks depend on avoiding inconvenient facts.
And they deserve academics who leave the seminar room for the suburbs, who speak with business owners, walk with police, and listen—really listen—to victims.
Because only then can their theories carry the weight of the world they claim to explain.
John Mac Ghlionn is a researcher and essayist who writes on psychology and social relations. He has a keen interest in social dysfunction and media manipulation.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Victoria is the nation's debt dunce but the competition is hotting up
Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan has previously indicated she is up for a conversation about how to broaden the tax base of states that don't have access to lucrative resource royalties. It may surprise some to learn that if you mention vertical fiscal imbalance, the premier can talk the leg off a chair. She also understands the urgency. Although a national agreement on health funding – the biggest expense items within her government's budget – commits the Commonwealth to eventually provide what the states consider a fair share, that day is still 10 years away. In the meantime, the state must find savings elsewhere or keep borrowing to make up the shortfall. This year the funding gap is $1.6 billion in a $22 billion health budget. (This column's earlier, unsolicited advice for the premier to dump her pet infrastructure project, the Suburban Rail Loop, has so far gone unheeded.) The state premiers didn't make it onto Chalmers' guest list and state/federal finances aren't on the agenda of his three-day powwow in Canberra next week. Eslake doesn't criticise these omissions from an already jam-packed roundtable program but he wonders how bad things need to get before Australia turns its mind to the thorny problem of rebalancing how money is spent and how revenue is raised across the Commonwealth. 'I think federal/state financial relations is an important issue, but I don't have a lot of company,' he laments. So, what exactly is this $900 billion elephant? According to the latest budget figures compiled by S&P Global Ratings, an international rating company that keeps a close eye on the fiscal position of the federal and state governments, this is the combined, gross debt of Australian states and territories forecast for the end of this decade. If we include the gross debt forecast to be on the federal government's own books by that stage, Australia's debt mountain will reach a $2.1 trillion base camp by June 30, 2029 along the way to a still unknown peak. Victoria, by its own budget figures, is the most indebted state in Australia. The $213 billion gross debt it has amassed as of July 1 this year represents nearly one third of the total debt currently owed by all states and territories combined. The best news for Victoria is that, in its push towards fiscal profligacy, it has some serious competition from Queensland and Tasmania. S&P lead analyst Martin Foo says while Victoria still has the weakest balance sheet of all state and territory governments, its raft of new property and payroll taxes unpopular with business has at least stabilised its fiscal position. 'We have pointed out consistently that a lot of the fiscal challenges Australia faces right now are at the state level, rather than federal level,' he says. 'Victoria has been the focus of attention for the last couple of years. Maybe it has flown under the radar a bit but some of the mid-sized and smaller states, particularly Tasmania and Queensland, are accumulating debt at a very rapid pace.' Eslake reckons his home state of Tasmania, which remains without a functioning government after two elections in the space of 15 months, already deserves Victoria's mantle as Australia's fiscal dunce. In 2019, Tasmania's gross debt was just $3.2 billion. That figure is forecast to treble this year and to increase more than six-fold from its pre-pandemic level by 2029. Loading Queensland is sharply accelerating the amount of debt it is taking on, with last year's figure of $106.6 billion forecast to nearly double by the end of the decade as the state prepares for the 2032 Olympics. Although these numbers look scarier the further you look into the future, the source of the problem is more immediate. The S&P figures show that in the last financial year, the states and territories posted a combined cash deficit of $55 billion.

Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
What's it like to have a son who does MMA? Ask our deputy PM
Richard Marles, 58, is the deputy prime minister and defence minister. His oldest son, Sam, 28, is a mixed martial arts fighter and trainer who had the biggest bout of his career on the night of this year's federal election. Sam: I idolised Dad when I was young. My parents were divorced, and I'd spend a few days with Mum [Lisa Neville, a former Labor minister in the Victorian government], then a couple of days with Dad. They both had very busy, high-pressure jobs, so there wasn't too much consistency in where I'd be. I had to go with the flow a little bit. I always looked forward to going to see Dad. He loves golf and I played with him a lot. It was one of the things that kept us close. I remember Dad's reaction when I got my first birdie. I was only about seven and I holed a putt from maybe 30 feet. Dad was jumping up and down. He ran over and gave me this big hug. As a son, you want to impress your dad; you want his validation. And golf gave me that. I'm sure he'd have loved me to become a professional golfer. It wasn't as if he pressured me to do that – he was never a pushy dad – but I stuck with golf a bit longer than I otherwise would have because I was searching for Dad's approval. When I made the transition to mixed martial arts, he was a bit concerned. I sat both my parents down and said, 'I'm going to pursue this.' At first, they didn't really understand it. They maybe didn't believe this was really a potential career path. They looked at me like I was crazy. But, over time, they started to get on board and actually became quite supportive. I think they can see it's been a positive influence on my life. 'I don't cry too often – he's more of a cryer – but there were definitely a few tears shed during that call.' Sam Marles I'm someone who needs to move. I'm very ADHD; I've been like that since I was a kid. Sitting at a desk like my parents do has never been something I'm good at. I like the description of mixed martial arts as high-level problem-solving with dire consequences. It's a very free form of combat sport. Boxing, jiu-jitsu, wrestling, kickboxing: it combines everything. I love it, and I really like the people I'm around in the gym. I probably didn't fit into the golf scene as well. Dad's a passionate person. The similarity between us is that we're both very driven. We're both obsessed with what we do, even if we've taken very different paths. At times in my life, I didn't have a lot of appreciation for the path he chose, and I'm sure that, at the beginning, the path I've chosen put a lot of stress on him. But we actually get along incredibly well. I can talk to Dad for hours; I love having conversations with him. After I won the fight on election night [on May 3], I called him straight away, but he must have been busy doing interviews. I went off and hung out with some people, then when I got back to the hotel room, I had about six missed calls from him. When we finally spoke on the phone, it was a pretty special moment. I don't cry too often – he's more of a cryer – but there were definitely a few tears shed during that call. It felt like everything had come together, and everything made sense.

The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Victoria is the nation's debt dunce but the competition is hotting up
Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan has previously indicated she is up for a conversation about how to broaden the tax base of states that don't have access to lucrative resource royalties. It may surprise some to learn that if you mention vertical fiscal imbalance, the premier can talk the leg off a chair. She also understands the urgency. Although a national agreement on health funding – the biggest expense items within her government's budget – commits the Commonwealth to eventually provide what the states consider a fair share, that day is still 10 years away. In the meantime, the state must find savings elsewhere or keep borrowing to make up the shortfall. This year the funding gap is $1.6 billion in a $22 billion health budget. (This column's earlier, unsolicited advice for the premier to dump her pet infrastructure project, the Suburban Rail Loop, has so far gone unheeded.) The state premiers didn't make it onto Chalmers' guest list and state/federal finances aren't on the agenda of his three-day powwow in Canberra next week. Eslake doesn't criticise these omissions from an already jam-packed roundtable program but he wonders how bad things need to get before Australia turns its mind to the thorny problem of rebalancing how money is spent and how revenue is raised across the Commonwealth. 'I think federal/state financial relations is an important issue, but I don't have a lot of company,' he laments. So, what exactly is this $900 billion elephant? According to the latest budget figures compiled by S&P Global Ratings, an international rating company that keeps a close eye on the fiscal position of the federal and state governments, this is the combined, gross debt of Australian states and territories forecast for the end of this decade. If we include the gross debt forecast to be on the federal government's own books by that stage, Australia's debt mountain will reach a $2.1 trillion base camp by June 30, 2029 along the way to a still unknown peak. Victoria, by its own budget figures, is the most indebted state in Australia. The $213 billion gross debt it has amassed as of July 1 this year represents nearly one third of the total debt currently owed by all states and territories combined. The best news for Victoria is that, in its push towards fiscal profligacy, it has some serious competition from Queensland and Tasmania. S&P lead analyst Martin Foo says while Victoria still has the weakest balance sheet of all state and territory governments, its raft of new property and payroll taxes unpopular with business has at least stabilised its fiscal position. 'We have pointed out consistently that a lot of the fiscal challenges Australia faces right now are at the state level, rather than federal level,' he says. 'Victoria has been the focus of attention for the last couple of years. Maybe it has flown under the radar a bit but some of the mid-sized and smaller states, particularly Tasmania and Queensland, are accumulating debt at a very rapid pace.' Eslake reckons his home state of Tasmania, which remains without a functioning government after two elections in the space of 15 months, already deserves Victoria's mantle as Australia's fiscal dunce. In 2019, Tasmania's gross debt was just $3.2 billion. That figure is forecast to treble this year and to increase more than six-fold from its pre-pandemic level by 2029. Loading Queensland is sharply accelerating the amount of debt it is taking on, with last year's figure of $106.6 billion forecast to nearly double by the end of the decade as the state prepares for the 2032 Olympics. Although these numbers look scarier the further you look into the future, the source of the problem is more immediate. The S&P figures show that in the last financial year, the states and territories posted a combined cash deficit of $55 billion.