Gough's government was criminally corrupt and inept. Kerr made the right call and the election afterwards was democracy in action. Progressives cant cope with those truths.
And 44.5 years later they're still bitter about that.
Carnot, that is nonsense. The Whitlam government had serious failings and deserved to lose the next election. To say it was criminally corrupt is just biased, one-eyed stupidity. If that were true, people would have been charged, and nobody was. I'd be interested to know just what criminal actions you can list.
In terms of behaviour, the worst it got was Cairns and Connor being sacked from the Ministry for misleading the Parliament. There were other policy and budgetary failings which would have cost them at the next poll. Interestingly enough, Fraser adopted just about the whole of Hayden's budget unchanged.
Kerr's action eased the path of political opportunism for a greedy and impatient opposition; an opposition on which you would not have been able to get a bet for the following scheduled election.
I don't know how old you were at the time, but I was 35 and able to follow the whole saga from the December 1972 election until the dismissal and subsequent election which Fraser won. Just so you know where I'm coming from, I was delighted that Whitlam won in 1972, and by November 1975 I was disillusioned and certain that he would lose the next election.