Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
5:30 pm, July 27th, 2023 - 52 comments
Categories: Daily review -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
Tmp have just turned overtons window..into a glass ranch slider..
And ya hafta say:..more power to them..!
They ain't in power yet cheif
No…but if it means being in power..or not being in power…it the math works out..
..hipkins will be rolled,..
..why wouldn't you…?
Tmp are presenting a vision of positive change…
And that in itself is a very powerful move..
And something long absent from this neoliberal-incrementalist iteration of the nz labour party…
Tmp have reached back to what labour once were…
And this is a very very good thing…
Labour will be decimated if Hipkins is rolled.
@ alan…
I am saying being rolled post election..not pre election..
And that is why Labour will be lucky to get 25% at this election, with or without Hipkins.
Unsure what you are trying to say…
Careful Phil, you'll drag out all the labour party hacks to attack you.
I can't see what arguments they would mount…
And they must see how things are slipping away from them…
Their certainties must be well and truly shaken by now…if not they are asleep at the wheel..
And I am hopeful that we are heading for the first real mmp election outcome in nz…
And that will be a humbling experience for labour..
And that's not a bad thing..
What does this mean?
I thought the first real MMP outcome was Winston holding the country hostage while he made up his mind in 1996. With 17 seats he held a much greater number than seems likely for either the GP or TPM.
But, he (unlike ACT, TPM or the GP) had the option of negotiating with both major parties.
that was Peters fucking up MMP for a decade.
I took it to mean it was less about one of the main two parties picking a dancing partner and raising the idea of 6 or 7 parties negotiating to form a true coalition government.
Unless you are counting TOP (a wild outsider) – the most that would be negotiating are three (TPM, GP, Labour).
I think you could discount NZF – even if they get over the 5% line. Peters has ruled out Labour; and, while, I have no doubt he could weasel his way out of that statement, I cannot imagine him working with either the GP or TPM – both of whom are antithetical to his personal philosophy.
yes, but my comment was in response to Belladonna's point about WP holding the country hostage. He really did monkey wrench MMP right at the start and set the tone for a long time.
Then what is a real MMP outcome?
It can't just be that the outer-wing parties get to set the agenda (I can't imagine that there would be many here rejoicing if ACT were doing that in October/November, and celebrating it as a 'real MMP outcome'!)
Little though I like him, Winston had a really significant minor bloc of political support in 1996. A lot of people voted for him, and believed in what he said (I agree, they may have been naive – but there's no intelligence test for voting).
I will always tip my hat/give peters credit for being the one who turned around that neoliberal bus rogernomics labour were thundering along in..
..in that in coalition negotiations in 1996 he insisted on restoring free health care for 6 yrs old and younger ..
My son was born in 1994..
I remember it well..
Market rents continued for those in state houses. The MW was real low.
real MMP wasn't my term.
But the potential of MMP was to increase representation, make it more broad/diverse, and to improve democracy. Peters' bullshit of not saying before an election what NZF's position would be was a power game. He played it very well for sure, but it established MMP as a poorer version of what it might have been. Even today we have to have these interminable conversations about leverage and why don't the Greens work with National, as if that kind of power play is all there is. Peters set the tone and culture of MMP and basically fucked that up.
I used to argue with Brits on line who were complaining about the Tories and the Blairites. I would tell them they needed to put their energy into electoral reform. They were aghast because they thought that would mean the BNP being a coalition partner in government. I would say, it's better thy have their own party and everyone can see them for exaclty who they are, rather than having them hide in the Conservative Party and influence behind closed doors. Also, if there are increasing number of Brits going fascist, it's more visible.
I'm not saying ACT are like the BNP. I'm saying that diversity is a good thing for it's own sake, it's not a partisan position.
Pre-election coalition deals don't seem to be the norm in many MMP (or other non-FPP election systems) overseas. We regularly see an election followed by a considerable period of deal-making – in countries like Germany, Israel – and most recently, Spain. Sometimes resulting in some truly weird electoral combinations.
https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-odd-couple-politics-strange-coalition-governments/
ok, but that's a complete non-sequitur to my comment.
I thought it was a response to this part
"Peters' bullshit of not saying before an election what NZF's position would be was a power game. He played it very well for sure, but it established MMP as a poorer version of what it might have been."
there’s a difference between doing coalition deals pre-election, and being honest about who one os willing to support to form government. Peters took a position at the start that he wouldn’t say. One election he implied he would go with Labour and then went with National. The following election his voter based said get fucked. That’s the bullshit he plays.
The thing, is NZF campaigned as part of the opposition, then chose to keep National in power. I could see it coming a mile off and did not bother voting.
Remember the baubles of power….
I am talking about those normally voting labour…
.. collapsing back into tmp and the greens ..
(Both of them more labour than neo-inc labour..)
And this meaning the possibility that grns +tmp equal with labour..in any coalition deal done..
..so I guess what I mean by first mmp election outcome..is that re-balancing of power…to the minor parties..
..who after all…are the agents of change that we sorely need…eh..?
And, do you hold the same view about the growth of the ACT vote?
They are, after all, polling considerably higher than the GP – seem to have a formidable party discipline and negotiation ability – and (if there is a right [as in politics, not correct] outcome in October), they may well be dominating a shrunken National Party (not shrunken from current numbers, but shrunken from, say 2017).
This, too, would be re-balancing of power to the minor parties (or to one minor party).
Is that also a real MMP outcome?
No..I don't feel the same way about act..they are an effing abomination…
Tho' they are sucking that racist far right out of national..
I actually think that national should be shifting uneasily in their seats…
..worrying about those soft national voters..who are only alarmed by act..
I also think some of those soft national voters .. terrified by act promising to deny man made climate change.. could be snapped up by the greens…
National shouldn't be sneering at labour..
..they should be looking at what they are losing..from their right..and from their 'left' (for want of a better word..)
So..yes..this could be a real mmp election..for national ..and a power shift away from them..
I understand that you hate ACT and all they stand for.
But your arguments about a real MMP election hold up just as strongly for ACT as they do for GP and TPM.
Or is it only a real MMP election if the left win?
It seems highly unlikely that power will be shifting away from National. They are already in opposition – not government – and seem certain to gain a considerable number of seats at the expense of Labour.
The worst outcome from their perspective (based on the current polling) would be to be in opposition with ACT, only one or two seats away from toppling the government – with the consequent hope of destabilizing the government during the next 3 years.
I answer your national/act question in the comment above your question..
'hate' act is a bit emotive..
I think despise gets nearer the mark..
Well, "effing abomination" sounds close to hate than despise.
Nah..!.. effing abomination is descriptive.. it's what they are..
Despise is what I feel about them…
And/but…act are just national with the mask ripped off..eh..?
I welcome a clear division between left and right..
I celebrate the end of tweedle dee and tweedle dum…
Oh they can see they are losing popularity, they just don't care.
The fact is, many prominent people in the Labour party both inside parliament and outside, are fine with losing power and in fact would prefer defeat over working with Greens and TMP to overturn the 40 year neoliberal experiment that Labour began!
Honestly, I'd love nothing more than to see NZ return to a more social democratic style economy, taking the best of what we have now and adding the best bits of what we had and adding new ideas….
But the nzlp is a bigger road block to social democratic reform in NZ than National or any other party, because Labour champions the status quo whole pretending to be against it.
A lot of people in labour won't mind if Labour loses, a lot of them hate the left more than they hate the right and a lot of them hate the poor and secretly don't disagree all that much with national or act.
If they lose they'll sit in opposition pretending to disagree for 3-9 years whole national/acts austerity and reforms become incredibly unpopular and once back in power the next Labour govt won't undo a single economic reform of the next National govt.
I don't have such a bleak view of labour..
I think they are ripe to be turned back to their roots…
..to embrace the progressive vision of nz promised/articulated by tmp/greens..
Glimmers of hope are parker walking away from his revenue minister role..
..and robertson also made uneasy by hipkins axing capital gains tax..
And I think that there are many within labour who would welcome a return to old labour…and to be agents of real/progressive change..
In fact labour have to come along..for us to be able to effect the real changes many of us want..
Labour are incrementalists, they would rather govern for three terms than one.
The point is to achieve something, bed it in and make it normal before the other lot get back in – so it lasts.
It has a certain methodology, and if they force the other lot to moderate their policies to win, its sound. Not if NACT wins though.
And if NACT do win, the next Labour government would undo stuff.
PS The Fair Pay Agreement is not nothing.
As TPM pointed out – this incrementalism has got us to a state where the richest 10% own 50% of NZ wealth, and the poorest 50% own 2%. An absolute social and economic disaster.
If the 5th Labour government was in power still, incrementalism would have a better track record … it's the 9 year periods otherwise which are the problem.
That said, we have no estate tax (not since 1992) nor gift duty (not since 2011) – there is a reason why 2/3rd of the OECD does.
And this is why we need a wealth tax as part of a restoration of commonality, lest we drift into a two tier society. But the FPA is also an important safeguard against decline into a generation rent precariat.
FPA are great, but unfortunately the decline to generation rent precariat is thoroughly complete for many people in NZ. It has gone too far for incrementalism to fix, IMHO
Problem is, inequality becomes self-reinforcing (got no money->got no options to make money->get less money->repeat), as does wealth (got money->opportunity to make more money->got more money->repeat)
Glass ranch slider! Brilliant.
You give me hope Phil, demonstrating not all vegans are pious and humourless.
I know who those vegans are..I've met them…they are no fun at all.
(and chrs..!..)
Two months ago dissadent Russian Marxist Boris Kagarlitsky wrote to the Western left. Yesterday he was arrested and imprisoned.
And from the Western progressive public, we only need one thing – stop helping Putin with your conciliatory and ambiguous statements. The more often such statements are made, the greater will be the confidence of officials, deputies and policemen that the current order can continue to exist with the silent support or hypocritical grumbling of the West. Every conciliatory statement made by liberal intellectuals in America results in more arrests, fines, and searches of democratic activists and just plain people here in Russia.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2023/05/29/a-plea-to-my-western-progressive-friends-stop-helping-putin-with-your-conciliatory-and-ambiguous-statements/
Looking forward to National dong a proper costed tax policy, as well as Labour, so we can put a table up showing the comparative costs and benefits to individuals and to the country.
A simple table is all.
Labour didn't take the opportunity to have an independent costings unit set up in time, this was last year:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/door-closing-on-chance-for-election-promise-costing-unit/KILWDB2ZZEZU3LBCXASIPQ3XGU/
Song for Labour and its all ova Tova, at the moment …………..
Sinéad O’Connor & The Chieftains' emotive rendition of the anti colonial ballad The Foggy Dew.
The Foggy Dew
As down the glen one Easter morn
To a city fair rode I
There armed lines of marching men
In squadrons passed me by
No pipe did hum
No battle drum did sound its loud tattoo
But the Angelus Bells o'er the Liffey swells
Rang out in the foggy dew
Right proudly high in Dublin town
Hung they out a flag of war
'Twas better to die 'neath that Irish sky
Than at Sulva or Sud-El-Bar
And from the plains of Royal Meath
Strong men came hurrying through
While Brittania's Huns with their long range guns
Sailed in through the foggy dew
Their bravest fell and the requiem bell
Rang mournfully and clear
For those who died that Eastertide in the
Springing of the year
While the world did gaze with deep amaze
At those fearless men but few
Who bore the fight that freedom's light
Might shine through the foggy dew
And back through the glen, I rode again
And my heart with grief was sore
For I parted then with valiant men
Whom I never shall see n'more
But to and fro in my dreams I go
And I kneel and pray for you
For slavery fled, O glorious dead
When you fell in the foggy dew
– Charles O’Neill
Hard to watch and not be moved…….
Defenestration and polonium tea are so yesterday..
/
A 40-year-old Russian tech entrepreneur who bolstered President Putin’s domestic mass-surveillance operations was found dead over the weekend, having allegedly overdosed on “medical gas”.
“It is with great sadness that we announce that on July 22, Saturday, at the age of 40, the head of ICS Holding, well-known Russian technology entrepreneur Anton Andreyevich Cherepennikov, passed away,” his company ICS Holding wrote on Telegram. “We are all mourning these moments.”
[…]
He is the second high-profile businessman to have died in the space of 48 hours, with Igor Kudryakov, 63, a billionaire oligarch, having been found dead in his Moscow apartment on Friday.
Dozens of top industry tycoons have died under mysterious circumstances since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, among them aviation experts, a top executive from Russia’s largest private oil company, and other businessmen and oligarchs living in both Russia and abroad.
https://archive.li/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russian-spyware-billionaire-dies-medical-gas-b60z2jq36
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspicious_deaths_of_Russian_businesspeople_(2022%E2%80%932023)
Oh my, just watched one of the best documentaries on poverty in the UK, Greg Wallaces The British Miracle Meat. Try not to read about it before you see it, it's astounding stuff.
Where can you see it IFL?
Use a VPN – Channel 4 is UK only …
thanks SPC!