Chloe Swarbrick’s first words as new Green Party Co-Leader

Written By: - Date published: 2:21 pm, March 10th, 2024 - 71 comments
Categories: Chlöe Swarbrick, greens, james shaw - Tags:

If you want to understand the Greens, listen to them in their own words.

Chloe Swarbrick’s press conference: Video here, starts at 10m 30, 7 minutes then press questions. She’s not holding back and it’s well worth listening to the press Q&A. Lots of very good stuff.

After thanking James Shaw and Marama Davidson, she centres her speech on three points:

Legacy politics is not working to serve people and the planet.

…

The bullyboy behaviour of this government will only succeed if we let it… Politics belongs to those that show up.

…

Those in power need you… to stay in power… It is our job in the Green Party to show you the alternative.

Green Party Charter

The Green Party press release:

_________________________________________________________________

Greens elect new Co-leader

The Green Party has elected Chlöe Swarbrick, MP for Auckland Central, to be its new Co-leader alongside Marama Davidson.

“Thank you to Green Party members across the country who’ve put their faith and trust in me to lead our movement alongside Marama. I ask everyone to put that faith and trust in themselves too, and in our collective capacity to transform our world for the better,” says Chlöe Swarbrick.

“Aotearoa can be a place where everyone has what they need to live a decent life, and our natural world is restored and protected, on a foundation honouring te Tiriti o Waitangi. That is the Greens’ vision, and one we work to see realised every single day.

“This week, the Government completed their cruel and, frankly, bizarre 100-day programme. They know that many of the things they have done will make things worse for people and planet and they’ve told New Zealanders that they don’t care.

“We’ve heard from people across the country of their deep despair. That’s precisely what this Government wants from you: to switch off. Don’t.

“The coalition wants you to think better is impossible. They want you to acquiesce to oil, gas and mining lobbyists’ wishlists to destroy our natural environment. They want you to give in to their bonkers agenda that’ll see more people die from smoking to fund landlords’ tax cuts. They want you to believe all politics and politicians are the same – it benefits them and their donors for you to switch off.

“Don’t let this Government’s bully boy behaviour silence you. Let it motivate you. We’ve been here before with regressive conservatives. It was organising by regular people that changed the course of history.

“The Greens see you, hear you and will represent you in the halls of power. We know where our power and motivation comes from – and it isn’t the vested interests of today – it’s you, your kids, your communities, and our shared future on this beautiful planet.”

“We can take world-leading climate action that also improves people’s lives. We can provide a guaranteed minimum income for all. We can protect our oceans. We can have functional public transport. We can invest properly in our public services, housing, education and healthcare if we have the political courage to implement a fair tax system – and the Greens do,” says Chlöe Swarbrick.

Marama Davidson added:

“It is going to be fantastic to have Chlöe alongside me leading our biggest caucus ever in the fight against this Government’s cold, cynical and cruel agenda.

“Chlöe is an incredible MP, colleague, and friend. She has proven time and time again her unique ability to mobilise communities to push for the change Aotearoa needs.

“It has never been more important for there to be a strong voice for an Aotearoa that works for everyone, where everyone is supported to live good lives, in warm dry homes, and where we take bold action to cut pollution and protect native wildlife.

“Chlöe and I will be in communities up and down Aotearoa working with people to build an unprecedented grassroots movement fighting for the future Aotearoa deserves,” Marama Davidson says. 

James Shaw added:

“There is no one I would rather take my place as Green Party Co-leader than Chlöe. Ever since I first sat down to coffee with her after her mayoral campaign in 2016 she has struck me as a remarkable leader with an extraordinary belief in the power of people to make a difference. Her passion and strength is second to none, and alongside Marama, will lead the Greens to make even more of a difference in the future,” says James Shaw.

71 comments on “Chloe Swarbrick’s first words as new Green Party Co-Leader ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Phillip ure 1
    10 March 2024 at 2:47 pm

    Yes…all very good..

    Reason to be cheerful…

  2. Chess Player 2
    10 March 2024 at 3:35 pm

    Nothing surprising here IMO in terms of Swarbrick winning.

    Not seeing how it will make the Greens more effective in achieving good outcomes however.

    Can’t do anything until Labour wins again…

    • thinker 2.1
      11 March 2024 at 7:46 am

      Not so, IMHO,

      One thing National did right and has solidly done right for many years is present itself as a coalition with ACT, whether in government or opposition.

      Labour and the Greens have given me the impression as competing for the left share of the vote, unless/until a coalition agreement is needed.

      The left parties need to see how the right has marketed itself as unified, sort out subcategories of representation and start projecting a unified attack on the government.

      They say of John Kennedy that one of the reasons he beat Nixon (ok, I'm not naive 😉) is that he spoke as if he had already won, while campaigning.

      • weka 2.1.1
        11 March 2024 at 9:53 am

        Labour and the Greens have given me the impression as competing for the left share of the vote, unless/until a coalition agreement is needed.

        Apart from 2020 (which was an anomaly because of the pandemic) a coalition agreement is always needed. This is true for the right and the left.

        Prior to the 2017 election, Labour and the Greens didn't formally co-operate. That changed in the 2014 – 2017 term, where the two parties agreed ahead of election year to work together to change the government. This is the iconic image of that time,

        They came up with a memorandum in 2016, announced it to the public, and then in 2017 won the election. That was a significant change for the two parties.

  3. Psycho Milt 3
    10 March 2024 at 4:05 pm

    I still have my doubts about her ability to go beyond activist rhetoric. She was asked about whether she could live up to Shaw's ability to work with people who fundamentally disagreed with to reach sustainable compromise agreements and in her answer she mentioned working across the aisle on several different Acts. But that was working with people who agreed with her on those particular issues – reaching compromises on environmental legislation with people who hate environmental legislation is a much tougher gig.

    Unlike Shaw, she leaves you in no doubt that she doesn't respect her political opponents and thinks they're Terrible People. That goes down a treat with fellow activists, but it doesn't bode well for getting environmental legislation through the House.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 3.1
      10 March 2024 at 5:10 pm

      Unlike Shaw, she [Swarbrick] leaves you in no doubt that she doesn't respect her political opponents and thinks they're Terrible People. That goes down a treat with fellow activists, but it doesn't bode well for getting environmental legislation through the House.

      Shaw is a big loss. Whether or not current NActNZF MPs are "Terrible People", those MPs should have no trouble getting ‘their’ environmental legislation through the House.

      Fast-track law will 'undermine environmental protections' – opposition
      "This Bill hands lobbyists and ministers the keys to our country without transparency when it comes to our resources. The greed of corporations both foreign and local could reshape New Zealand," she [Brooking] said.
      …
      "It is hard to see this as anything other than a shadowy, anti-democratic way of fast-tracking projects that will increase climate pollution and trash our environment."

      Speaking earlier ahead of the announcement, he [Shaw] told Morning Report he had serious concerns the legislation would override the environmental protections that had been in place for decades.

      "That is an extraordinary level of executive overreach and overriding all of the frankly very weak environmental protections that this country has had in place for decades."
      …
      "This is giving ministers unbridled personal power to singlehandedly approve or decline any damaging development they want. It's anti-nature, anti-climate, and anti-democratic. It's powers not seen since the days of Think Big by Muldoon's government in the 1970s.

      "The Fast Track Approvals Bill will override the Conservation Act, Reserves Act, and Wildlife Act, as well as the RMA and law governing the Exclusive Economic Zone.

      “Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed.” – Einstein

      • weka 3.1.1
        10 March 2024 at 6:04 pm

        I think the point is when the left are next in power, not now. But maybe also now. What happens in Select Committees when sitting around a table with people you are consistently making out to be bad people. I'm not saying her strategy is wrong, I'm asking how it works.

        Do you think that the days of 'working with' are over?

        The reason Shaw did what he did was because it was necessary to get core climate legislation through parliament in a way that would survive a change of government. And embedded in Ministries.

        If he had taken CS's approach, this is unlikely to have happened.

        Shaw was criticised by many on the left for being a green BAU suit/neoliberal shill/conservative, but I think it's going to be increasingly apparent that he is none of those. eg this is what he is like when no longer constrained by being the Minister of Climate.

        https://twitter.com/NZGreens/status/1766225339813118307

        Point being that we needed the working with approach, and Shaw was the man to do it. What is less clear is what happens next. Many in the Greens want the radical approach now (myself included), because the climate/ecological crises are here, now.

        Does CS talking about the government MPs in such terrible terms but doing so as a rallying cry to the nation to stand up and do what is right, make climate action by parliament more likely or less likely? Over what time period?

        I don't know. I think the way she has supported Palestinian liberation by implying that Jewish people are bad/wrong is a mistake and she has a blind spot on this. The risk is in advancing anti-semitism in NZ, but also I'm not sure that most NZers will agree with her and I've yet to see anyone supporting that specific approach explain how it works alongside bringing democracy to the people and getting everyone on board with climate action.

        Otoh, no-one is perfect, and we're pretty much at make or break. They probably don't have much choice about going hard, because the conciliatory approach is unlikely to win the next election. The radical approach is not without risk but what else can they do?

        • Cricklewood 3.1.1.1
          10 March 2024 at 7:24 pm

          Reality is if you cant take people with you anything you achieve is bound to fail.

          Look at how quickly the current govt is undoing major legislation. 3 Waters and RMA reform gone burgers.

          Shaw's approach is the right one. Get cross party consensus first then build on what we have in place. Yes its slower initally but over the medium to long term will actually mean we get they change we need.

          Done well we could block the extremes that result from the likes of ACT and NZ1st in that if Nat Lab or the Greens could hold their noses a little and work together on the big stuff to the point that they can agree to vote together to keep key legislation in place no matter who is in 'power' there is very little danger of a 5% party having such a detrimental and outsized effect as we arw currently seeing.

          It would add a very different dynamic

          • observer 3.1.1.1.1
            10 March 2024 at 7:52 pm

            "Work with" means something very different when the Right are no longer in opposition.

            Shaw sensibly tried to work with Todd Muller in the hope of making it last. Just as Labour worked with Collins/Willis on reaching a housing agreement.

            But now the hard Right have power and so they casually tear up previous agreements. They simply don't care. It's bizarre that this "Greens can work with National" fantasy persists, as if it were a matter of having a good faith discussion between good faith participants.

            Just read the coalition agreement. Or last week's news. They have decided to trash the environment. It's not only about the Greens in Parliament, they are ignoring every group outside, even the most moderate and conciliatory.

            They got power. They will do what they want. No "strategy" by the Greens can possibly influence that.

            • Phillip ure 3.1.1.1.1.1
              10 March 2024 at 8:08 pm

              Wot observor said…

            • Grey Area 3.1.1.1.1.2
              11 March 2024 at 12:51 am

              Exactly.

            • AB 3.1.1.1.1.3
              11 March 2024 at 10:24 am

              Agreed. Her opponents are not "terrible people" – I'm sure they are quite pleasant most of the time in their interactions with others. That's what allowed Shaw to operate in the way he did.

              But although they are not terrible people, they do believe terrible things. Kiwis seem to struggle to make this distinction. If someone seems superficially like a 'nice bloke', that's generally seen as good enough.

              • Michael P …
                12 March 2024 at 11:10 am

                "But although they are not terrible people, they do believe terrible things. Kiwis seem to struggle to make this distinction."

                Kiwis don't struggle to make this distinction at all in my opinion. Just because certain things are "terrible" according to you doesn't mean other people have the same outlook.

            • Tiger Mountain 3.1.1.1.1.4
              11 March 2024 at 3:42 pm

              yes

          • Bearded Git 3.1.1.1.2
            10 March 2024 at 9:07 pm

            Supporting Palestine is NEVER antisemitic per se Weka. Surprised you buy into this notion.

            • weka 3.1.1.1.2.1
              11 March 2024 at 11:17 am

              I certainly didn't say that supporting Palestine is anti-semitic per se and I don't believe it is. I support Palestine liberation. Please reread my comment and if you don't get it ask for clarification, I'm happy to talk about what I meant.

              I don't know what notion you think I am buying into, perhaps you could explain. Do you mean anti-Palestinian arguments that take the position that a Palestinian state is inherently anti-Jewish or bad for Israel?

              • Nic the NZer …
                11 March 2024 at 10:16 pm

                I found Tony Greenstein quite interesting talking about his book, "Zionism during the Holocaust". I think this demonstrates that the state of Israel has never been the representative, defender or sanctuary of Jewish people. It certainly is not now and one should be very careful when reading rhetoric directed at Israel as being anti-Jewish.

              • Bearded Git …
                13 March 2024 at 11:46 am

                "I think the way she has supported Palestinian liberation by implying that Jewish people are bad/wrong is a mistake and she has a blind spot on this. The risk is in advancing anti-semitism in NZ."

                The point I am making is that I don't think she is implying Jewish people are bad. Rather, she is saying that Israel has got it wrong.

                You have jumped on the "any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic" bandwagon IMHO.

                • weka …
                  13 March 2024 at 12:59 pm

                  You have jumped on the "any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic" bandwagon IMHO.

                  I think the nation of Israel is a genocidal maniac state, aided by the US, and the West generally, and any country that considers itself even halfway decent should be doing whatever it can internationally to intervene intervene so that Israel can be stopped.

                  I have more thoughts than that, but it's simply wrong to say that I am in the camp of people who believe that any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic.

                  You seem to have fallen into the camp of people who think any critique of criticism of Jewish people must be in the camp of people who believe that any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic.

                  My own preference is that we make more attempt to understand each other's positions.

                  The point I am making is that I don't think she is implying Jewish people are bad. Rather, she is saying that Israel has got it wrong.

                  It's entirely possible that CS is indeed doing that. Unfortunately it's not the impression she is giving, given she was talking to and about Jewish people in NZ, not the state of Israel. See the Jack Tame interview, which is the primary thing I am responding to.

                  And it's that frame she is building that leaves people with that perception that concerns me, given she also wants to try and build a set of mass political movements around climate and justice in NZ. Still no-one has addressed this.

                  I think CS has a blindspot on this. I also think she showed the ability to reflect on feedback from others in that interview with Tame and I hope she continues do that with the issues where lefties disagree with her.

                  • Bearded Git …
                    13 March 2024 at 6:29 pm

                    Good to hear that first paragraph Weka-agree 100%. I have a feeling that is also CS's position but she hasn't said it in those words.

                    This is well worth a watch-Roger Waters on the Israeli genocide.

                    • weka …
                      13 March 2024 at 8:40 pm

                      I would guess it's her position too, I'm less clear on how she sees Jewish people being culpable (that's a whole other conversation about politics eg voters in Israel, but NZ can hardly point a finger on that count). Mostly my critique is how she is framing and expressing her position.

            • Michael P 3.1.1.1.2.2
              12 March 2024 at 11:24 am

              How do you get from

              "I think the way she has supported Palestinian liberation by implying that Jewish people are bad/wrong is a mistake"

              to saying that by stating the above, the author has bought into a notion that supporting Palestine is antisemitic?

              Sorry Weka I know you don't need me to answer for you and that is not my intent, it's just that the deliberate misrepresentation of someone's views like that really rarks me up

              (well whaddya know, 'rark up' is in the dictionary)

        • Drowsy M. Kram 3.1.1.2
          10 March 2024 at 7:41 pm

          I think the point is when the left are next in power, not now.

          Thanks weka, wasn't thinking that way – who knows how long this 'now' will last.

          Do you think that the days of 'working with' are over?

          Hope not – for now our coalition MPs are focussed on working with one another!

          Does CS talking about the government MPs in such terrible terms but doing so as a rallying cry to the nation to stand up and do what is right, make climate action by parliament more likely or less likely? Over what time period?

          Don't know (to both questions). Imho, Shaw and like-minded MPs deserve huge credit for crafting (hopefully) enduring parliamentary commitments to tackle climate change – but when you know your best is not enough, it's tough.

          Otoh, no-one is perfect, and we're pretty much at make or break.

          Ain't that the truth, and it will not set us free – imho, too many are invested in BAU, and will respond to activism by clinging more tightly to the post-pandemic now.

          Again, I don't have an answer. The first year of the pandemic unified many Kiwis against an external threat. Global warming is a much bigger threat – one from both without, and within – a direct consequence of civilisation's unnatural nature.

          Getting it Right: Environmentalism for the 21st Century [1 Oct 1999]
          If you go to Australia, you'll find that most people think the worst deforestation is occurring in Malaysia and Indonesia, when in fact about 40 percent of Australia's native forest has been destroyed for agriculture. The same is true in United States; about 40 percent of the original forests have been converted to farming. We always like to think that the bad people are long way away and speak another language. We often fail to realize that we are doing exactly the same things we accuse them of doing.

        • James Simpson 3.1.1.3
          11 March 2024 at 11:56 am

          I agree with you Weka

          To be able to change anything you firstly need people to vote for you. We need people who voted for one of the 3 coalition parties to switch and vote Green. When you consider the policies they promoted during the election campaign, that is somewhat easier said than done.

          JS's approach was to reach out and appeal to those on the other side of the aisle. In my view that approach had a great deal of success.

          CS has a different strategy and it seems to be a lot more confrontational and in your face. I am not sure that will convince people who voted for the policies of Nat/Act/NZ1 to swing left.

          I believe in 95% of what CS stands for and hope that she succeeds. Bit I feel she needs to embrace a more unifying message to get there.

        • Subliminal 3.1.1.4
          11 March 2024 at 2:53 pm

          I would challenge you to show where Swarbrick has ever been anti Jewish. She is strident in her antipathy towards the Israeli govt and fully supports Palestinian rights. Many Jews, especially outside Israel fully support Palestinian rights which includes their desire "to be free from the river to the sea".

          Israel is fully involved in torture and is the country from which the US learned the "enhanced interrogation techniques" that were implemented at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.

          It is now emerging that torture was the method used to extract confessions from UNRWA employees of Hamas infiltration. This is the type of state we are dealing with. Lies and torture. Death by starvation, dehydration and disease.

          Swarbrick has only ever called out Israel and supported the Palestinian struggle. I would also note that Rachel Boyack was seen to continue the Palestine shall be free from the river to the sea chant in Nelson, for which she is roundly applauded and supported as the last election showed, managing to hold a previously safe National seat through a strong swing away from Labour. George Galloway would also demonstrate the desire from many people to be very clear and not equivocate on Palestinian rights.

          I would also desire Aotearoa to be free from the mountains to the sea without ever thinking that that left no place for Pakeha.

          https://thecradle.co/articles-id/23750

          https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/unrwa-employees-detained–tortured-by-israeli-army

          • James Simpson 3.1.1.4.1
            11 March 2024 at 3:47 pm

            Do you not think that repeating a line, that you have been told is extremely offensive to a section of our community, is a problem?

            • Subliminal 3.1.1.4.1.1
              11 March 2024 at 3:56 pm

              I'm assuming that you have a television? Or an internet connection? That you have been able to observe the slaughter in real time in Gaza?

              Many people in NZ, and especially followers of David Seymour and Christopher Luxon, find any public use of Māori words offensive. Are you then one of those who believe we should just capitulate to their "refined" sensibilities?

              • James Simpson …
                11 March 2024 at 4:42 pm

                I don't think it is worth us debating this when you try to equate a phrase which many people use, and others interpret as, the destruction of Israel, with the use of Te Reo.

                Many Jewish people in New Zealand live with the daily fear of rockets being launched at their friends and family in Israel. That phrase is therefore very confronting and real to them.

                But hey it must just be their refined sensibilities.

                • Subliminal …
                  11 March 2024 at 6:04 pm

                  Perhaps you could let us know a time when the Hamas rockets were not in retaliation to some terror comitted by the IDF or settlers. Also, the last time someone died from one of these rockets and then compare this with the children anually shot by IDF snipers. We know that Israel views Palestinians as less than animals and killing them is just a matter of course. Do you know how idiotic you sound bringing up the time worn complaint of the miserable rockets that Hamas has available or perhaps you prefer the flaming kites, when we see the bombs falling on Gaza. Do you know that 6 times more women and children have died in this short time in Gaza than in the whole of the two years of the Ukraine war?? Hamas rockets?! Good grief!

                  • James Simpson …
                    12 March 2024 at 3:59 pm

                    What has any of that got to do with Jewish people being offended by a senior politician repeating a phrase that is commonly used and understood to call for the destruction of a country that their families live in?

                    One side is worse than other is your justification for Chloe using that? Really?

                    You can call on Israel to stop killing innocent people, without resorting to antagonising the jewish people.

                    Good grief indeed.

          • weka 3.1.1.4.2
            11 March 2024 at 3:57 pm

            Let me rephrase so it is more clear, and I will ask you to think about what I am saying rather than reacting against it.

            I would like to see CS make a clearer distinction between Israel as a nation state and Jewish people. She can still for instance talk about why she uses 'river to the sea', while making it clear that Jewish people as a class shouldn't be discriminated against.

            If on the other hand, she is taking an activist position against Jewish people as part of her support for Palestinians, that would obviously have huge implications.

            The problem I have is that in the same interview where she talks about mobilising the community, she appears to create a division in the community between Jewish people and those that support Palestinian liberation. I still haven't seen anyone explain how the plan will work to bring lots of NZ people together to create political change while at the same time taking divisive positions. Is the idea here that most people will support her antagonistic position towards Jewish people? Or that they don't care enough about that?

            Reference is this interview with Jack Tame. Plenty of opportunities here for her to send affirming messages about Jewish people in NZ, none taken. How that comes across to me is that she has a conflict in her politics/herself between how she supports Palestinian liberation and Jewish people. I don't think that makes her anti-Jewish, I think she is risking creating the perception that she is. That is a problem for obvious reasons.

            https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/02/11/israel-gaza-swarbrick-used-controversial-chant-despite-urging-from-school/

            • Subliminal 3.1.1.4.2.1
              11 March 2024 at 5:08 pm

              I just watched the whole interview. CS deals with the issues well. She is definitely assertive and unwilling to back down as she correctly observes that this would be a betrayal of the world wide use of this statement in protests.

              CS also begins the segment on this topic with the inclusion of the many Jewish protestors who speak in support of the Palestinian liberation movement.

              I would also note that Jewish protests of the Gaza genocide are worldwide and huge.

              CS took the trouble at the beginning to include Jewish people protesting. That she is unable to acquiesce to another, perhaps extremely consevative or even fundamentalist, group of Jews wishes does not make her anti Jewish. She was at pains to make this clear at the beginning.

              I'm not sure why you think it is possible for her to carry every individual of every sub group along with her.

              It is obvious from the conduct and speech of the Israeli government that some Jews are genocidal maniacs but also obvious, as CS points out, that some Jews are absolutely as horrified by the situation in Gaza as we are. This is exactly the same as for the composition of any state that inflames hatred towards another people. Trying to include those who support the current direction of destruction is not something to do.

              Destiny Church is another group offended by the chant. All fundamentalists are. Destiny is present with many Israeli flags and a lot of chants of their own at our protests. We ignore them. Its not possible to talk to them or include them.

              So really I still think you are very wrong.

              • weka …
                11 March 2024 at 5:22 pm

                I'm not sure why you think it is possible for her to carry every individual of every sub group along with her.

                I don't. I said,

                I would like to see CS make a clearer distinction between Israel as a nation state and Jewish people. She can still for instance talk about why she uses 'river to the sea', while making it clear that Jewish people as a class shouldn't be discriminated against.

                But I think it's interesting that you perceive that as a betrayal of the Palestinian cause (is that what you meant?).

                CS took the trouble at the beginning to include Jewish people protesting. That she is unable to acquiesce to another, perhaps extremely consevative or even fundamentalist, group of Jews wishes does not make her anti Jewish. She was at pains to make this clear at the beginning.

                I was thinking about the much larger group of people between those two poles. Do you really see Jewish people in that polarity?

                I'm also curious if you see Jewish people as being mostly in support of Palestinian liberation. This relates to the question of how to build a mass movement in NZ (which you haven't responded to).

                Destiny Church isn't an ethnoreligious class of people with a long history of oppression included within living memory a genocide of millions of Jews. And I don't believe that the Jewish people that find CS's approach a problem are all akin to Destiny Church. I would be interested to see some research on Jewish people generally on Palestine, esp NZ Jews (again, this relates to the strategy of movement building question).

                • Subliminal …
                  11 March 2024 at 8:52 pm

                  I would not count Jews who protest Gaza as extremist. I would count them as ordinarily caring people. Most polls show a clear majority of people opposed to what is happening in Gaza. The exception is Israel where a clear majority support the destruction of Gaza even if they dislike Netanyahu. I have seen, I think from Jonathon Cook, data that shows even prior to Gaza when progressives were protesting Netanyahu trashing the judicial system with new blanket protections for the state that the one thing that united both sides was there unity on an iron fist for Gaza. Of course there are large exceptions, even large groups of ex IDF soldiers. In all other countries for which data is available the majority is in some degree of disgust. I would assume that Jews outside Israel and those inside Nz follow this trend. In the US, Jews are mostly disgusted and this is amplified in young Jews who feel increasingly alienated from Israeli state ideology.

                  I have listened to the CS JT interview again and would say she never says mass mobilisation. I would say this is intentional as many small tightly functioning community groups have far more cohesion and durability. Mass movements usually succumb to some sort of ideological conformity the ridgity which is destructive of creativity and problem solving. I would not have much clue on how this works but she may have cracked this nut in Auckland.

                  I would end by saying that referencing the holocaust just denigrates what Palestinians are experiencing. By 1948, the world was apalled by the holocaust and very supportive of Jews. From 1948, the destruction of Palestine began in earnest and has not relented. Only grown in intensity year by year. How is it possible to start any grass root mobilisation that does not recognise such an obvious power imbalance and where there is push back or any uncertainty, err first on the side of the powerless.

                  • weka …
                    11 March 2024 at 9:03 pm

                    I didn't say that Jewish people protesting Gaze are extremist. It's hard to have a conversation when there is this degree of miscommunication.

                    • Subliminal …
                      11 March 2024 at 9:32 pm

                      You said I was only interested in the two poles. I assumed one was the genocidal Jewish leaders of Israel. The only others I mentioned were the Jews protesting??

          • Michael P 3.1.1.4.3
            12 March 2024 at 11:54 am

            Many people might think it kind of strange how Swarbrick has been so outspoken and active, going on marches, etc on this particular conflict but they haven't heard a peep from her condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine in which many many thousands more people have been killed, murdered, raped, tortured, etc than in Palestine.

            Same with Syria, The Uyghurs in China, etc.

            And of course many view her apology for the river to the sea as insincere and one of those despicable non apologies (I'm sorry people found it offensive…..)

            • Subliminal 3.1.1.4.3.1
              12 March 2024 at 4:55 pm

              Killed yes. Murdered, raped, tortured no. In the few short months of Gaza, six times more women and children dead than the whole two years in Ukraine. Constant reports of torture initiated by Israel keep emerging. Even of UN workers to extract confessions of Hamas involvement. Israel is the go to guys on "enhanced interrogation techniques"(see link above).

              In the first 3 weeks of Gaza more children died than in any whole year from all armed conflict. (that of course includes Ukraine as just a subset)

              https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/gaza-child-death-toll-1.7012927

              In Ukraine roughly one child dies per day. In the first 2 months of Gaza easily 100 children died per day and this rate has not abated

              https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/7/is-israels-gaza-war-the-deadliest-conflict-for-children-in-modern-times

              • SPC …
                12 March 2024 at 5:02 pm

                War zones and civilians.

                Ukrainians fled fighting areas and many woman and children left Ukraine entirely – millions of them. This because they were allowed into the EU as refugees.

                Why do you think the civilian casualties figures are different in Gaza?

                PS Are you really claiming that there has been no murder or rape of civilians or torture (of soldiers) in Ukraine?

      • Psycho Milt 3.1.2
        10 March 2024 at 7:41 pm

        As someone who lived through the damage the 4th Labour govt did to our society, I know first-hand that Chloe's approach of "It just needs everyone to care enough to get out there and stand against the govt" is a recipe for complete and dismal failure.

        • Bearded Git 3.1.2.1
          10 March 2024 at 9:10 pm

          I think that is a patronising and simplistic labelling of CS's policies and approach.

          She is smart cookie who needs positive ideas thrown at her not negative crap.

        • weka 3.1.2.2
          10 March 2024 at 9:13 pm

          As someone who lived through the damage the 4th Labour govt did to our society, I know first-hand that Chloe's approach of "It just needs everyone to care enough to get out there and stand against the govt" is a recipe for complete and dismal failure.

          How so? What's the relationship with the Lange government?

          • Psycho Milt 3.1.2.2.1
            11 March 2024 at 8:14 am

            The Lange govt was doing a lot of obvious harm to our society, particularly to hourly-rate workers (which I was at the time). A lot of us thought like Chloe (don't leave politics to the politicians, mobilise, participate, fight back) to defeat their plans. Few actually did mobilise, participate etc and the govt shrugged off those of us who did like gnats.

            • weka 3.1.2.2.1.1
              11 March 2024 at 9:14 am

              The central difference there is that Labour were supposed to be a left wing, pro-working class government. Lots of confusion for a number of years, why would you protest the government you voted for or were a member of? The mobilisation happened in the early 90s against National, a more obvious enemy.

              My memory of the early 90s was that working class people and beneficiaries like solo mums who had time to organise before were now increasingly taken up with trying to survive. Hating the poor is politically successful if you want to suppress pushback.

              It would be interesting though to look at how protests and other actions were organised in the 80s and 90s. What did work? What didn't? Overlaps and differences with CS's strategy.

        • Phillip ure 3.1.2.3
          10 March 2024 at 9:22 pm

          @p.m..

          You are comparing apples and oranges…

          4th labour was f.p.p….now is mmp..for starters..

          And one takeaway from recent gyrations from the right..is just how right-wing this three headed hydra is…

          They are trashing our country..our environment..

          And surely it must be gloves off for those opposing this carnage..if not now…when..

          And if ms.swarbrick is going to start calling it as it is…

          ..more power to her/her voice…

          ..and as james shaw warned..those rushing to profit from what the tories/act/nz first are doing..must be put on notice that their gravy trains will stop..

          ..at the next change of government..

          ..and I am sure ms. swarbrick will be up for that..

          ..and there is one thing to be be grateful to this gummint for…

          ..in that they have well and truly buried incrementalism..

          ..next govt will see capital gains/wealth/land taxes..living wage for all…strong environmental legislation..our world leading tobacco legislation well and truly back on track…

          ..all that and so much more..

          ..it is time for the incrementalists to be laughed out of the room..

          ..banished to their footnote in history..

    • weka 3.2
      10 March 2024 at 6:05 pm

      I addressed this in a reply to Drowsy, but I will add here that stuff like this is going to be part of the challenge. I don't know if it will have subsided by the next election.

      https://twitter.com/SimonRAnderson/status/1766613245597765882

    • newsense 3.3
      11 March 2024 at 1:27 am

      She’s worked well with Wayne Brown. Part of the skill is finding areas to work together on.

    • newsense 3.4
      11 March 2024 at 1:40 am

      I mean who should we respect? The tobacco sales team straight from HQ? Shane Jones the decider? Chris – Ol King Lux- Luxon? The ones insisting benefit cuts are good for the poor? The ones that are insisting that these boot camps will be different? David the real Maori?

      I don’t think Shaw has any more respect for the mad or the bad than Chloe. I imagine it’s a reason he’s leaving, the frustration at the corruption and evil that is preventing dealing with the many threats of climate change, let alone other realities.

      Maybe she’s guna be no good who knows. But tbh you’re just saying things now based on reckons, no records. And it seems as if she’s a hard worker…

  4. randal mcmurphy 4
    10 March 2024 at 5:36 pm

    seemores feree advice to Chloe Swarbrick is worth as much as it cost which of course is nothing!

  5. Tiger Mountain 5
    10 March 2024 at 6:00 pm

    Chlöe is the real deal–up to you lot to get active now and organise in your communities.

  6. Kat 6
    10 March 2024 at 8:00 pm

    James Shaw plus Chloe Swarbrick as leaders would have been 'the team' ……

    Hopefully for the 'left' there is another co-leader vote sooner than later….

    • bwaghorn 6.1
      10 March 2024 at 8:17 pm

      If course Davidsons replacement has to be moari, so that narrows the feil I'd imagine.

      • Anne 6.1.1
        10 March 2024 at 10:55 pm

        Efeso Collins would have risen to be a co-leader of the Greens. He is Samoan but I think that would have been more than acceptable given his close ties with the South Auckland Maori community.

        • Belladonna 6.1.1.1
          11 March 2024 at 8:55 am

          Not in the GP constitution – where Maori means Maori – not Samoan.
          Of course, he could have been the 'other' one of the leaders – but where would that leave Swarbrick?

        • gsays 6.1.1.2
          11 March 2024 at 5:07 pm

          I think his socially conservative views would have been a barrier to leadership.

          Which would have been a shame.

      • weka 6.1.2
        11 March 2024 at 9:36 am

        There are currently 5 Māori GP MPs, and the co-leader doesn't have to be an MP.

        Teanau Tuiono (Palmerston North)

        Hūhana Lyndon (Te Tai Tokerau)

        Darleen Tana (Tāmaki Makaurau)

        Kahurangi Carter (Christchurch Central)

        Tamatha Paul (Wellington Central) not on the List

    • Ad 6.2
      11 March 2024 at 10:05 am

      Shaw did his time, but with Labour crashing out, what was the point of another term swinging in the empty playground monkeybars of Opposition?

      Shaw did the right thing.

  7. Tiger Mountain 7
    11 March 2024 at 9:12 am

    This ride will be fun…Chlöe still believes in “sticking it to the man” via people power–ok boomers…?

    • weka 7.1
      11 March 2024 at 9:17 am

      I'm sure all the elderly people living in poverty will appreciate the connection to sticking it to the man.

      • Tiger Mountain 7.1.1
        11 March 2024 at 10:16 am

        “Sticking it to the man” is rebellious 60s jargon for taking on corporates and the powerful/patriarchy. Elder poverty is certainly a thing particularly for women now in this country which Ms Swarbrick will hopefully appreciate. The boomer reference was mine.

        • weka 7.1.1.1
          11 March 2024 at 11:11 am

          I know what sticking it to the man means. When you use rhetoric like "ok boomer" and tie elderly people to people in power, you sidestep class analysis (in this case, socioeconomic) and replace it with identity politics. Using boomer as either a group indicator (older people are wealthy and selfish) and/or a perjorative, ties into NZ's significant anti-elder culture. It renders invisible all the baby boomers that have never owned a house and those that live in poverty.

          For a strategy like the one CS is proposing, of mass mobilisation, we have to stop with the pejoratives that create further division and instead focus on the actual politics. Attack power instead of using identity politics. IP is useful for gaining some rights under neoliberalism, but it has now morphed into a crazy beast.

          CS used "ok boomer" in parliament early on before boomer became just a dismissive term. I seriously hope she as the good sense to not use it now.

    • Ad 7.2
      11 March 2024 at 10:02 am

      The parallel Swarbrick should watch is Katie Porter in California. Similar "well researched radical" and youtube clip Queen just crashed and burned in the Dem primary, to a distant third.

      Stroppy is excellent in opposition. And she's evolved a long way.

      What will actual leadership mode look like?

  8. That_guy 8
    11 March 2024 at 10:24 am

    Honestly I miss James Shaw already, he always kept his eye on the prize and never, ever made it about him.

    Chloe is smart, articulate and beloved by activists. Unfortunately she is not smart enough to see her own blind spots. She can't see the damage currently being done by her own party to gender-non-conforming youth who are just like she was.

    I wish her well. I just can't see anyone in the Greens right now (well maybe JAG) who brings what James Shaw brought to the Party. Still, early days and there are some fresh faces.

    • weka 8.1
      11 March 2024 at 6:53 pm

      One of the strengths of the GP is that the structures of the party mean a few things. I see the whole caucus as important as the co-leaders, as well as the other elected positions within the party. The caucus is stronger now that EK and GG have done (despite GG's good work in some areas, I think she was a bit of a loose unit at times). That the membership has quite a large degree of say in what happens is also a strength.

      So while I agree that Shaw is a huge loss (and many will only now be getting how good was in hindsight), I don't see the party as hinging on him. I really hope he goes onto do something that involves speaking truth to power publicly, but it will be interesting to see what kind of job he ends up in.

  9. weka 9
    11 March 2024 at 4:05 pm

    Chloe Swarbrick will be interviewed on BHN tonight at 9pm.

    live tonight at 9pm to chat about her new role as co-leader and the future of the left in NZ #nzpol

    https://twitter.com/patbrittenden/status/1767010171040227362

    https://www.youtube.com/live/Y9F694cu0_w?si=Aysy53ftjFINLUcg

  10. randal mcmurphy 10
    11 March 2024 at 5:28 pm

    Lets face it. The planet is rooted. All the dweebs with their pc's and the rest of the cognitive elite trying to grab everything they can for a vainglorious last hurrah, from ever dwindling resources before the biosphere gives up the ghost.