web analytics

It’s 2014 and we have a job to do

Written By: - Date published: 10:00 am, January 1st, 2014 - 251 comments
Categories: Economy, election 2014, Environment, identity, Left, Politics, Social issues - Tags:

… and I’m worried we’re not going to do it.

It’s not just about winning an election.  It’s not just about getting Labour, or Labour/Greens, or Labour/Greens/Mana etc over the line.

It’s about getting the people of New Zealand to turn out and vote for a different kind of country.  Not a country where Paula Bennett gets to pull the ladder up behind her.  Not a country where finance companies get bailed out while rail workshops have to close their doors.  Not a country that uses material wealth as a moral yardstick, blaming the poor for being poor and assuming the wealthy should be listened to.  Not a country which points a finger at those who have no power and makes them the scapegoat for our failures.

But we may be our own worst enemies.

This isn’t me telling people to shut up for the sake of unity.  It’s not labelling my ideological enemies as Redneck Stormtroopers.

It’s a plea for understanding the difference between strategy and tactics.

To get to the New Zealand we want to live in, from the New Zealand we have now, is going to take a huge amount of work.  We need to change how our economy works, our whole system of industrial relations, our social welfare systems, how we support vulnerable people, how businesses invest and create real jobs, how families and communities are able to support each other, our criminal and justice systems, our attitude towards our natural environment, our position on the international stage

Every aspect of that work is important, and interconnected.  And we can work on more than one thing at a time.  We can have tactics like a capital gains tax and amending the Reserve Bank Act and we can push for a living wage and we can discuss sexual discrimination in the workplace and we can increase paid parental leave.  We can create financial disincentives on property speculators and implement environment and accessibility standards for new builds and demand rental properties are fit to live in and build more state houses.

We can do the big serious economic policies and give a fuck about people’s day-to-day lives, because all of it will feed into the brighter future big picture.

In 2014 the New Zealand Left must have more on its agenda than “win power”.  We should want to create a better New Zealand, and doing that is about so much more than economic policy (which is also, obviously, important).  It has to touch everything.  And it’s going to take people working in different areas on different parts of the plan to make it all happen.

It may sound all a bit Pollyanna, but I absolutely believe we can do it … if the heterosexual leftwing dudes could please just stop complaining every time we spend five minutes on issues which don’t purely benefit them.

We’re all in this together, guys.  We’re all aiming for the same thing.  We all want that better New Zealand and that strong leftwing government.  And you know what, we’re here on the left because we’re fighting in the same war: the war against the powerful elites standing on our necks.

Now give me some fucking cookies for saying all that without using the word “vision” once.

251 comments on “It’s 2014 and we have a job to do”

  1. Jim Nald 1

    Cheers! I agree.
    I have been away but have regularly looked in.
    Keep up the good fight, y’all!
    Happy New Year to Everyone.

    And if you live around the corner, QOT, you will get lots of my baking all year.

    • dave 1.1

      there is only one job this year and thats door knocking , plamflet delivery and the odd protest getting out the vote we can only get the change we all want if we can get out the vote and make sure slippery takes a fall.so to all those who want change sign up get involved its only a grass roots effort that will seal slipperys fate!

      • Skinny 1.1.1

        I agree door knocking is very important. DC should force all his MP’s and candidates to door knock starting from March. I spoke to a former labour MP about how she won a blue ribbon seat, she said it was simply that she spent 6 months door knocking, people are more than chuffed to be heard and come polling day bingo we have a winner!

  2. Jimmie 2

    Trying to get the left to agree on a common message is akin to herding cats QOT.

    I’m not a leftie but I think the left would do a lot better if it could minimize the tribalism, almost denominationalism of the left.

    I never supported Helen Clark politically but one of her strengths was her ability to push the left together under her leadership through a combination of pragmatism, strong arming, and strategically placed allies (sisterhood if you were)

    Since she has left there has been no replacement with the gravitas to be able to draw the left together as she did. Goff couldn’t, Shearer couldn’t, Cunliffe……time will tell.

    I actually don’t think the left can bond under a male leader…….too much hostility and suspicion. Perhaps if Labour loses this year Jacinda Arden may be needed to step up to the mark?

    • QoT 2.1

      I don’t think “tribalism” is the problem. There are plenty of “tribes” on the Right but we only see the occasional symptoms of whatever ideological feuds they’ve got going on. And I really doubt it has anything to do with gender, since Helen Clark hardly had what you’d call a “maternal” or “nurturing” style of leadership. And she faced plenty of hostility and suspicion!

      • weka 2.1.1

        Good rallying cry QoT, thanks.

        I’m not sure what people are meaning by tribalism, but let’s remember that we have existing indigenous cultures within NZ, tribal ones. Perhaps we might learn something from the whanau/hapu/iwi structures and processes on how to work together.

        Diversity within the left is an asset. God forbid we get rid of the denominations.

      • Rather ironic really; the Right – which espouses the Cult of Rugged Individualism – can work together with minimal public antipathy between factions – whilst the Left, which is Big on collective action, shows more internal bickering than is healthy…

        Of course, there is a need for passionate debate and weighing of ideas. The ‘trick’ is to do it without personalising it and deflecting from the issues we were originally discussing…

        Buggered if I know how to go about it.

    • Shona 2.2

      Nonsense. While no one would doubt Ms Arden’s sincerity and compassion fact is she lacks Clark’s ability , nous and intellect not to mention life experience.
      She can’t even win an electorate seat! to be pilloried in parliamentary debate by an over- privileged, intellectual lightweight like Maggie Barry proves Ms Arden will never have what it takes to lead a party.
      Cunliffe is the leader we need right now.
      FFS! get in behind and give him the support he needs and stop equivocating people.

      • QoT 2.2.1

        As my post said, this isn’t a call for people to shut up for the sake of unity, Shona. I objected to that strongly enough when Shearer was leader that it would be hypocritical for me to do the same thing now my preferred candidate as leader.

        By all means, we need to work together, but I want to be very careful that “working together” or “unity” don’t get used to stifle useful debate.

    • kenny 2.3

      Distraction warning!

  3. karol 3

    Well said, QoT.

    Anything but tribalism. About working together.
    I think the post is about the broad left working together. Totally not tribalism.

    The neocons/liberals split feminism, etc fromthe left.

    Time to recognise that and work together.

  4. karol 4


    Neocons tried to split feminism from the grass roots left.

    1st effort at using mobile to comment. No edit function.

  5. RedLogix 5

    if the heterosexual leftwing dudes could please just stop complaining every time we spend five minutes on issues which don’t purely benefit them.

    OK – fair enough. I can take that on board QoT.

    The other thing is this – when the right attacks us – front foot it back into their faces. If it’s a real fuck up, apologise and do whatever it takes to stop the story becoming a narrative, but when the attack is a beat-up like the Len Brown drivel – take it back to them without reservation or equivocating. Never buy into their false premises and lies.

    This year has to count. Forty years of neo-lib madness has been quite enough.

    • QoT 5.1

      when the right attacks us – front foot it right back to them

      Let’s not get too ambitious now!

    • Colonial Viper 5.2

      if the heterosexual leftwing dudes could please just stop complaining every time we spend five minutes on issues which don’t purely benefit them.

      Five minutes is fine, go for it, no probs there.

      1) Global trans-national corporate and banking dominance leading to austerity and neo-feudalism.
      2) Fossil fuel and real resource depletion.
      3) Climate change (now expected to hit 4 deg C by 2100, and possibly up to a civilisation ending 5 deg C).

      These are the tier one issues. These are the issues which will likely make life nearly unbearable (and possibly nearly unsurvivable) for all under 20 year olds today, during their lifetime. Those who are over 60 now will fortunately miss the brunt.

      Any peaceful political or civic approach which helps sort the above out, I will back. Can the Left focus on many other things at the same time: yes. But given the tightness of the above timeline I suggest doing so for only about five minutes.


      • QoT 5.2.1

        Five minutes is fine, go for it, no probs there

        And this comment is why you can fuck off, CV. Laying down the law about what you consider to be “tier one issues” is kind of the entire problem.

        • Draco T Bastard

          CV’s right – we do have to put in some priorities but I think those priorities need to be about what we do first after the left win power. Until then we can talk about everything including what needs priority.

        • Craig Glen viper

          “We are all in this together we are all aiming four the same thing.”
          Clearly not Qot you words and actions are totally un helpful to electing a left wing Government.

          You have behaved like a total bully, you are a hypocrite pure and simple. Using language like that against another person is not acceptable as far as I am concerned seriously get some counselling.

          [QoT: actually, I take back my remarks below. For making assumptions about my mental health, and using ableism to criticise me, you can get the hell out of this post.]

          • QoT

            Oh good, another person who wants to pre-emptively blame me for Labour’s presumed failure to win in 2014.

            … hang on, it’s almost like that’s exactly the kind of shit I’m complaining about!

            (Oh, and I’ll tell anyone to fuck off if I want to. If you want to scold me for my unladylike language … guess what you can do?)

        • phillip ure

          @’fuck off’..

          why would you react like that to a reasoned listing of the most urgent issues facing us..?

          ..you can have identity-politics up the jacksie..

          ..if the planet is frying around you..


          phillip ure..

          • QoT

            “Reasoned listing” is subjective, and if you don’t see why Colonial Viper’s comment was exactly the kind of smug privileged silencing that this post was about … well I don’t believe it, frankly.

            • phillip ure

              @ qot..

              ..actually..on a re-read..(i previously missed the beginning and ending..)

              ..i withdraw my objection to yr objection to his comment..

              ..(and i do agree with the tone/timbre/content of yr original post..and agree it is not a matter of either/or..)

              ..but why not let his own words show him up for being a dick..?..(‘five mins’..indeed..!..)

              ..and use him as a foil..a spur to restate/hone yr words/arguments..?

              ..i still object to both the telling dissenters to fuck off/shut-up!..

              ..and the censoring of the words that led to their summary-justice verdict..

              ..i feel free-(political)-speech/transparency overwhelms the offended feelings of any individual..

              ..the other way lies totalitarianism..

              ..phillip ure..

              • QoT

                I have let his own words show him up, phil, because I left his comment there, just like I left KJT’s, and just like I let KJT’s fifth post-moderation comment through to illustrate the sense of entitlement some people feel to come into other people’s houses and dictate what conversations happen.

                And I’m going to say again, for the benefit of people who will label this comment hypocritical: I have never said people should stop talking about climate change, or globalisation, or fossil fuels. I have only objected to being told by others that my issues and my human rights should take a back seat to the “tier one” issues, which just happen to be the ones preferred by privileged leftwing men.

                • Corokia

                  Climate change is a human rights issue, it is also about inter-generational justice. The people who will (and are already) suffer the most from the increase in extreme weather events are the poorest and least powerful people.

                  When disasters strike the rich get by better than the poor -a recent example of this was the way wealthy Christchurch residents moved to their holiday homes after the earthquakes, leaving the ordinary people to cope with liquefaction and portaloos. Women and children bear the brunt of the increase in domestic violence and alcohol abuse that has followed such disasters.

                  When the shit hits the fan, those people in our society who are already disadvantaged get even more crap. So IMHO (as a privileged left wing woman) we need to multi-task and fight inequality and discrimination and climate change.


            • Frank Macskasy

              …well I don’t believe it, frankly.

              And that’s my ‘cue’! 😀

              I fully concur with QoT’s comment,

              Every aspect of that work is important, and interconnected. And we can work on more than one thing at a time. We can have tactics like a capital gains tax and amending the Reserve Bank Act and we can push for a living wage and we can discuss sexual discrimination in the workplace and we can increase paid parental leave. We can create financial disincentives on property speculators and implement environment and accessibility standards for new builds and demand rental properties are fit to live in and build more state houses.

              There will be many problems (I refuse to employ the “issues” euphemism) confronting a new Labour-led coalition. After 6 years of National rule, and 30+ years of rogernomics, there is much that requires fixing.

              Of course we all have out “pet” projects. I’ve got a truckload, and my #1 is addressing the crisis of child poverty and the strong symbolism of Cunliffe taking on the role of Minister for Children when he becomes PM.

              At the same time, Colonial Viper has a point – global warming is the threat of this century, much as nuclear annihilation threatened human civilisation in the 20th Century.

              We also need to review the GCSB/SIS/Police inroads into our privacy; review mining in DoC land; address the housing problem in this country; introduce a full Scandinavian style food in schools programme; dump anti-worker legislation, and so it goes.

              Labour and the Greens will be busy post-election. There is much work to be done. Thankfully, with enough Labour, Green, Mana (NZ First?) MPs, there should be plenty of hands available to get stuck in. No MP should be backbench “fodder” for the Debating Chamber.

              And we all need to help by supporting a new government by presenting solutions to problems.

              But it all boils down to a basic theme; since 1984, the cult of individualism and self-serving attitudes has become the “norm”. It’s “what’s in it for me” that is the mantra of the shrill and vocal when debate rages in this country on a problem. (Eg; alcohol laws. How many times do you read/hear the refrain, “Why should I have to give up —- just because of booze-fueled violence, crime, etc”)

              We have to replace that notion of individualistic dominance, with a return to community values and priorities. So that it’s what’s in the community’s interest that matters – not just someone enjoying a tax cut because poor families don’t deserve to eat because yada yada yada…

              QoT, you can have some of my sugar-free cookies. You’ve earned them.

      • RedLogix 5.2.2

        Mate – sighs.

        The temptation to say something stoopid with the ‘five minutes’ thing was too much eh?

      • weka 5.2.3

        Five minutes, how magnanimous of you CV.

        Myself I have no problem with priortising tier one. But let’s not forget that the reason we are in the shit in the first place is because we have a system that over-privileges white-dudery. We need the voices and smarts of Maori, women, queers, disabled people, Pacifica, the working and under classes etc precisely because those peoples have been actively working against oppressive systems and understand them. They also have been working on solutions for a long time. Further, different kinds of peoples think and behave differently, and that diversity gives us the best chance of doing something constructive and useful.

        The idea that people who are not part of the white-dudery club can have their ghettoed 5 minutes before returning to the real work is patronising, insulting and worst, just really fucking stupid. It’s crucial that all those people are in the centre of what we do because their specific perspectives and skills are crucial to the finding and making of solutions.

        • marty mars

          “different kinds of peoples think and behave differently, and that diversity gives us the best chance of doing something constructive and useful.”

          This is the guts of it for me – if we actually respected the diversity of people and their different ways of framing and finding solutions we would have a good chance of making change that helps people. Imo we have to search out that diversity of view just as we search out the positive – it is an active process that is at least as much about the journey as the destination.

        • geoff

          But let’s not forget that the reason we are in the shit in the first place is because we have a system that over-privileges white-dudery.

          Privileging white dudery is a symptom of how power was constructed in the past, it is not a leading cause of how power is constructed in the present.

          Power has shifted to faceless organisations, (such as multi-national corporations or the NSA), to such a degree that even people who consider themselves cognizant of this fact often do not appreciate the scale of the problem.

          I agree with CV and I think he has highlighted those 3 aspects (Global corp dominance, fossil fuels, climate change) because they are the key issues driving what is happening now in the world, not what was driving things pre-industrial revolution.

          • QoT

            Good point, geoff. Now let’s have a think about what kind of people tend to dominate those faceless organisations. Hint: not overwhelmingly queer women of colour.

            • phillip ure

              is that yr ‘number one priority’..

              ..and i am puzzled..you call for ‘unity’..

              ..then 5 mins later seem to attack anyone who isn’t ‘queer women of colour’..?

              ..perhaps to clarify/put into context yr words..

              ..perhaps you could succumb to ‘listing’..

              ..and give us yr take on the top three issues energies should be directed at..?

              phillip ure..

              • V de Plume

                Can you please explain how pointing out that multi-nationals and powerful govt agencies etc are overwhelmingly run by cis white men (ie, not queer women of colour) is “attacking” cis white men? Is the implication here that describing someone as having societal and institutional power is an attack?

                Also, I don’t believe QoT called for unity. Or listing. Or a “top three issues energies should be directed at”. In fact, I took her point to be just the opposite: that we *don’t* in fact, “succumb to listing” as you ask her to do… that we *don’t* pick “the top three issues” or a “number one priority”… that we can look at things like climate change and neo-feudalism and everything else that’s going to make the world unlivable in fifty years’ time, AND ALSO let people who aren’t cis white males fight against the things that are making their lives unlivable RIGHT NOW.

                • karol

                  In fact, I took her point to be just the opposite: that we *don’t* in fact, “succumb to listing” as you ask her to do… that we *don’t* pick “the top three issues” or a “number one priority”… that we can look at things like climate change and neo-feudalism and everything else that’s going to make the world unlivable in fifty years’ time, AND ALSO let people who aren’t cis white males fight against the things that are making their lives unlivable RIGHT NOW.

                  Ah. Agreed. Also, i think the issues and problems indicate where to look for solutions \: e.g. poverty also has a gender and Maori/Pasifika angle – there are particular issues related to single mothers on benefits, and other issues more directly impacting on male workers within the forestry industry.

                  The casualisation of the workforce has been done by playing on gender differences within our culture. These things need to be understood when looking for solutions.

                  Domestic violence, rape, sexual violence etc, have more to o with patriarchy than capitalist arrangements, but are severely damaging lives right now.

                • @v..well..that’s your reading of my comment..

                  ..i don’t have the energy to refute point by point..save to disagree totally with yr interpretations..

                  ..and as someone succumbing to the listing-urge..

                  ..i have about five issues battling it out for top-spot..

                  ..but this does not mean i am not sympathetic to/will not argue for/support….

                  ..another 15/whatever number..of issues..

                  ..and doesn’t mean i don’t want to hear from those with others top of their list..


                  ..and those ‘lists’ must vary from person to person..

                  ..my pot-smoking vegan-fight..vs old skool beer-quaffing bbq-unionist..

                  ..as examples of being on the same side..

                  ..but very very different..(and viva la differance..!..eh..?..a broad-church..and all that..)

                  ..and once again..who gets to play god/censor..?

                  ..and who can hire and fire them..?


                  ..it’s a slippery fucken slope that one..

                  ..and if we don’t learn from totalitarian-history of both the right and left..

                  ..then we are fucken idiots..

                  ..and this whole brouhaha is like a strawman-argument convention..

                  ..and ultimately both depressing and annoying..

                  ..this much energy being dissapated arguing for the right/rights of..censoring..(!)

                  phillip ure..

                  • V de Plume

                    It might have taken less energy to refute point by point, as I didn’t make many points.

                    1) You said QoT “seemed” to be attacking anyone who wasn’t a queer woman of colour, by observing that they (QWoC) are not the people running faceless organisations. I asked what about that seemed like an attack to you. That’s not a reading of your comment, that’s a question. Please explain how this seems like an attack to you, because I genuinely do not understand.

                    2) No one can hire and fire anyone here as it is a blog and not a company with jobs. The third word of “slippery slope” is “fallacy”. There is not a slippery slope here. There is a moderation policy. It is in writing, it is linked to, you can read it.

                    3) You keep insisting on people having ‘lists’ when the point was that we SHOULDN’T be putting things on a “priority” list and telling people their issues aren’t important enough. That’s why the objection to CV’s initial “okay you can have five minutes for your issues then deal with THIS LIST”. You asked QoT if “queer women of colour” was her “number one priority” when the point of the post is that we can focus on more than one thing at a time. Why do you have this obsession with lists and priorities?

                    Once again, the person who gets to play “censor” (spoiler: it’s not censorship) is the post author. Because those are the rules of the site. It is not a slippery slope. Do you also consider a newspaper editor to be “censoring” people when they choose which letters to the editor to publish?

                  • QoT

                    I simply must raise an eyebrow at the dude who insists on adding “..” to the beginning and end of every sentence fragment complaining about how anyone else chooses to dissipate their energy.

  6. karol 6

    Front foot media/right beat-ups, RL?

    You mean like not buying into, and pandering to their “manban” type beat-ups?

    • Colonial Viper 6.1

      [QoT: You aren’t welcome to comment on this post any more, CV, unless you want to say something which contributes to the discussion at hand instead of merely illustrating it.]

      • KJT 6.1.1

        “This isn’t me telling people to shut up for the sake of unity. It’s not labelling my ideological enemies as Redneck Stormtroopers”.

        Haven’t you just done that above, QOT?

        Yes. I agree we should be concentrating on all aspects of human rights. (I consider human rights a much better term than identity politics). We can multitask.

        I also agree with CV that the right wing is happy for us to concentrate on narrow aspects of human rights while they run off with the money, and the real power.

        Imagine if Maurice Williamson’s speech had been about more support and money for solo mums, for example, instead of something which doesn’t cost anything?

        Read up on South Africa. While they were concentrating on one person, one vote, those who were really in power made sure that there was no way the economic arrangements could be changed.
        Most South Africans are just as powerless as they were before.

        And, I think the Labour caucus should have just come out boldly and said. “We are for equal rights for women, and we are proud of it”. Instead of giving in to the media narrative.,

        • QoT

          I think the situation in South Africa might be the teensiest bit more complex than you portray, KJT. And there are a number of reasons why Maurice Williamson’s speech wasn’t about supporting solo mothers, chief among them because he’s a National Party libertarian douchebag.

          And I haven’t told CV to “shut up for the sake of unity”. I’ve suggested he’s a jackass who doesn’t get to keep derailing every thread with his demands that everyone else shut up because his favourite issues are the most important. This is one post. You will find him on many others. Hell, he can write his own post.

          I’m also not demanding we “concentrate on narrow aspects of human rights”. Identity politics is about far more than marriage equality, and only people like CV insist on limiting its scope in that way. Because he wants people like me to shut up for the sake of unity. Ironic, huh?

          • KJT

            You mean that a National party member, these days, could never advocate for any human rights that cost their supporters money or power, don’t you. Supports what I said.

            As usual QOT you area attacking without reading.

            • QoT

              Nope, I’m pointing out that marriage equality was an issue which wasn’t already clearly divided along party lines. The demonization of solo mothers has been a National Party/ACT totem for decades. Trying to reframe it as being about “human rights” when it’s been framed as an economic issue for a generation means your argument has no basis in reality.

              • KJT

                I think you are being deliberately obtuse here.

                The point is that the right wing have no problem with allowing the left/progressives a few token victories, that don’t cost them money or power, to let us think we are making progress, while they keep the real power. Which is access to most of the wealth.

                • QoT

                  You said:

                  Imagine if Maurice Williamson’s speech had been about more support and money for solo mums, for example, instead of something which doesn’t cost anything?

                  For this argument to work, you have to pretend that the only reason Williamson isn’t advocating for more support for solo mums is cost.

                  Supporting solo mothers is quite obviously an issue which is not about cost, and not about human rights, because the rightwing narrative for years has been about bludgers and lowlifes and poor life choices.

                  • RedLogix

                    because the rightwing narrative for years has been about bludgers and lowlifes and poor life choices

                    Which serves two purposes simultaneously:

                    1. Scapegoating. The narrative of the ‘outsider’ is necessary to cohesion of their propaganda.

                    2. It provided justification for benefits to be kept low. (Cheap is very important to them.)

                • Murray Olsen

                  I think I agree with you here, KJT. What actually worries me more is the number of progressive activists who have allowed themselves to be corralled into fights for these token victories over the years. I see many of them, when fought for in an individualistic way, as admissions of the weakness of the left.

          • karol

            I also agree with CV that the right wing is happy for us to concentrate on narrow aspects of human rights while they run off with the money, and the real power.

            I agree with you that it’s about power – but allocating “money” as the “real power” is part of a fairly traditional masculine discourse.

            In the 21st century, capitalism is central to most power plays. But it isn’t the only source of empowerment.

            A focus on economics over wider humanist issues or other forms of oppression is a part of pretty traditional masculinity. And it largely focuses on some instrumental aspects of economics in the sphere of production and consumption, largely removed from an understanding of the role of the domestic sphere, personal relationships and various social groupings.

            And many on the left have incorporated such a masculinist version of economics into their ways of challenging the corporate plutocracy under which we currently live. It’s interesting that some on the left a very clear about how money is created – largely a social and cultural construct, used to exert power over resources, and other sections of society – but they don’t see how much that is part of a masculinist construction of economics.

            Capitalism arose within a very patriarchal (and imperialist) context and is inextricably interwoven with it. Any person that aims to be successful within it, needed to negotiate these interwoven systems of power, without providing too obvious a threat to either capitalism of patriarchy – it can be seen in the different ways that women like Thatcher, Judith Collins, and, from a more humanist and left wing perspective, Helen Clark negotiated with both capitalism and patriarchy.

            Masculinist economics focuses on production and distribution of resources, while failing to see how it is inextricably intertwined with the power dynamics of unpaid domestic and community labour, and, on the most personal level, sexuality and various kinds of personal relationships.

            Unfortunately, some on the left want to dismantle capitalism (or at least ensure a more equal distribution of wealth within it), while either appeasing traditionally masculine values, or actively supporting them.

            Dismantle capitalism alone, and some will still resort to other ways of exerting power over others – through slavery, physical force, etc, and on a more personal level through gender and sexuality.

            Underlying economics it’s more about power than wealth – wealth is only useful if it provides power and privileges.

        • RedLogix

          Read up on South Africa. While they were concentrating on one person, one vote, those who were really in power made sure that there was no way the economic arrangements could be changed. Most South Africans are just as powerless as they were before.

          An arrangement just as bad for most whites too. The white South African guy I’m working right next to has told me shit I won’t repeat.

          The point KJT is that there is a major strategic lesson to be learnt here. But it’s not that the South Africans should not have pursued ‘one person, one vote’ as a goal is it?

          • KJT

            Of course they were right to pursue universal franchise, never said they weren’t, and we need the QOT’s that keep us aware of what needs to be done, but while they were concentrating on that one issue alone they dropped the ball.

            I know white South Africans that have left, including black sash members, who are disgusted with the domination of, what they hoped would be a much better country, by capital and the wealthy.

            Brash said ” hit them on all fronts before they know what is happening”. Well, if that is the case we need to fight back on all fronts.

        • weka

          “Haven’t you just done that above, QOT?”

          No she didn’t, and this is an important point. Healthy, functional groups don’t allow a single, dominating voice to derail necessary work.

          I’ve not seen CV attempt to meet those of us who disagree with him in any kind of conciliatory or collaborative way. On the contrary in recent weeks he has upped the ante and taken a new tactic of being bluntly dismissive of his natural allies here and posting comments that increasingly look like propaganda from the authoritarian stance. There are others who agree in various ways with CV’s key point, but they’re finding ways of engaging in dialogue that don’t dismiss people they disagree with.

          The Standard has long had a policy of authors moderating their own threads in ways they see fit, and I appreciate the threads that moderated hard, because we don’t get so distracted by all the crap. There is a balance to be had between allowing everyone a voice (not shutting down dissent) and keeping debate functional and useful. For me, it’s 30 years of being in many different situations where allowing everyong a voice has meant work just didn’t get done, so now I am more in favour of the pragmatic approach. The irony here is that one of CV’s main points is that we don’t have time for distractions. On this I completely agree.

          CV can of course still post comments on Open Mike, and I believe he has author access so can put up his own post.

          • KJT

            I don’t see that CV was disagreeing.

            He dared to mention that the right are successfully using “divide and rule”.

            “On the contrary in recent weeks he has upped the ante and taken a new tactic of being bluntly dismissive of his natural allies here and posting comments that increasingly look like propaganda from the authoritarian stance.”
            I feel that way often when I read QOT. Attacking people who are on the same side because they do not use the exact approved words.
            I don’t censor however

            • QoT

              It’s not the right who are dividing and ruling, KJT. It’s people on the left who demand that only their issues get talked about, who label anything else as a “distraction”, and who jump into every single conversation they can to make irrelevant digs about identity politics – i.e. exactly what CV has been doing recently.

              Unless of course you’re suggesting he’s a rightwing plant?

              • KJT

                CV making digs about identity politics is only in your head.

                Neither of us has said we should not pursue human rights for minorities, women, LBGT, and everyone else. Fully support that.

                But, without economic, and there fore, political power, we are at the mercy of the next bunch of ideological nut jobs that may propagandise their way into parliament supported by unlimited funds from the plutocracy.


                America is becoming a third world nation

                Espiner becomes RNZ Morning Report host and Pagani criticises the Standard

                Open mike 31/12/2013

                And for calling me a liar you can get the fuck off this post.]

                • weka

                  “CV making digs about identity politics is only in your head.”

                  You are denying the reality and experience of quite a number of people who regularly post here. What gives you that right? How do you think that will help?

                  “But, without economic, and there fore, political power, we are at the mercy of the next bunch of ideological nut jobs that may propagandise their way into parliament supported by unlimited funds from the plutocracy.”

                  Yes, and I’ll say this slowly because I’m sick of being treated like and idiot. We understand the politics and dymanics of the situation just as well as you do.

              • weka

                QoT’s moderation has to be understood in the context of the past few months. It’s not about a couple of sentences in one comment. It’s about a pattern of behaviour that I suspect a number of us here see as destructive.

                “I don’t censor however”

                That’s fine, and you are entitled to not censor. But did anything I wrote about a long history of working in groups that got undermined by making sure that everyone had a voice mean something to you? What’s your experience with that?

                • @ weka..

                  ..you are out of one side of yr mouth saying ‘everyone must have a voice’..

                  ..and out of the other..you are saying:..’except those whose voices i don’t want to be heard’..

                  ..what is wrong with using yr intellect to dismantle ‘wrong’-ideas..?

                  ..instead of ‘banning’/censoring them..

                  phillip ure..

                  • weka

                    I haven’t said either of those things phil. Please explain what you mean and link to some specific comments I have made so that I can understand.

                    Please also understand that (a) I didn’t write the standard’s moderation policy, (b) that I have no power to moderate on this blog and (c) were say CV to put up a post I would fully support his right to moderate as he saw fit. I might express an opinion about that moderation, but I wouldn’t challenge his right to do it.

                    I think you are confusing and conflating many things I have said. I’m not surprised, the level of listening and communication on ts is pretty poor at the moment. But I remain committed to good communication and am trying to find a way back to that.

                    • @ weka..

                      the last para of yr 12.25pm..

                      ..and even in yr question @ 12.28..you advocate for the rights of individuals to censor..(??)

                      ..and a hat-tip to yr last sntence @12.28pm..

                      phillip ure..

                    • weka

                      “@ weka..

                      the last para of yr 12.25pm..

                      ..and even in yr question @ 12.28..you advocate for the rights of individuals to censor..(??)

                      ..and a hat-tip to yr last sntence @12.28pm..”

                      Still not making any sense phil. I feel I’ve explained pretty clearly where I stand, and I’m not interested in relitigating your assertions that I said something that I didn’t.

                      btw, I think you bring some interesting perspectives, but I’m not going to respond as much. I have a cognitive disability and your posts are just really hard to read because of how you use type.

                  • QoT

                    Here’s the problem, phillip: you and others keep complaining about censorship. When the simple fact of the matter is that, for this one post on this one occasion, a few people have been told they’re not allowed to dominate the conversation at the expense of others.

                    Take a look at the Open Mike. There those people are, happily leaving all the “QoT is the meanest bitch ever” comments they like.

                    People who are from marginalized groups, who have already had to put in more effort just to be part of the discussion, are not obliged to educate, reform, or burn energy and goodwill on pointless arguments. No blogger is obliged to give a platform to people who break the rules and derail the conversation.

                    This is funny to me, though, because whenever someone like Matthew Hooton or Pete George come to The Standard, everyone cheers when they’re told to fuck off and stop derailing the conversation. Everyone gets the idea that lprent doesn’t have to put work into creating a space for rightwing trolls to spit in our faces. Suddenly when it’s a different part of the left saying “hey dudes, can we have a turn please?” the screams of CENSORSHIP!!!! are instantaneous.

                    • @ qot..1st para..

                      ..”a few people have been told they’re not allowed to dominate the conversation at the expense of others..”

                      and the censor gets to make that oh so subjective call..?

                      ..surely you can see that one persons’ ‘dominator’..is anothers’ ‘robust/enlightening debate of the merits of competing ideas..for observors/readers..?

                      ..and who gets to make that (subjective) call..is where it all goes gooey..

                      ..para three..

                      ..i’m sorry..i can’t comprehend what you are saying here..are you giving automatic censorship rights to ‘marginalised’-folk..?

                      ..(hey..!..i’m a vegan ex-con..!..that’s fairly ‘marginalised’..eh..?..can i be a censor too..?..)

                      ..i say that to illustrate the paucities i see in that argument..

                      ..yes..of course everyone must have their voice heard..

                      ..but not at the cost of censoring others..

                      ..that is a price too high to pay..

                      “..No blogger is obliged to give a platform to people who break the rules and derail the conversation. ”

                      once again we run smack into that subjective-judgement wall..

                      who gets to make that call/those definitions..?..(c.f.previous robust-debate point..)

                      para four:..

                      “..whenever someone like Matthew Hooton or Pete George come to The Standard, everyone cheers when they’re told to fuck off and stop derailing the conversation..”

                      (as (paraphrasing) what tonto said to the lone ranger when surrounded by other hostile indians..)

                      ‘what’s with the ‘we’/(everyone)..?..white man..?..’..)

                      ..no..i do not cheer at dissenting voices being banned for the crime of ‘derailing’..

                      “.. Suddenly when it’s a different part of the left saying “hey dudes, can we have a turn please?” the screams of CENSORSHIP!!!! are instantaneous..”

                      i’m sorry..could you please re-word that..?..(if you can be bothered..)..

                      ..i fail to see the connections made/attempted..on a basic logic/understanding level..

                      ..phillip ure..


                    • QoT []

                      “Censor”. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

                    • weka

                      Ok phil, so I take it you are opposed to all moderation on this blog?

                    • V de Plume

                      Phillip, who gets to make that subjective call is the author of the blog post. I read the site policy before I commented on this post, and it states quite clearly that authors get to moderate their posts. That’s pretty straightforward. It might pay you to refresh your memory if you haven’t read it for a while, you may find it answers a lot of these questions for you.

                      As QoT pointed out, CV et al are not ‘censored’, as they are quite freely able to make their comments not only elsewhere on the internet, but even elsewhere *on this very site*. And in fact *are doing so*. I’m not sure why you think ‘free speech’ is at stake because they are quite clearly, vigorously, still enjoying that right.

                    • weka

                      “I’m not sure why you think ‘free speech’ is at stake because they are quite clearly, vigorously, still enjoying that right.”

                      It’s ideology. Trumps reality every time.

      • weka 6.1.2

        +1000 to that bit of moderating QoT. Would be good to see if we can focus on where we go from here rather than getting into another tedious round of defense.

        • KJT

          You mean of people who basically agree talking past each other.

          • weka


            • RedLogix

              We are on the same side weka. We have a lot of common ground and I’ve personally learnt a great deal while we all blundered about exploring it. I’ve still got a lot more to learn.

              Of course we are different people, different lives and experiences and we go about things differently. This year I want these differences to be our strength.

              • weka

                I appreciate that RL. Sometimes your responses to what I write make me wonder if I wasn’t understood that well, but like you I am open to us continuing to learn.

                QoT’s states that the issue is to stop marginalising certain politics and groups of people. I think there is also a deeper problem around communication and collaboration.

      • phillip ure 6.1.3

        oh dear..!

        ..the banning of dissenting voices always brings me out in a cold-sweat..

        ..that’s enough of this conversation for me..

        ..i’m outta here..!

        ..phillip ure

    • RedLogix 6.2

      Yes – a great example karol. The Labour caucus mis-handled (like so many other things) that very poorly.

      All it needed was a simple plain statement from the leader to say that it was a perfectly legitimate conference remit. That it was Labour Party democracy in action. And that while the Party had yet to decide if it was the best way to achieve the goal – the goal of gender balance itself was not in question. It is a goal we are proud of and one that we will always be exploring new ways of living up to and honouring.

      Instead we got this piss-weak equivocation that bought into the attackers meme and burned everyone off.

  7. Ad 7

    The prime logic of this post for me is that the great majority of those who volunteer around national elections in progressive politics are women, young people, unemployed, Pacifica, gays, unionists, and other less than fully empowered. They are the base. I don’t always agree with them politically, but I know the preciousness of volunteer labour in campaigns that have a chance to change for good. So the call for separation of policy and politics is accurate and always necessary.

  8. red blooded 8

    Good on you. QoT. There’s a difference between healthy debate and dysfunctional anger and attack. We need to remind ourselves about what links the concerns of those of us who identify as Left – it’s a desire to live in a fair, inclusive, functioning society. A sense that we are connected to each other (and to our planet), not just separate and competing individuals, driven to get the best and too bad about the rest.

    Side note (and example) – I saw a lot of personalised abuse of Jose Pagani on this site the other day, and while I agree that she has erratic judgement (ably demonstrated in the original post, which listed some decisions that seem hard to reconcile), I have to say that her plea for a more caring and less personally abusive approach to debate on the Left was not all that different from what is being said here. She used different words because she’s a different person, but the message was basically that we should live by the values we espouse (and yes, I know that she doesn’t always reach that ideal), and that the tendency of the Left to cannabalise itself plays into the hands of the Right.

    Please don’t respond to this with another set of comments about Pagani. This is just a recent example of the tendency I’m commenting on. I’m not a particular fan of hers, I don’t admire her political judgement, but it’s possible to say that without the level of vitriol that was dumped into that discussion.

    It’s fine to debate with vigour and passion, but there’s a difference between that and viciousness, and that line is sometimes crossed on this site. Plus, we don’t all have to have exactly the same weighting of issues, so long as there are broadly shared principals and a desire to get things done.

    [QoT: I suggest that in future you not try to relitigate a conversation and then dictate what people can or can’t say in response. Josie Pagani is not saying the same things as me, she’s demanding that people stop pointing out her severe lack of a clue or solid leftwing principles, and yes, I will be “vitriolic” when I see the left screw the pooch following advice from people like her and then blame “identity politics” for it.]

    • red blooded 8.1

      And here we go… I don’t give a bugger about Pagani – I am not trying to ‘relitigate’; I was simply giving an example. It seems a bit quixotic of you to be asking for a accepting approach from others, emphasising that there can be unity in diversity, and then insisting that it’s OK to attack those who identify as Left but don’t have what you regard as ‘solid leftwing principles’. How is that different from CV identifying his list of priority areas then saying that anyone who doesn’t make those their own priorities deserves exactly 5 minutes?

      • QoT 8.1.1

        You didn’t give “an example”, you advocated for Josie Pagani’s interpretation of things. Josie Pagani’s distinct lack of a leftwing philosophy is already being thoroughly discussed here:

        Espiner becomes RNZ Morning Report host and Pagani criticises the Standard

        There is a world of difference between criticising and demanding silence, especially when the people demanding are already in privileged positions and the people being silenced are oppressed.

        • red blooded

          Bullshit. I used an example of a discussion line that had degenerated into personal attack and abuse. I referenced it because it was a recent example – there are (as I’m sure you know), plenty of others. To be honest, it is a tendency that I find very off-putting sometimes and one that sometimes sees the genuine contest of ideas swallowed up.

          I’m not interested in discussing Pagani’s political viewpoints. I’ve already said that she doesn’t represent my view. (Hmm… I do seem to recall quite a few people “demanding silence” from her, though…)

          How about trying to see the intent of the original comment (which was to endorse what you had originally said in your post)? However, I think I would also ask you to try to see the incongruity of insisting that there is one “correct” leftwing viewpoint and this is the only viewpoint that should be advocated in public and identified as Left, while at the same time arguing that people shouldn’t be silenced and that we all have something of value to contribute towards the greater leftwing movement for social justice and inclusiveness.

          • QoT

            I’m not saying there is “one correct” leftwing way of thinking. I am saying that Josie Pagani is factually wrong, a shit writer, and not someone who should have her level of authority and credibility in the mainstream as a “normal” or “standard” example of leftwing thinking.

            Take a different example. There are radical feminists who are incredibly transphobic. They’re still on the spectrum of feminism, at one extreme end, but I’m equally vocal about not treating their viewpoints as representing all feminist thought.

            But don’t have a fucking moan when you introduce a topic into a discussion and people comment on it. Especially don’t try to pre-empt people’s disagreement by saying “but don’t comment on the thing I just brought up”.

            • red blooded

              Please note, “the thing I just brought up” was the tendency of some people on this site to do exactly what you have ended up doing – stomping on someone who questions or disagrees with them and getting abusive. Responding to that isn’t “having a fucking moan”, it’s pointing out a discrepancy between the standard of behaviour you are requesting of others (a request I was initially impressed by) and the standard you have displayed here.

              To quote your own words:
              “But we may be our own worst enemies.

              This isn’t me telling people to shut up for the sake of unity. It’s not labelling my ideological enemies as Redneck Stormtroopers.”

              It seems to me that you’ve been pretty quick to label and to look for an enemy in what started off as an approving comment. That’s a bit sad, and more than a bit disappointing. Feel free to respond, but I’ve spent enough of my time today on this to-and-froing.

              • QoT

                red blooded, you brought up Josie Pagani. You then demanded no one respond to your comments about Josie Pagani. Yes, you will get “stomped on” for demanding, as a commenter, that you dictate how conversations go. I’m the author of this post. Yes, this means I get to decide how this conversation goes. If you visit the Open Mike post, you’ll see that Colonial Viper, for example, has quite freely continued to comment – he just doesn’t get to do it here. This “discrepancy” is necessary so we don’t have exactly this kind of derailing shit cluttering up every single damn post on this site. Don’t like it? Guess what, you don’t have to comment on my posts.

            • Psycho Milt

              But don’t have a fucking moan when you introduce a topic into a discussion and people comment on it.

              Good advice. One could even extend it to not deleting their comments, banning them from the thread, telling them to fuck off etc.

              • QoT

                It’s not the same thing, PM, and I think you can spot the difference.

              • @ qot..+ weka..

                and what some people call ‘moderation’..

                ..others call ‘censorship’..

                ..(especially if dissenting views are told to ‘fuck off!’..)

                ..and in general..with the qualifications of slander etc..taken as a given..

                ..that within the course of normal discourse..

                ..no..i do not believe in ‘moderation’/censorship..

                ..i prefer to see arguments stand or fall on their merits..

                ..and to let the audience be the judge of the writers’-words..

                ..not an anonymous/unaccountable/unable to be questioned ‘moderator’..

                ..blocking those words from even being said/seen..

                ..so..yep..that’s where i stand on that one..

                ..phillip ure..

                • V de Plume

                  Others may call it ‘censorship’, but they would be misusing the word ‘censorship’.

                  QoT is not anonymous, and presumably not unaccountable (I imagine authors can be removed from TS), and certainly not unable to be questioned because that’s all you’ve been doing here since you said at 8:38 this morning

                  “oh dear..!

                  ..the banning of dissenting voices always brings me out in a cold-sweat..

                  ..that’s enough of this conversation for me..

                  ..i’m outta here..!

                  ..phillip ure”

  9. “And it’s going to take people working in different areas on different parts of the plan to make it all happen.”

    Yes I think this is essential – the areas that bind us together are the important ones not the areas where we are different. Big year we are in now – time to take that fake wanker key and his mates, from whatever party they profess, down.

    • RedLogix 9.1

      marty – totally.

      This time the goal is too big for anyone person or group. We’re just going to have to hack away at the bit’s of it within our grasp and help each other where we can.

  10. The Outrider 10

    Have been reflecting on this after seeing contacts in other forums being harangued and patronised by said elitists. I feel there is a real scope for something along the lines of a Council of Social Justice and Equality (ignore the name, it just encapsulates the purpose) to be set up and organised by left-wing activists, many of whom have been tirelessly working on these issues individually and in small clusters for aeons despite frustrating obstacles and setbacks. Progress could be advanced if such an organisation transcended party loyalties and had the ability to be inclusive yet decisive. To succeed it would need to be run as a face to face concept and not via social media clickfest An online presence would be necessary but as an organising tool used primarily to promote actual work being done. It may sound like a pipe dream but it could be done. I’m in.

    • QoT 10.1

      I really don’t think another committee/council/working group is going to help. They tend to reinforce existing power structures (especially if you demand a “face to face concept” which limits many people’s ability to contribute) and get bogged down in procedural fuckery.

      We have existing political parties with various policy processes. We have existing activist and community groups. What we need is for people to acknowledge that being Diet National and shitting on vulnerable groups in society hasn’t worked for the past two elections, and that as glorious and world-changing as macroeconomics and fiscal policy can be, people vote for a team which looks able to govern, and concrete policies which they can see will benefit them – even if it doesn’t benefit them directly.

      This is my beef with the way some leftwingers moan about marriage equality being a “distraction”. Sure, in practical terms it directly gave certain rights to a small, specific minority. But plenty of other people – the majority of people in NZ – supported it anyway because it said something positive about our country and because we give a shit about other people being treated fairly. It was the right thing to do, and frankly getting it passed when we’re in Opposition so we can’t amend the Reserve Bank Act anyway was a fucking brilliant move.

      • The Outrider 10.1.1

        Fair enough, but your post was in some ways a call to arms without a template. What do you propose that we all do to ensure the creation off a fair and just society?

        • QoT

          Um … have a plan, stop shutting out identity politics, get the voters to buy in to that plan. Like the post says.

          • KJT

            [QoT: This is the FIFTH comment you have left after being told, by a moderator, that you were no longer welcome to comment on this post. This is telling in terms of your sense of entitlement and disrespect for obeying the rules. Fuck. Off.]

          • The Outrider

            I am with you 100 per cent and found your post inspiring but believe the debate needs to focus on how to achieve these aims as well as what needs to be done. I look forward to your future posts to see how this develops. Keep up the great work.

            • weka

              I also want to discuss the how. What are your thoughts on this Outrider?

              • The Outrider

                One aspect is outlined in my original comment above. I have a number of friends and contacts with affiliations to most of our left leaning parties and organisations, and believe there are ways we can harness all that collective good will and desire for positive change, not necessarily in a council (purely a label of convenience) but in some form that goes beyond clicking ‘Like’ or sharing feel good memes on Facebook etc. There is nothing wrong with those activities but they are limited in their scope for achieving useful outcomes.

                Forums like this one are very helpful for bringing like-minded people together and sharing/debating ideas. I am very interested in translating such ideas into meaningful action as the stakes are too high to allow this government to have unfettered access to the dismantling of our democratic rights. There is still a place for real time, face to face activism that utilises the power of social media rather than living entirely within it. Lives and our country are being crushed out there by real people and real policies. In my opinion it is time to step out from behind our screens from time to time and meet these challenges head on together, in the flesh.

                • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill)

                  Excellent & constructive comment The Outrider.

                  I think that alienation is a big part of how these utterly useless policies have been enabled to be pursued for so long. The Standard allows one to realise that there are many like-minded people around (if not somewhat prone to bickering 🙂 ), which is really excellent and counteracts the media and those in powers’ attempts at alienating this type of like-mindedness.

                  I’m unsure how one would translate the ideas expressed here and elsewhere into reality – yet like your ideas on this – and it certainly seems time to act. You appear to convey a ‘can do’ attitude. This is great and what we need to focus on.

      • dancerwaitakere 10.1.2

        But was simply extending the institution of marriage (and all of its associated privilege) to one group actually going to be looked back on in 100 years as a being a giant leap forward for challenging the inequalities that exist in a capitalist world?

        I mean surely if we were actually being realists we would abolish marriage from the law, removing its ability to be used by the state to promote an idea about a ‘good relationship’, and thereby allowing anyone to have whatever ceremony and call their relationship whatever the hell they want.

        In the same way that having quotas for boards might mean that 5 women earn 6 figure salaries, does not do a whole lot to challenge the system as those women just become a part of capitalisms ugly wealthy elite. Where as paying low wage women (actually ALL low wage workers) a living wage, as part of a re-structered economy would actually be CHANGING SHIT.

        Isn’t the catch cry smashing patriarchy? why settle with tinkering around the edges. This is social democracies failures.

        Use the means of production to challenge and reform equality, because ‘identity’ issues are all a reflection of the same ugly system that keeps a few people very very wealthy and screws everyone else over.

        QOT, we are on your side, why are you pillaring people on this post? That isn’t going to help anyone win in 2014.

        • karol

          Actually I think extending marriage to same sex couples was only a minor victory for LGBTI people – especially considering the decline in significance of marriage in our society. It doesn’t really tackle the underlying homophobia in our society – but small steps should still be celebrated. it does give many LGBTI people more confidence in themselves and takes of some pressure. It could also mean that some low income same sex couples experience a little less negative pressure on their lives.

          I agree that it would be better to totally restructure society: and that would mean recognising the value to the economy of all the unpaid work done in families and communities, largely done by women. It would mean totally changing the occupational system away from one that is masculine based, and one that values child birth, child care and other nurturing activities.

          Characterising feminism as being about equal numbers of women and men on corprorate boards is a way to reduce the breadth and depth of what feminism, especially left wing feminism is about.

          There’s been a lot of muttering on the left (and on some TS discussions) indicating pressure to just STFU about any gender issues, and focus on ones that don’t upset a lot of guys, or people who support the current system, where traditional masculine values are still dominant: and lack of recognition of how patriarchy and capitalism are strongly intertwined.

          • Lanthanide

            “It could also mean that some low income same sex couples experience a little less negative pressure on their lives.”

            I’m curious what you mean by this. Because de-facto partners have pretty much all of the same rights as married ones; the only significant differences I’m aware of is when it comes to adoption, and that’s a product of our adoption law being so woefully ancient.

            • karol

              I was thinking of social pressures resulting from homophobia. Apart from adoption, I think the main positive from marriage equality is that of institutional acceptance of same sex relationships – at least superficially.

              Homophobia is still pretty strong within NZ society – look at the kinds of things Tamihere says for instance, and accepted by some/many on the left and right.

              • Lanthanide

                Ok, not really sure why you invoked “low income” then, except possibly as a route towards “working-class” or something; the people who are likely to live and work in a less accepting community.

                • karol

                  No I wasn’t thinking of low income people as being less accepting – but just saying that low income people already have enough pressures undermining them, and homophobia just adds more.

                  • Lanthanide

                    Ok, got ya. Still think that’s a bit odd to single them out in this context though, because even someone who isn’t feeling any ‘pressures’, but who is gay, is liable to then feel homophobic pressure.

                    • karol

                      yes. Agreed and homophobia damages lives no matter what the income.

                      Also, the privileging of heterosexual relationships that women are often kept in a secondary position – as domestic carers and supporters of the hierarchical workforce.

        • QoT

          Marriage equality and the associated changes in how same-sex couples and their children are treated absolutely is a big step forward in our society’s development away from capitalist/patriarchal notions of “family”. I see plenty of merit in the idea of the state having nothing to do with marriage, but we aren’t anywhere near there yet, and in the meantime I am quite happy for parents and children to be treated equally.

          I think you mean “pillorying”. And I already acknowledged that the “broad church” of the left essentially wants the same things. I haven’t told anyone to stop discussing industrial relations or fiscal reform. On the other hand, marginalized groups have been frequently told to shut up and sit down and stop making a fuss over issues of basic human rights. Maybe you want to rethink which of those attitudes is going to “help anyone win in 2014”.

          • dancerwaitakere

            Yes I did mean “pillorying”, but alas my auto correct was turned on.

            QOT you have missed the point. I would argue that if you talk to most of the people who you have had a go at tonight, they totally want to achieve the same changes in society that you do. But instead of being reliant on having patchwork solutions to problems (not saying that is what you want, but it is the tendency of identity politics, which is NOT mutually exclusive to feminism or any other social movement), they are actually acknowledging the seriousness of inequality in all of its forms by highlighting the need to do something which is the root of the problem (in every case)… the economy.

            Privilege reinforces economic power. In a capitalistic society it is money that is pursued by those who wish to retain their power. They will then also pursue ways to assert that power, and retain their wealth, over other groups, manifesting itself in the range of social issues that exist today.

            Lets look at Kevin Rudd apologizing to the indigenous population of Australia. I totally agree that the apology was the right thing to do. It was arguably a modern liberal party pursuing an ‘identity politics issue’. But for all of the effort that went into staging the apology, was there much thought going into the fact that the economy could be restructured in a way that could mean lot more to the lives of people who have been systematically oppressed, than an apology.

            That doesn’t mean the apology wasn’t a good humane thing to do. But fluffy liberalism that makes privileged people feel better, actually just reinforces the power of the elite.

            • QoT

              See, you say “but patchwork solutions!!!!!” in a comment on a post which specifically, deliberately and clearly states that what’s needed is an overarching strategy.

              And you’re surprised I don’t assume good faith on your part?

              • dancerwaitakere

                Ugh. I also specifically said “not saying that is what you want”, because I read the post.

                Also I did not say “but patchwork solutions!!!!!” …. I actually said “patchwork solutions”.

                I actually agree with your original post. I just find the treatment of this discussion, by yourself, to be quite horrible. And guess what, on a blog, you can respond to the discussion at large, which often moves beyond the original post. I wouldn’t have commented if I didn’t find your response to people, who were adding to the discourse, to be relatively unreasonable.

            • karol

              by highlighting the need to do something which is the root of the problem (in every case)… the economy.

              Actually, the economy is not the root of every problem: the root is that some groups seek power and privilege over others – the main way this is done today is through capitalism – through economic arrangements. But this is also supported and motivated by patriarchal values: competitive, instrumental, insensitive to the ways cultural practice and the daily conduct of human relations damage lives.

              If you only recognise the economic (monetary-financial, resource allocation) part of that, then the underlying problem remains no matter how egalitarian the economic arrangements. And meanwhile – wives and children still get bashed, women (and others) still get raped, and too often concerns of the most dominant men get met and attended to, while those of many others get ignored.

              And these cultural practices are continuing on this site – with some of the most dominant male voices demanding that their priorities be attended to, while those asking for attention to the power dynamics of gender relations, are told to get to the back of the bus.

              And on other threads, CV twists and turns and just keeps commenting and commenting and slipping around, demanding that we accept his priorities, accepting no criticism.

              The same guy who said:

              Who cares if marginally more men have one of the too few life rafts than women in the patriarchy? The Titanic is fucking sinking. Most of the passengers aren’t going to make it, male or female.

              And then yesterday was saying:


              Thanks for the misrepresentation of my definition of boutique identity politics.

              Which are to do with policies – albeit sometimes necessary ones – which will never provide concrete benefits to more than a very small % of the population, and sometimes a vanishingly small % of the population. Hence the term “boutique.” While leaving issues of economic justice for the bottom 50% of the population largely or wholly untouched.

              Then claimed that attending to the economic issues of the many will sort out most of the other issues for the minority. While also claiming that survival of the species so pressing, no other issues should be attended to in the present. And that, anyway, gender issues can’t be solved by parliamentary politcs, only economic ones can. And then claimed he wasn’t marginalising issues of the minorities, while continuing to say just that:

              karol – I know what can be solved by parliamentary politics in relatively short time frames. Unemployment, poverty, and economic sovereignty is amongst them. Your issues around many women being a single step away from outright poverty can be ameliorated by initiatives like a UBI and policies of full or emergency employment, for instance.

              As for issues of domestic violence, sexual violence, homophobia, etc. I have no confidence that parliamentary politics can tackle those issues with much more than glancing efficacy, at least in the short to medium term. You clearly have more faith than that however.

              Also, minority issues are just that – I am staggered that you think life-damaging bigotry against any minority should be ignored because they are only a minority.


              Where did I say that anything like this should be ignored. Get over yourself. What I am saying however is that issues of economic justice for the bottom 50% must take precedence over issues which affect a tiny % of the population, not the other way around.

              Surely it is not too difficult for you to accept that more than one thing at a time can be focussed on.

              And the last sentence is just too hypocritical from the person that wants to attend to economic issues first and foremost.

              So no matter what we say, CV accepts no criticism, twists, turns and sidesteps, and continues with an endless stream of comments saying we should all attend to his priorities, as he says, and ignore, basically feminist issues.

              Underlying it is a masculinist concept of economics, that does not accept any other oppression is really worth the NZ left to attend to currently.

              • just saying

                When you get members of one sub-group trying to talk about things that are important to them, and you get members of another sub-group insisting that the others concerns are not really important, that even their own feelings caused by the other’s expression of what matters to them is more important than those “exaggerated” issues themselves, it really doesn’t bode well for that utopia after the revolution – not for many, many people (one way or another the majority, in fact). It feels more like “meet the new boss, just like the old boss”.

                I know CV is on my side in many things, but a few things lately have got me reevaluating my own activism, and one of them is this: I’m done with being patronised by left-wing men in the movement – I’ve literally done my time. I know there is an urgent need to get off the sidelines and take action and “united we stand divided we fall” etc. but this is becoming a real stumbling block for me. Why should I be a good little soldier fighting for a movement in which things that are important to me and impact on my life (but not yours) don’t actually matter that much at all, but what matters to you, even if that happens to be the content of your freaking toothpaste, trump my trivial boutique concerns every single time because they matter to you?

                • Bill

                  For me you’ve somewhat banged the problem with operating through groups on the head there. The larger group will dominate the smaller groups. In this case I guess we’re merely looking at numbers of people identifying with a particular group – but it could be access to resources or other criteria that lead to one group and the concerns it espouses gaining dominance or a louder voice in relation to the others.

                  Take away the group setting – where groups interact and compete for oxygen – and it’s possible that divisions disappear…each person can only have so much influence where groups don’t thrive – and each person brings a richer and often multi-facetted perspective to any issue than will ever be possible where the voices and experiences of people are subjected to the process of homogenisation/simplification inherent to any traditional group.

                  Kinda comes down to many people = many voices or many people = one voice.

                • karol

                  <but a few things lately have got me reevaluating my own activism, and one of them is this: I’m done with being patronised by left-wing men in the movement – I’ve literally done my time.</i

                  Exactly. I've started remembering why women started organising separately from the mainstream left in the 60s & 70s. Why waste one's time having to repeat, ad nauseum the same old arguments to people not wanting to listen?

                • QoT

                  This is very much how I think!

        • phillip ure

          dance waitakere +1..

          phillip ure..

      • Mr Tank 10.1.3

        QoT – I’m scanning the comments and kinda paying attention (you know like maybe kinda etc) I love seeing the debate on this site – particularly since I find I don’t need to comment as some other (more dedicated soul) goes and makes my point for me. Any way I like your point about the gay marriage thing being of little direct benefit to the vast majority yet of benefit to all of us as it speaks to how we ALL like to think of ourselves. Nicely done! Now as to the thing about the Reserve Bank Act I’ll assume that as I continue to scroll one of the other sterling contributors will have parsed the sentence and will seek to hold you to account as to WHAT THE HELL DO YOU MEAN? Or maybe not – now that I pause to reflect – after all – I figure these folks know your views on most subjects! Anyway – If I were Labour Leader I’d be going the Reserve Bank as soon as they raise interest rates and leveraging that into a policy debate that provides the NZ public with a real Left Wing Alternative. There is no justification for being the first nation in the world to raise interest rates since the GFC. Not if you have more arrows in your policy pack than just monetarisms sad fuck up of a solution…Happy New Year Comrades!

        • QoT

          Amending the Reserve Bank Act is simply an idea I’ve seen tossed around here. It’s not my area of expertise, it’s just an example I used of things which aren’t my pet issues but other people are thinking about and working on.

  11. Chooky 11

    QoT….I like your post!!! ( my New Years resolution was not to comment or get into arguments here any more because I am too busy…but I have to say this)

    It is unequivocally a bloody good post! Norman Kirk and Helen Clark would agree !

  12. Chooky 12

    I also have to say that this year there will be attacks on blogs like this from people who are not what they seem ie they will be pretending to be Left and for the little people Labour should be representing ……. but are in fact working for their own monetary and vested interest groups …..and will have more vested in Key’s Nact agenda than what appears….so severe moderation is going to be very important…

    Labour must be a broad church …as it once was under Norman Kirk…In fact he is a very good yardstick….above pettiness and faction fighting and able to inspire all New Zealanders of good heart for justice, dignity( non-exploitation) , and equality towards a true Labour ( /Green /Mana / New Zealand First) ….2014 Election victory for all New Zealanders…..

  13. Sacha 13

    A good start will be Labour and the Greens coming out with a couple of joint policy positions early in the year – to show they can work together.

    As for the broader left, until people grasp the impact our lack of cohesion and cooperation has on the real people and communities we supposedly serve, the current destructive bunch of righties will keep winning and exercising power. If that prospect is not enough to get some folk to pull their heads in, then the rest of us need to minimise their influence.

    • weka 13.1

      “A good start will be Labour and the Greens coming out with a couple of joint policy positions early in the year – to show they can work together.”

      Is that on the cards?

      • Sacha 13.1.1

        I’m being optimistic saying ‘will’ rather than ‘would’.

        Maybe people connected with those parties can tell us?

        • weka

          Oh, damn, had my hopes up there for a minute 🙂

          I’m a GP member, but not involved in the party, and I’ve not not heard anything like this being planned. I wish it were so. Tricky for the GP though, because part of their attraction is their difference from Labour.

  14. Treetop 14

    Many issues are important from the micro to the macro when it comes to improving the daily life of people on many levels.

    Sometimes people just do not stop to think about the smallest difficulty that a person has e.g they know how to use an eftpos machine but they do not know how to use an ATM. To protect the person from theft they need to learn how to use an ATM.

    Increasingly I think that people who have a problem are not being listened to by the government as to why they have the problem. This is so evident when it comes to housing. Poverty and stress will be halved when people have decent affordable housing.

    A them and us attitude is what divides society and not being willing to listen and deliver, further divides socitey.

    To win the 2014 election Labour need to listen to find out what the main problems are and to deliver policy which is going to improve the lives of those who vote for them.

  15. Pete 15

    I think I heard Mike Williams say once that an election was a contest between two narratives: Don’t risk it all and It’s time for a change. Now we are already hearing that 2014 is going to be the big year for economic growth. Mainly from milk and the Christchurch rebuild. The government and its surrogates will keep on pushing that.

    I believe the narrative coming from the Left has to be one of security in an uncertain world. Key is a dealmaker – Warners, Sky, Chorus. He likes the uneven playing field. He likes allowing those with the means to speculate regardless of the consequences on people’s live – through cavalier health and safety enfforcement, oppressive employment law, disregard for the environment and so on.

    The Left should point to a country where people can depend on a fair society, where they’re in a position to plan and know what to expect. Where people are safe and their rights are respected. Our problem is that is also a boring vision. Good governance is boring and predictable. This whole election will be like a casino versus a library.

    • Sacha 15.1

      A party in the library, perhaps. There’s an exciting story to tell about a confident nation with smart sustainable enterprises both business and social.

    • kenny 15.2

      Good points Pete.

      ‘Don’t risk it all’ would mainly worry those who have something to lose (the ‘Have’s), and ‘It’s time for a change’ requires a clear set of differences in policy from the Nat’s which people can see will benefit themselves. The so-called economic recovery will be a jobless one I’m sure.

      I think enough people now recognize how naked the ’emperor’ really is, but it is up to the Left to convince the voters that THEY have the answers which will create a fairer, more equal society where everyone (including the Right) feels a part of. To my mind we are not far enough left yet and too many of the Labour caucus are still influenced by neo-liberal ideas. This year we have to finalise policy as a left-leaning group with the Green’s/NZ First/Mana – (why not, if we have to consult/talk to each other after the election, why not before). Once we have our policies in place we then have to select candidates who believe in them.

      Big job? You bet!

      While I’m here I may as well put forward two proposals I’ve been thinking about recently:

      1. Make superannuation and all benefits tax free.

      2. Make it illegal for Government to borrow money. The government is the only organisation which should be legally entitled to ‘print’ money, so why should it have to borrow? If it needs to borrow $300 million dollars (at interest) why should it not be allowed to ‘print’ this amount interest- free and at no other cost other than that of production? This money can then be spent directly into the economy, debt-free.

      The neo-liberals have had their way for over 30 years and look what they have left the world with – time for them and their big ideas to go!

  16. Will@Welly 16

    Not sure who QOT is, but whoever that person is, deserves a big thanks for starting off a much needed piece of conversation. Then the comments descend into a diatribe of infighting and nothingness. Wow. So who are we opposing. The National Party and Act are the opposition, but wait, they are the Government, the Greens/Labour/Mana & NZ First are in the Opposition.
    So come election time, we have to convince voters that our policies are better that those of the right, we have to get those people out of their houses to vote, we have to motivate them to get on the electoral rolls, we have to show them that ours is not a brighter future, but one that is tangible and offers real hope. So we can argue and bicker amongst ourselves as much as we like, but that won’t inspire one disenfranchaised voter to caste his or her vote against the right.
    F**k me, all I can see, with all this infighting and procrastination, is in 6 – 10 months time, John Key, Steven Joyce and Bill English laughing all the way to the ballot box, as the left tries to argue which policy is right to present to the electorate. Old snake oil won’t give a rats.

  17. greywarbler 17

    I object to other bloggers coming on to this site and limiting the people who like to comment here. We don’t want censorship being imposed willy nilly by other bloggers – not by QOT, Whaleoil, not by Bomber Bradbury, not by anyone who is too narrow focussed and domineering.

    • karol 17.1

      And yet, some have been doing their best to derail and/or silence any expression of gender politics.

      It’s not censorship so much as ensuring a particular line of discussion can happen without some continuing to sabotage the discussion and trying to silence others. The people excluded can continue their line of argument elsewhere – and will take every opportunity to do it.

      not by Bomber Bradbury, not by anyone who is too narrow focussed and domineering.

      Sounds like some of the behaviour exhibited here of late by CV.

      • phillip ure 17.1.1

        “..And yet, some have been doing their best to derail and/or silence any expression of gender politics. ..”


        ..since i have been reading here..i have not seen that..

        ..and possibly slightly thicker-skins might be in order..?

        ..y’know..!..it’s only words..!..the debating of ideas..!

        ..take a chill-pill..smoke a joint..


        ..but seriously..i have never seen anyone commenting here attacking/trying to silence ..

        ..discussion on gender/identity-politics..

        ..i just take that whole package as a given..

        ..part of the raft of changes needed..

        ..and i think most others here would too..

        ..the progressives are a multi-hued bunch of people..

        ..trying to march in roughly the same direction..

        ..and including all..

        ..can we all accept that as ‘a given’..

        ..phillip ure..

        [QoT: The topic of “people trying to silence identity politics discussions” has already been thoroughly canvassed here. I suggest you actually read things before commenting on them, because your wide-eyed ingenue act combined with your awful typing style is really grating.]

        • V de Plume

          Common derailing and silencing techniques include:

          “I’ve never seen that (so you must be imagining it).”
          “Lighten up, take a chill-pill, grow a thicker skin.”
          “That’s just a given, of course we’re all against sexism, (so we don’t need to discuss it).”
          “No, seriously, I’ve never seen anyone here do that, (so you’re imagining it).”
          “It’s only words, what are you making such a fuss about?”
          “We’re all on the same side here.”


          (aka “BINGO”. Does someone win a prize?)

          • phillip ure

            @ v..so..proof that i am ‘the enemy’..eh..?

            ..i am secretly/cunningly working against things like full gender/orientation equality.eh..?


            ..loved how you put those words/meanings into my mouth..eh..?

            ..(where the fuck are monty python when you need them..?..eh..?..)

            ..phillip ure..

            • V de Plume

              “so..proof that i am ‘the enemy’..eh..?”
              “loved how you put those words/meanings into my mouth..eh..?”

              This is so perfect, I may embroider it onto a doily.

    • QoT 17.2

      I am not an “other blogger”. I have been an author on this site for over a year, and the only complaints I have received about my “domineering” style of moderating have been from people who are pissy I won’t let them derail threads, personally insult me, or continue to ignore moderator’s instructions. Boo fucking hoo.

      [Edited to replace “commenting” with “moderating”.]

      • Chooky 17.2.1

        +1 OoT…. you are an excellent moderator !

        …and women built the Labour movement and the socialist movement…New Zealand Maori women and pioneering women Pakeha were the first to get the vote in the world……they built this country ……..anyone who tries to undermine or put down women posters on this site or in general womens’ rights to freedom, dignity and not be exploited(sexually or otherwise ) in New Zealand ….. is taking on New Zealand culture and the NZ Labour and Green environmentalist movement.

    • thechangeling 17.3

      I think we’ve all got more common ground that it would appear at times. We all need to fight a bit between ourselves to allow each other as individuals and collectively to synthesize, focus and develop an understanding on a deeper level of just what are the salient issues facing us, and how we go about effecting change.
      So called ‘division’ is normal and healthy as long as we are also able to garner and extend the common ground. We seem to mostly all agree that the macro (neo-liberalism) in it’s various forms and as represented by the current National Government, is the damaging enemy (ably escorted by the international governing institutions the WTO, IMF and WB) who develop and facilitate neo liberal derived international trade and finance laws.
      Garnering the common ground will be essential in 2014 and beyond if we are to make an impact at improving the collective standard of living of all of us through our respective political institutions.

      • lprent 17.3.1

        So called ‘division’ is normal and healthy as long as we are also able to garner and extend the common ground.

        That is my view.

        I also think that the only way that the “common ground” can be extended is to have places to argue about it. The “labour movement” that this site targets is far wider than the narrow confines of any single party, so arguments and discussion is inevitable.

        For some strange reason there are political fossils around who seem to think that political discussion is going to held within a political party. The majority of people I know of whose politics grew out of the basic ideas of the labour movement of the later 19th and early 20th century, are not members of any political party.

        Many used to be especially the large group I call “Labour ulterior” or in those who feel away from New Labour/Alliance. But anyone who has been involved in policy discussions in those types of organisations are acutely aware exactly how difficult free flowing discussions (or often any discussions) are in a structure that hasn’t caught up with the 21st century and fast communication links.

        Besides, as far as I’m aware, no political parties in NZ have even something as basic as closed forums discussion areas at a party level. The nearest to it is probably in something like the Labour parties LEC’s, where usually you get just one person talking at a time…

        • karol

          It seems to me, a lot of the most recent angst around the politics of class, gender and sexuality has originated from within the Labour Party and/or in response to the Labour Party’s recent history.

          Some seem to treat this forum as the forum for the Labour Party, while many of us have a broader left wing focus on such issues. So we get this line from some about which policies Labour should promote – it becomes focused on Labour strategies, with some sort of PR focus on trying to shut down certain lines of discussion on gender and sexuality.

          The Greens seem to be able to incorporate issues of poverty, low pay, gender and sexuality without so much angst – at least, as far as I can see

          • lprent

            Some seem to treat this forum as the forum for the Labour Party, while many of us have a broader left wing focus on such issues.

            Yes, it tends to irritate me frequently. Personally I’m a member of the NZLP who is planning to vote Green (I’ve always made up my mind about elections in the mid-term) and who on every measure of self-interest should vote National or even Act. But I don’t operate purely on a simple-minded self-interest. I can take care of that myself, and I don’t need politicians to do it for me. I’m more interested in making sure that everyone has an opportunity, and National isn’t.

            The Greens seem to be able to incorporate issues of poverty, low pay, gender and sexuality without so much angst – at least, as far as I can see

            It tends to be subsumed a lot more inside their internal processes if only because they are somewhat more up to date than Labour’s processes that were designed around a party with 100k members and expensive phones lines back in the 30s and 40s. But if you hunt around the Green members and particularly the ex-Green members you’ll find that there has been a lot of rather often acrimonious debate and quite a lot of frustration.

            • karol

              Well there must have been quite a bit of robust debate within the Greens, looking at their official history:

              In May 1972 a meeting at Victoria University, Wellington, launched the Values Party, the world's first national Green party.

              The party contested the 1972 general election, with radical new policies such as zero economic growth and zero population growth and promoted reform of laws covering abortion, drugs and homosexuality.
              In 1979 Values was also torn by internal debate about its political orientation with an Auckland-led environmentalist faction and a Christchurch-led socialist/unionist faction. Those strands are still there in the contemporary Green Party but they are in concert rather than opposition.

              Interesting this last bit, in that I recall Martyn Bradbury has long complained about the shortage of Green MPs in Auckland.

              But the changes and developments indicate there must have been some struggles over policies and direction.

          • geoff

            It seems to me, a lot of the most recent angst around the politics of class, gender and sexuality has originated from within the Labour Party and/or in response to the Labour Party’s recent history.

            That and the roastbuster incident was the starting point for a lot of division amongest people commenting here.

            • karol

              Actually some quite intense debates about rape culture began before that – it intensified even further with the roastbuster news.

        • phillip ure

          @ iprent..’closed forum discussions’..

          ..some time back the greens used to have this..

          ..i dunno if they still do..

          ..greens commenting here will know..

          ..phillip ure..

  18. lprent 18

    Please keep the scrabbling down. I’m trying to enhance the reply mechanism for the mobile version. I’m doing it with a slight hangover.

    For the other authors, if you want to write an alternate vision to QoT’s vision* – write a post. We could do with some more.

    In the meantime I’m having a look at Josie Pagani’s proffering of a guest post for yet another vision. It does show a distinct lack of understanding about how the net makes social media operate…

    * I see I wrote it twice in a sentence. I’m wondering if the dread disease that politicians get is contagious…

    • QoT 18.1

      Well I avoided using the damn word so someone had to make up the shortfall!

      • lprent 18.1.1

        Just realised that the main device that I’ve been working on for the last 3 years has a product code of XB9000, but is more commonly known as a “Vision”. The company I worked at for a decade started life as a Vision Software or something like that.

        Maybe it is an occupational hazard for me in my profession as well as politicians.

        Arghhh. New laptop. Trying to get the development environs set up is irritating. Right now I’m trying to remember passwords to things like email.

  19. Pete 19

    Well well, I sailed into another load of wannabes that like to talk about it but don’t do anything. More concerned about the crappy computers and laptops they try to operate than working on the real issues. Typical NZ bullshit. When do you clowns get your arses into gear and actually do something constructive!? (Spelcheckers do not comment!).

    • karol 19.1

      Well, clearly you’re a person of action that is out there doing stuff on “real issues” rather than wasting everyone’s time, tapping on a computer, adding nothing of substance to a discussion forum….

      This is a forum – the point is to discuss – the guy talking about computers is the one who keeps this blog functioning.

      I guess you are not a woman, especially not a woman struggling on a low income, so, of course, doesn’t impact on your life in any “real” way.

      You got any ideas of how to improve social security, stop the media undermining (young) women by treating them as a saleable commodity – paid parental leave? increase in benefits for mothers with children under 6 years – they are contributing a lot to our future economy? Ways to provide more living wage work for Maori and Pasific women?

    • adam 19.2

      I love ya man I really do – now make me some bloody eggs and do the dishes. off topic – mmm yeah ya are.

      And +1 for what Karol said.

  20. Lionel 20

    With you all the way girlie we are at war with the right we have to win the country,s stuffed if we don’t it will be hard fought and you are right winning which will be tough enough is,nt good enough

  21. Sosoo 21

    To get to the New Zealand we want to live in, from the New Zealand we have now, is going to take a huge amount of work. We need to change how our economy works, our whole system of industrial relations, our social welfare systems, how we support vulnerable people, how businesses invest and create real jobs, how families and communities are able to support each other, our criminal and justice systems, our attitude towards our natural environment, our position on the international stage.

    We don’t.

    What needs to be done is, in the grand scheme of things, minor tweaking. The only conceivably “radical” thing that needs doing is to overturn the idea that state intervention in the economy is bad, and the only reason people think it is radical is because the right endlessly trumpets the claim.

    There’s no need for heterodox economics, deep ecology or any of the usual nuttiness that pervades this site.

    [QoT: For reading into my post shit which simply isn’t there, you join the list of People Who Can Fuck Off.]

  22. Yes 22

    QoT..dreams are free..all arrows are upward for the country and economy. And it’s a safer place to live…crime down…roads are safer…and more people employd. This is exciting …writers on the standard should hop back on the merry go round.

  23. Tracey 23


    you know how many people out there believe we can keep the present system AND not have another economic meltdown to benefit banks in, say, 18 years.

    scary shit

  24. Ennui 24

    Have just read your whole thread and the “moderation”. What a circus, a call for unity that includes a dig at an identity group (hetero males). How fekkin oxymoronic,. Then the objections, so you ban them. In the most foul language. Very clever QoT. Ask yourself, who would follow you?

    • karol 24.1

      So consider this scenario: QoT has perceived there to be some (largely male) people attacking gender politics/feminism and wanting to separate them from the preferred politics of some mostly left wing men. She then makes a plea for unit and not to be so dismissive of (left wing) feminism so-called “identity politics”. –

      Then some of the same or similar (divisive) people jump in with the same divisive sorts of comments that she was railing against, what would you recommend she do?

    • just saying 24.2

      …an identity group (hetero males)…

      Now you’re getting it Ennui.

      And welcome to the boutique – now we’re all in here.

  25. Ennui 25

    K, put it this way….she was doing really well calling for acceptance, diversity and unity but she could not help herself, she had to have a dig. Pin to a balloon. She offered up the bait. It was taken. Why did she need to do it unless she wanted to resume a divisive conflict? I am absolutely certain Q is clever enough to have realised this as she penned the line, yet she chose to continue.

    I might question that this was the intention all along: have you been taken in, become a little gullible?

    • QoT 25.1

      Yes. This was all a dastardly plot on my part. It couldn’t at all be the case that I’m incredibly frustrated with privileged men’s constant fuckery.

      Things I am also frustrated by? When person A fucks up, and person B says “wow you fucked up, that’s shitty” and then douchebags like you cry “OMG person B, why are you so mean and divisive???”

      The divisive conflict was already being waged against people like me. Pointing it out and naming the people doing it does not “resume” it.

      • Grumpy 25.1.1

        The fact remains that the left will never succeed in parliamentary terms without the support of white heterosexual males. To demonise a complete demographic is silly.
        If a swinging voter looked at the latest exchanges between lefties on these pages, they would run a mile.

        [QoT: and another one on the “waaaaaah shut up you’re going to lose the election for us” list. Guess what: swinging voters don’t tend to read blogs.

        And white heterosexual males are absolutely the least powerful demographic for the left. Ask any Labour Party strategist, or take a quick gander at the recent US election (for a given value of “left”, obviously.)]

        • karol

          You know, most of my work colleagues are not political – but in the last couple of months I’ve heard a couple of comments (unsolicited by me) referring to the male dominance of parliamentary politics and being critical of it. As far a I know, they could be swing voters too.

          This blog has always tended to be quite masculine dominated – as has the organised left.

          It doesn’t surprise me that some leftie males jump in to support males here who are resistant to many expressions of feminism/gender/LGBTI politics. I’ve also seen comments elsewhere online from leftie women who perceive TS to be a pretty unfriendly place for women.

          And I’ve also become fed up with the way “identity politics” (ie feminism/gender/sexuality politics) gets blamed for the failings of parliamentary Labour over the last few decades. Cop out.

          • Grumpy

            Karol, I came from a West Coast working family. My mother was the most staunch women’s rights, Labour supporter imaginable, I’m not.
            As a union branch secretary at the Addington Railway Workshops, I met a huge number of white heterosexual men who were the guts of the Labour movement. I was one of them.
            Things have changed and so have my politics but I will always remember those guys.
            The ones QoT and others are so quick to dismiss.

            • karol

              Are we dismissing them? I have some respect for the union and labour movements. I have posted of some of its history in the past. I didn’t think any of us were dismissing them – just asking for gender and sexual politics not to be dismissed by any leftie men (or anyone else on the left). Just saying the issues many men decide are the crucial ones, are not the only ones.

            • QoT

              Sigh. I don’t dismiss all white heterosexual men. I dismiss a specific viewpoint which is put forward, most typically by white heterosexual men. And only people like you need to pretend otherwise.

              • How many bloody times do you need to spell it out QoT – too many times imo and still they just don’t get it – they are too locked up in their little worlds of privilege, holding with grasping hands and pretending to care about those worse off than them – and their catch-cry resounds “What about MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE”

                • Grumpy

                  If “they” don’t get it, how do you expect to win over middle NZ?

                  • I think that is a point – perhaps the righteous lefty men are like boulders in the river – very deeply entrenched and not apt for moving especially as they have formulated their positions over time and have submerged the protection of their privilege with the pretend-tears for the poor. Whereas the less entrenched middle-men out there have less riding on it all because they haven’t planted their credibility upon their righteous position. They are like smaller stones moving as the river takes them especially when the big flood comes through.

                    anyway been playing in the river of recent times – one thing I do know is that the water keeps coming, sometimes low, sometimes high but always moving, always flowing – bit like life really.

          • SPC

            This is largely because Labour is attacked by its opponents and critics for being a rainbow coalition of identity groups. And this sometimes leaves an echo in wider media. Such as when such issues as quotas in party selection are covered.

            This enables the usual people in Labour to play their real bloke card, to answer some supposed call for someone who can get “Waitakere man” to vote Labour.

            This is only an issue when Labour has lost elections.

            The irony being it is the loss of female votes to Keys National and the lower turnout in South Auckland that were the major change since victory in 2005.

            Of course when National lose them, the question turns to how they can appeal to women voters and the non Pakeha vote (as per threatening the MP with abolishing Maori seats to coerce compliant coalition arrangements and charter schools).

            • QoT

              The thing is … I don’t see Labour getting attacked by its critics for this. They don’t need to. It’s the Damien O’Connors, Chris Trotters and John Tamiheres (all people at least superficially of The Left) who are the most vocal about it.

        • Grumpy

          …but QoT, I will never vote Labour. I don’t care if you lose, in fact I would be overjoyed. Just offering an opinion for you to ignore…….

          • millsy

            So who would you vote for? National? A typical working class traitor who would vote his compariots a drop in their standard of living.

          • Naki Man

            What made you stop voting for Labour???

            • McFlock

              a big gay rainbow, obviously

            • Grumpy

              Very good question and one I hadn’t given much thought to until you asked.
              I voted for Norm Kirk and David Lange also Helen Clark the first time. I have also voted Values and NZ First…..last 3 times National. I would not class myself as a loyal voter for any partly. As Lprent says in his later post, Labour has changed hugely since I started to work for them, I now have little in common with Labour and even less with Greens. I could never vote for Act (maybe NZF if I thought it would achieve anything), so it’s almost National by default. I think that is the case for a lot of centre voters and echoes what CV was saying. Turned of by identity politics, seen too much of the left’s Trojan horses whether Lange or Clark.
              I was a Union branch secretary for one of the NZR unions when they started to shut down the railway workshops at Addington under Lange and remember guys like Corliss and co more concerned with playing politics than their own members. The right might have done the same thing but at least would not pretend to be your mates while shafting you. Later, in another large organization, I saw huge layoffs but to a different view of the process as I was now corporate management and saw the laziness and incompetence of the unions we were negotiating with first hand.
              Now, fully self employed, I find that if I finish up in the shit, then I have got there on my own, not by some politician or pseudo union “rep”.

              • heh.!..grumpys’ journey from left to right..

                ..and the first definitely-worded attack on identity-politics i have seen/read since i have been @ the standard..(did it used to be rife..)..

                ..and it is from a reactionary natty..(q.e.d..eh..?..)

                ..and how could grumpy not be a textbook case of my exhoratations to let idiots be hung by their own stupid words..?

                ..come on down..!..grumpy..!..heh..!

                ..i was laughing out loud..

                ..reading his grumpy old mans’ tale..

                ..imagining him..(florid of face?)..banging on about this..in person..

                ..you’d hafta laff..eh..?

                phillip ure..

                • Grumpy

                  You would be quite wrong Phil. You know the saying “if your not a socialist at 20you have no heart, if your not a conservative by 50 you have no brain”. I think you prove the point there.
                  Funny thing is, if there was a decent centre left party that did not make a point of pissing off white males, I would probably vote for them. At the moment, the party closest to that is National.

                  • mac1

                    Quoting Churchill can be fun, Grumpy.

                    “Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.”

                  • @ grumpy..are you jonesing for a cliche-award..?


                    ..and ‘that did not make a point of pissing off white males’..


                    ..and..in national you are in yr natural home..eh..?

                    ..that labour stuff was just a youthful abberation..eh..?

                    ..a rebellion against parental-politics..?..perchance..?

                    ..and do you really want a ‘quote-off’..?

                    ..phillip ure..

                    • Grumpy

                      Hi Phil, you are much more readable now you are taking your medication.
                      Actually some of your stuff is quite good.

                  • Saarbo

                    “if your not a socialist at 20you have no heart, if your not a conservative by 50 you have no brain”.

                    So what happened to the “heart” at 50 Grumpy?

                    • Grumpy

                      Reality and good luck…….

                    • “if your not a socialist at 20you have no heart, if your not a conservative by 50 you have no brain”.

                      @ Saabo, funny, for me it was the other way around; Conservative at 20 – socialist (or Social Democrat) by 50…

                  • Saarbo

                    Reality and good luck???

                    I would suggest that in your old age you no longer mix with people who are suffering at the bottom, so your “realty” has changed. If you are over 50 then economically speaking, that equals “good luck”.

                    “if there was a decent centre left party that did not make a point of pissing off white males”

                    I suspect you may be a bit of a bigot as well, you are suited to National.

                    • Grumpy

                      Maybe…….but I do employ people and I do pay considerably more than the “living wage”, so I like to think that despite being old, white and male, I am still doing something other than just talking about it.
                      You might find it very hard to believe running as it does against the narrative on these pages, but there are many “old white guys” who actually have quite a bit in common with the disadvantaged, given that we have experienced disadvantage in our past but have, through luck mostly, finished up on the other side.
                      Someone did a survey of all those earning over $500,000pa in Auckland and found only 10% of them had been to university……..

                  • adam

                    Grumpy that would be NZ first. They really are going for that vote, especially with the new Deputy leader, Tracey Martin. She is more than capable of keeping NZ first going and she is on the left of the party, actually NZ first has taken a whole big step to the left – I was shocked really. But there you go.

      • geoff 25.1.2

        This was all a dastardly plot on my part. It couldn’t at all be the case that I’m incredibly frustrated with privileged men’s constant fuckery.

        Nah it’s because you’re an aggressive person that loves a good verbal stoush.

        • QoT

          Both of those things are true, but I still reject the insinuation that this entire heartfelt post was just written as an excuse to start a fight. When I want to start a fight I don’t bother getting all thoughtful about it.

    • karol 25.2

      Maybe you have been taken in by the people determined to derail any discussion on (women’s/LGBTI) identity issues – and who jumped in pretty quickly with lines bound to trigger QoT off…. maybe it’s you who have been taken in…. or can’t see the divisive dynamics in play from the attempted derailings.

      Qot has her own style, and, in comparison with a lot of stuff she’s written, her post was pretty tame and constrained – and strongly focused on the positive.

  26. Sacha 26

    Any commenter who keeps commenting here after being banned just shows his lack of respect for common group rules rather than ego.

    And that’s sadly symptomatic of the left’s problem in an election year.

  27. ecossemaid 27

    First of all, Happy Hogmany & Peaceful 2014 to one and all!
    I am a relative new comer to this site an on the whole I have found it illuminating, thought provoking & forward thinking. I don’t have a problem with the free, frank exchanges of views on all topics, it’s one of the ways of learning and valuing others viewpoints.
    I just wonder if the Mud Fight above which seems to be between established contributors is healthy. The debate of how to be a consolidated force to Oust Those Fascists from power in 2014 with equitable policies, social justice for all, and protection for the weakest in society and therefore a better NZ, is best served when, some people are acting like spoilt admins in some wannabe chat room?This detracts from the initial debate and makes others whom may have valid points apprehensive from posting them.
    Meanwhile at National Towers, they must be rubbing their oily hands in glee. “Are You Thinking What I Am Dreading?” That they will waltz back into power, as a fragmented opposition does nothing, apart from a game I am a better Author/Admin/MP than you!…This just plays into there hands, as they get ready to unload their bile, of appealing to lowest common denominators in NZ society, ready with illicit donors cash to carpet bomb advertise the unwitting into another 4 years, hit the poor, vunerable ….Slash and Burn public services and then also to add insult try to sell you stuff you don’t need and already own!
    .Do all of you want this to occur? I don’t! Surely there is more that unites us on this forum than divides us…..Start acting like it before you all have four years to regret it!

  28. Mr Tank 28

    Ok I’ve made it to the end. Now I can comment on your original post. Well…I liked it. Nothing particularly original or controversial – pretty much a boiler plate “come together”piece for the first day of a new year. Nicely done at that – I even liked the last line regarding not using the word vision (after all leave that word to the visionaries!) Yeah, pretty much a nice tight piece of writing (ok now this member of an identity group is fucking with you!). Interesting tho how many comments it garnered. Methinks there is a core here without much else to do on New Years Day. Love you all! Onward to victory!

  29. Zorr 29

    Your posts are excellent QoT and then I come back and read the comments a day later and with all the bold text everywhere – it’s almost like there was a party.

    I have always been what would probably be called a “progressive socialist democrat” or something similar. In the past, I was probably a lot more like CV and had a world view that was completely limited to my realm of experience. Several experiences led me to question that viewpoint and attempt the change to correct that most serious of flaws – ignorance of others.

    You’re one of the people who has forced me to continue re-evaluating that even when I think I might be getting near the end of the journey.

    Keep it up! ^_^

  30. Bomber 30

    You calling for unity on the left QoT???

    Wow. Just. Wow.

    • QoT 30.1

      I didn’t call for unity, Martyn, but you always have had a difficult time (a) reading things properly and (b) accurately describing what other people have said.

    • Megapope 30.2

      You’re criticising someone else for causing disunity Bomber???

      Wow. Just. Wow.

  31. JK 31

    I’ve finally made it to the end, too, Mr Tank – and I think QoT has come up with the best slogan yet in her original post for the left to use – creating “a better New Zealand” – that’s a great message for us to put out – and we can wrap it around everything – economics, feminism, gender, poverty, race, the environment – you name it ….. we all want a better NZ (because the one we’re living in now, just sucks!)

    • we all want a better NZ (because the one we’re living in now, just sucks!)

      Does that reflect a lack of familiarity with other countries and/or history, or are you just the kind of person for whom anything less than utopia is beneath your dignity? Living conditions in NZ right now are better than almost everywhere else in the world at every point in history – it can be made even better, sure, but… it just sucks?

  32. JK 32

    It sucks, Psycho milt, for all those who don’t have enough money to enjoy our lovely country ….. and that’s heaps of people – for whom the Nats have not provided a brighter future at all, who are sick with preventable diseases, who have inadequate housing, who cannot get out and about easily because they cannot afford the petrol, there’s no public transport, they live a long way from the facilities that those who live in cities take for granted, etc etc etc.

    • No doubt even Utopia would suck for some people (military types, perhaps).

      The fact that NZ can be made better does not mean it currently “sucks.” If you stop to think about it, you’re living right now in one of the best places to live that has ever existed in the history of Homo Sapiens – a little credit for the efforts of your predecessors wouldn’t go amiss.

      • phillip ure 32.1.1

        @ pm..

        ,,go tell those one in four children living in poverty yr demands for ‘a little credit’..eh..?

        ..and just looking @ nz..

        ..we and our ‘predecessors’ have well and truly fucked this country in the past..

        ..and we continue to do so today..

        ..and in such a blink of time..eh..?

        ..and given the environmental-whirlwind we/our children are about to inherit..

        ..and those one in four children living in poverty..

        ..yr call on this moment in time..

        ..i think you deserve a special ‘rose-coloured glasses’-award..

        ..and you are factually wrong..

        ..we did not have one child in four living in poverty..

        ..before rogernomics/ruthenasia..


        ..so..basically..as is shown..

        ..everything you said was utter shite..


        ..basically just one big lowest-orifice-pluck..


        ..(shall we end with a chorus of bill englishs’ favourite ditty..?

        ..that one that he has on repeat-play every questiontime..?

        ..’you don’t know how lucky you are!’..



        ..phillip ure..

        • Psycho Milt

          It’s truly encouraging to think there are New Zealanders for whom Utopia is the minimum spec, beneath which everything “sucks.” People who set heir standards that high must be incredibly high achievers themselves, that they can look down their noses at the achievements of their forebears and declare them suckworthy – what awesome accomplishments these superhumans must be piling up ..eh..?

          • phillip ure

            @ pm..

            ..are you disputing the fact that there weren’t one in four children living in poverty b4 rogernomics/ruthenasia..?

            ..and our environment isn’t fucked..and about to get worse..?

            ..amongst a slew of facts that makes your ‘we’ve never had it better1’ a total crock..



            ..btw..don’t know what tf you are banging on about in yr strawman 10.20 pm..


            ..and/but don’t bother explaining..eh..?

            ..phillip ure..

            • Psycho Milt

              ..are you disputing the fact that there weren’t one in four children living in poverty b4 rogernomics/ruthenasia..?

              I don’t see why I’d need to dispute it – the existence of some unpleasant feature of your existing society doesn’t mean your society “sucks.” It also doesn’t necessarily mean your society is worse than it was – for instance, there may be a higher proportion of children living in poverty now (which has more to do with demographics than social policy anyway), but anyone nostalgic for NZ society of the 1980s must be too young to remember it. For me, the NZ of 30 years ago was one in which the PM could just proclaim it illegal to raise either wages or prices until further notice; it was one in which we were allied with a nuclear power engaged in brinkmanship with an equally-nuclear-armed power; it was one in which it was illegal to engage in homosexual sex acts, and being revealed to be gay could end your career; it was one in which declaring Maori interests non-existent would not harm your career; the list could go on.

              ..and our environment isn’t fucked..and about to get worse..?

              Again, do you really want to hold up the level of environmental protection we operated 30 or 40 years ago as superior to what’s been put in place since then? The fact that something can be improved does not mean it “sucks,” unless you’re God.

              • Milt, no one denies those things.

                But there were good and bad things then – as there are good and bad things now.

                An example; we have umpteen free-to-air TV now – but I find myself watching less and less f-t-a tv than I did 30 or 40 years ago.This is highly subjective, but there appears to be more unwatchable crap on tv now than there was when I was a young adult.

                Forty years ago (before the two oil shocks of the 1970s – especially the 1979/81 event) we had a considerable balance of payments surplus.

                We led international opposition to apartheid and atomic testing in the Pacific.

                Forty years later, we have extended full civil liberties to gays and lesbians, paid parental leave, and a much more democratic electoral system.

                Maybe it’s time to bring back some of the good things we’ve lost over the decades?

                • Sure – this blog’s seen plenty of comments from me about stuff that’s deteriorated rather than improved over the last 30 years, and I certainly wouldn’t mind a return of the days when most workers were in unions and people working outside their normal hours got paid penalty rates. But that doesn’t mean our society “sucks.”

              • @ pm..

                i never said everything was better back then..so what are you talking about..?

                ..i just noted that the dpb-levels etc then meant that one in four children were not in poverty..

                ..(what you dismiss as a ‘demographic’-miss-reading..?..really..?..)

                ..and then came roger and ruth and helen..(remember how labour cut ‘allowances’..?..i do..)

                ..and the massive intensification of the cow concentration camps..

                ..means our rivers etc are now much more fucked than they were..

                ..and i was noting yr easy dismissal of those realities..

                ..in yr ‘we don’t know how lucky we are’-attempt..

                ..and the facts of the matter are that there have been advances on some areas of concern since back then..

                …but in those issues of child-poverty/environment..

                ..we are far worse than we were back then..

                ..phillip ure..

                • What’s your point? I’ve mentioned twice in comments above that the fact that things can be improved doesn’t mean our current society “sucks.” Your response is to point out things that can be improved – ie, your response is pointless.

                  • V de Plume

                    “Sucks” is a subjective evaluation for which everyone will have different criteria. The entire CONVERSATION is pointless.

                    But gosh, I’m glad this post didn’t get derailed by a bunch of leftwing dudes insisting that the dialogue be exactly on their terms.

  33. Sacha 33

    Sheesh, Mr Ure. Look at the amount of energy people have expended today responding to you. Think of what they could have discussed instead rather than your flat-earth libertarian assertions that political discourse is a level playing field and your freedom to speak without consequence must remain unimpinged. Then perhaps have the good grace to STFU for a bit.

    And you wonder why conversations need to be moderated..

    • @ sacha..

      so now i’m a ‘libertarian’..?

      ..well..maybe on things like drug-reform..

      ..but that’s about it..really..

      ..and just to clarify the depth of my libertarianism 4 u..


      ..and perspective is a funny thing..eh..?

      ..because i am seeing myself ‘responding’ to what others are saying..in this case..

      ..and i have never made the claim that ‘political discourse is a level-playing field’..

      ..and seeing as i argue for full-gender/orientation equality/a vegan diet/ending the cancer-causing dairy paradigm in new zealand/shutting down all the vivisectors..(370,000+ animals tortured then killed..every year)/declaring war on poverty/taxing the banksters/ending the war on all drugs/taxing the dairy-farmers to clean up the fucken mess they have made of this country/partially nationalising a raft of industries…etc..etc..

      ..if talking on these issues i would be inviting responses..

      ..but like i say..in this case i will repeat..i am the responder..

      ..and as for your shouted exhortation/order to shut the fuck up..

      ..you won’t have been the first to have tried..eh..?

      ..no success..to date..i regret to inform..

      ..but i do agree with the charge/allegation that i believe in ‘freedom to speak’..

      ..yes sacha..yes i do believe in ‘freedom to speak’..

      ..it is the voice of democracy..

      ..the other road leads to demagoguery..

      ..whether on the right..or the left..

      …and of course there are ‘consequences’ for speaking yr mind..

      ..if the writer talks utter shite..

      ..they will be laughed out of the room..

      ..the pointed-barb inviting derision is far more powerful/effective at destroying those stupid/regressive/repressive ideas..(of the likes of grumpy)..

      ..much more powerful than the censors’-pencil/’authority’..

      ..phillip ure..

      • karol 33.1.1

        And when you’re in somebody eles’s house, club, worplace, pub, classroom?

        • phillip ure

          @ karol..i respect their environment..

          .i don’t walk in and say:..’i hate what you’ve done to the kitchen!’..

          but i was under the impression that this is an open political forum..

          ..somewhere to come to engage in political discourse..

          ..occaisonally to disagree even..at times..?

          ..and without having to tip-toe around/stepping on eggshells..

          ..have i got that wrong..?

          ..phillip ure..

          • karol

            phillip, it’s pretty open usually, but there are limits. The moderation is no where near as heavy as I undersand it can be on The Daily Blog.

            Most usually the limits on thread derails (what I consider CV did – if he’d continued, he would have dominated the discussion and diverted from QoT’s intent – in fact, he has quite successfully managed to do that anyway) are at the discretition of the moderator/author.

            More usualy moderation tends to fall heaviest on right wingers – and they respond exactly as some here have, as do some left wngers when moderated – complaining about censorship.

            The usual reply from lynn is that he/managers/moderators runs the blog, authors provide content – for no pay – if people don’t like the rules and how they are applied – start their own blog – and often it’s been likened to how people behave in someone else’s house.

            On this thread it’s some people being moderated in relation to gender issues, rather than the more usual moderation related to general left wing issues – some guys respond by claiming censorship. I have actually moved comments from my thread to open mike, by people who continue to dispute my moderating decisions. I consider it a thread jack. In fact, QoT has allowed you to continue moaning about her moderating decsion – moderators can/do issue bans for continual thread jacking.

            QoT has been more lenient on your moans – off topic, than other authors or moderators have been at other times.

            Get over it.

            CV continued his arguments on open mike – continually addressing people like me, drawing me/us in to replying – it became very time consuming – he was unrepentant about his “identity poltics” dog whistles, and his antagonstic entry to this thread – he was hardly censored – he had free reign. There are more ways to silence people than being dismissed from one particular discussion. I believe CV also has authorship rights on TS, and could write his own post on the topic.

            So – I reckon just get over it – move on. There’s an issue here about why/how CV has upset many of us by continually telling/pressuring us to be quiet about gender and sexual issues – he has quite a powerful presence on TS and seemed to be trying to silence some of us on particular issues, prior to the publishing of this post.

            The topic of the post was about how, we can focus in election year, on various issues, and also not silence people raising issues of gender and sexual oppresssion.

            Anything to say on that?

            • phillip ure

              @ karol..

              ..last paragraph:..+ question..

              ..i repeat..that since i have been writing/reading here..i have not really seen any evidence of this wholesale ‘silencing’ you/qot allege..

              ..and i do object to being accused of ‘moaning’..

              ..and again i repeat..i am responding to what others are saying..

              ..i am not leading/driving the argument..

              ..and as for ‘moaning’..i was under the impression there was a discussion/debate on the merits or not of censorship..

              ..a discussion i was not the only one participating in..

              ..have i got that wrong too..?

              ..have my questions/contentions made me worthy of/deserving of..’moderation’..?

              ..and really..this thread seems to have ended on a real gender divide..eh..?

              ..and that is both sad and disconcerting..

              ..and i repeat..my personal beliefs include all that qot is fighting for..

              ..it is the censorship/stifling of free speech i have issues with..

              ..phillip ure..

              [QoT: Yes, phillip, it’s abundantly clear that you don’t see the problem that multiple other people have observed, and that you still don’t understand the concept of “censorship”. As karol has noted, I’ve been bloody lenient with your incoherent derailing on this thread. Any further repetitions of this pointless argument will be moderated – but of course you’re welcome to take them to the Open Mike. Which is a funny kind of “censorship”.]

              • Sacha

                “i do object of being accused of ‘moaning’”


              • karol

                Well I have experienced it over time. CV has been very quick to deliver a slap on some of the (limited number) of occasions I have raised gender issues – he seems to have a problem with it. Recently his repeated “boutique identity politics” dog whistle was not appreciated by some of us.

                There has been a line – laregly coming from Labour Party guys (and the Tamihere’s etc), that “identity politcs” (wirth specific reference to gender and sexuality) has caused a lot of Labour’s problems re voters etc. This seems to me a very misplaced blame. CV has repeated lines in that direction.

                It also seems to me to be an issue very much within/from the labour party that has somehow assumed we should all be following Labour party lines.

                • weka

                  “There has been a line – laregly coming from Labour Party guys (and the Tamihere’s etc), that “identity politcs” (wirth specific reference to gender and sexuality) has caused a lot of Labour’s problems re voters etc. This seems to me a very misplaced blame. CV has repeated lines in that direction.”

                  Which is why this is a highly political issue, right here on ts.

              • too late qot..

                ..i’ve already left the room..

                ..you are shouting at a departing shadow..

                ..and yes..you have ensured i will not engage in any form of conversation with you..at any time in the future..whoever you may be..(a ‘relief’ for you..i am sure..)

                ..consider yrslf ‘moderated’..

                .i have tired of ‘bad’ qot..


                ..but i guess you can always throw grenades at me (yr ‘enemy’..eh..?..f.f.s..!..)on open mike..eh..?

                ..did you not read that i support all you are arguing/fighting for..in the real world..?

                …once again..f.f.s..!..

                phillip ure..

                [QoT: You persist in threatening to leave this thread. I will make it easy for you and delete any further comments you’ve made, since you haven’t added anything original in your last half-dozen attempts.]

      • Phillip, thanks for the link to this: http://www.alternet.org/why-i-fled-libertarianism-and-became-liberal


        It’s very close to my own personal journey from conservative right winger in my teens and early/mid 20s, to a social democrat (“socialist” according to others). Back then I would have been a typical young Act member. Ghu help me.

        So, I get where you’re coming from, mate.

  34. Sacha 34

    Not convinced you have much understanding of what democracy means. Or much else.
    And we’re not on the radio… ok …

    • @ sacha..

      ..”..Not convinced you have much understanding of what democracy means..”

      heh..!..you go first..!

      and..sorry..i won’t use metaphors again..(however light-touched..)

      ..it’ll be literal..all the way..

      phillip ure.

  35. SPC 35

    “It’s a plea for understanding the difference between strategy and tactics.”

    The right has attempted to divide us against women by class or circumstance.

    The poorly educated raised in unhealthy homes who struggle to find work and then more generally those who raise children without a partner. By such means they launch an attack on both welfare and those raising up children in poverty.

    Basically daring the left to take up their cause and be subject to attack for not towing the line on applying market type incentives on the have not’s so that being a have not is undesirable.

    Many working women, sole parents or with parents are susceptible to this thinking because they don’t want to fund the “lifestyles” of those in poverty with the money they worked hard for.

    For now WFF has been accepted by National, because it delivered outcomes for these women who they want (and need) to vote for them (note that most men voting for National oppose WFF).

    This shows the area where the campaign could be fought. But this does not mean abandoning the poor but by building solidarity or common cause between the two groups of women.

    Extending parental leave to 12 months is something in this policy area and National knows it.

    But there is further that Labour could go and it is something I suggested to Laila Harre when parental leave was first raised in the first term of the last Labour led government.

  36. SPC 36

    4th paragraph, correction for clarification

    Many working women, sole parents or with partners are susceptible to this thinking because they don’t want to fund the “lifestyles” of those in poverty with the money they worked hard for.

  37. Sacha 37

    Stargazer has posted a wonderfully concise summary of this conversation here:

    Open mike 03/01/2014

  38. It’s a shame that good ideas here have been over-taken by raw emotion and personalisation…

    • karol 38.1

      Agree, Frank. It’s disappointing, really, after all the topics that we have been discussing here and elsewhere in the left over the last few years. After all the struggles, we get this.

  39. QoT 39

    This conversation has about done its dash, but I did want to point out this classic, for everyone above and in other threads who have moaned and whined about CENSORSHIP!!!! and SILENCING!!! and “oh my god how DARE you tell someone to fuck off!!!”:

    Mythbustin’: Waitakere Man

    That, my friends, is how lprent moderates threads when people have pissed him off. I don’t see y’all whining about him being a mean nasty bitch.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • The UK has a choice as to whether it chooses to be manipulated… or not.
    If you want to study propagandist techniques, you are typically told to study Dictatorships. Not unfair, but what’s always been more interesting to me is so-called “democratic” countries and their broader information systems. Why? Because people opt for it, even as they decry “totalitarian regimes!”.. It’s quite an eye ...
    exhALANtBy exhalantblog
    7 hours ago
  • Today’s secrecy legislation
    Introducing legislation which shits on the public's right to know seems to have become a daily occurrence for this government. Today's example is the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill. The bill establishes a framework for the establishment of "special purpose vehicles" (SPVs) to hide debt from local government balance sheets ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    10 hours ago
  • Hard News: Public Address Word of the Year 2019: Time to vote!
    Below is the longlist of words and phrases generated in the korero phase of Public Address Word of the Year 2019, with some editorial moderation. Now it's time to vote. As you'll doubtless be able to see, you get three ranked choices. Use your power wisely. Or frivolously, whatever.As usual, ...
    10 hours ago
  • Encryption, passwords, and self-incrimination
    The University of Waikato and New Zealand Law Foundation have released a report today on the law around encryption in New Zealand. There's stuff in there about principles and values, and how proposed government policies to provide for "lawful access" by creating backdoors would destroy the trust which makes encryption ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    11 hours ago
  • Drawn
    A ballot for two Member's Bills was held today, and the following bills were drawn: Insurance (Prompt Settlement of Claims for Uninhabitable Residential Property) Bill (Stuart Smith) Social Security (Exemption for Ex Gratia and Compensation Payments) Amendment Bill (Willow-Jean Prime) Neither bill seems likely to be particularly controversial. This is ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    12 hours ago
  • Bougainville votes for independence
    Earlier in the month, Bougainvilleans went to the polls in a landmark referendum to decide on whether they would remain part of Papua New Guinea or become independent. Yesterday, the results came in, with over 97% support for independence. The referendum wasn't binding - instead it means negotiations with the ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    12 hours ago
  • Bus strikes, suspensions and solidarity
    by Daphna Whitmore This week 800 unionised bus drivers in Auckland were suspended from work after they refused to collect fares as part of a campaign of industrial action. Drivers working for Auckland’s largest bus company NZ Bus are asking for more pay and better working conditions after being offered ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    14 hours ago
  • How to support after the Whakaari/White Island volcanic eruption
    As details emerge about what unfolded on Whakaari / White Island two days ago, my thoughts go out to all the families affected by this terrible event. My thoughts are also with the first responders who worked in perilous circumstances to assist and protect those affected. Both local and ...
    SciBlogsBy Sarb Johal
    15 hours ago
  • Final BMG poll – nothing to see here
    BMG research have unleashed their final poll of the 2019 campaign:Westminster voting intention: CON: 41% (-)LAB: 32% (-)LDEM: 14% (-)GRN: 4% (-)BREX: 3% (-1)via @BMGResearch , 06 - 11 Dec Chgs. w/ 06 Dec That's a bit of a "Dunno why we bothered" sort of poll. "Phillip, I'm afraid I've been a ...
    16 hours ago
  • Grant Robertson Spends Up Large – On The Establishment!
    Grant Keeps On Trucking: Out of the $12 billion Robertson has announced for infrastructure investment, $8 billion will be allocated to specific projects, with the balance of $4 billion held in reserve. What does it say about this Government's "transformational" ambitions that 85 percent of that $8 billion is to ...
    17 hours ago
  • Boris Johnson … Hides … In a Fridge
    I am not making this up.First few lines of the Dail Mail write up:Boris Johnson's exasperated media minder swore on live TV today as the PM refused to speak to Good Morning Britain before trotting into a fridge as he started an early milkround in Yorkshire. Piers Morgan was visibly ...
    1 day ago
  • Shy Labour Voters?
    In previous elections pollsters have bemoaned the 'shy Tory' - the respondent who is so fearful of being judged as a cruel and heartless bastard by an anonymous pollster, or their spouses, workmates and friends, that they lie about their intention of voting Conservative, skewing the poll figures in Labour's ...
    1 day ago
  • Seven reasons to be wary of waste-to-energy proposals
    Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz I was in Switzerland recently and discovered that they haven’t ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 day ago
  • Reviewing the whitewash
    Back in 2015, then Ombudsman Beverley Wakem conducted a review of the OIA, Not a game of hide and seek. The "review" was a whitewash, which found no need for legislative change, and instead criticised the media and requesters - which destroyed Wakem's reputation, and undermined that of the Office ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 day ago
  • You Gov MRP Poll Out
    So, You Gov's MRP poll - the weird one that tries to reflect what will happen at a constituency level and which pretty much nailed the hung parliament in 2017 - is not looking too good for Labour:
    UK #GE2019 MRP seat projection:CON: 339 (-20)LAB: 231 (+20)SNP: 41 (-2)LDEM: 15 ...
    1 day ago
  • Climate Change: Accountability?
    We've known about climate change for over forty years now,and it has been a major political issue for twenty. And yet fossil fuel companies have kept polluting with impunity, while government have looked the other way and twiddled their thumbs and refused to do anything because "the economy", or just ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 day ago
  • Delusional And Irrational: The Rise Of Paranoid Politics In New Zealand.
    Sheer Loopiness: Many of those expressing bemusement at the antics of these #turnardern effacers, were convinced that they were yet another expression of the National Party’s increasingly spiteful anti-government propaganda campaign. They marvelled at the oddness of the perpetrators’ mindset and questioned the common-sense of allowing the rest of New Zealand ...
    2 days ago
  • Things to know about Whakaari/White Island
    Brad Scott, GNS Science VolcanologistThis post was originally published by GeoNet. Following the 9 December devastating eruption at Whakaari/White Island we have put together some information about the island. New Zealand’s most active volcano Whakaari/White Island is currently New Zealand’s most active volcano, it has been since an eruptive episode ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    2 days ago
  • Status quo supports status quo
    The Justice Committee has reported back on its Inquiry into the 2017 General Election and 2016 Local Elections, with a host of recommendations about how to improve our electoral systems. Some of their recommendations are already incorporate din the Electoral Amendment Bill currently before Parliament, but there's also a recommendation ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 days ago
  • The Greens abandon NeoLiberalism
    Back in 2017, in order to make themselves "electable" in the eyes of rich people who oppose everything they stand for, the Greens signed up for NeoLiberalism, adopting a restrictive set of "Budget Responsibility Rules" which basicly prevented them from using government to make things better. Now, they're finally abandoning ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 days ago
  • Lying about a failed war
    Since invading in 2001, the US has consistently claimed that their war in Afghanistan has been going well, even when it continued year after year after year. Of course, they were lying, and thanks to the Washington Post and the US Freedom of Information Act, we get to see just ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 days ago
  • Artificial Intelligence and You
    How should we think about artificial intelligence and the implications that it has for our work and leisure? There are many articles on artificial intelligence and its potential impacts on jobs, and the ethics of applications. These are important topics, but I want to focus on some less discussed aspects, ...
    SciBlogsBy Robert Hickson
    2 days ago
  • Statistical manipulation to get publishable results
    I love data. It’s amazing the sort of “discoveries” I can make given a data set and computer statistical package. It’s just so easy to search for relationships and test their statistical significance. Maybe relationships which ...
    3 days ago
  • More lies on the Twitter (Dan Hodges edition)
    The other big story concerning Leeds Hospital is Boris Johnson's bizzare behaviour at Leeds Hospital, where he was confronted by a journalist and challenged about a four year old boy with suspected pneumonia who was left sleeping on the floor, rather than getting  abed like a sick kid would in ...
    3 days ago
  • LabourActivistPunchedMattHancock’sSPADGate
    So, for a brief period of history, it was alleged that a protester had punched Matt Hancock's SPAD (not a euphemism; special adviser) when Hancock visited Leeds Hospital.This was reported by the likes of Robert Peston and Laura Keunssberg, as well as the less credible Guido Fawkes.  It also quickly ...
    3 days ago
  • France’s anti-Zionism is anti-liberté
    by Daphna Whitmore Last week France passed a law that equates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. It is based on a definition of anti-Semitism that includes criticism of Israel such as: “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    3 days ago
  • Another bus lockout
    Over the past year we've seen major bus problems in Hamilton and Wellington, as drivers have sought better wages and an end to the bullshit of split shifts, which basicly see them "married to the job". And now its Auckland's turn. When NZBus's drivers planned low-level strike action of not ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    3 days ago
  • Climate Change: Showing us how its done
    The government has been congratulating itself over the passage of the Zero Carbon Act, which sets out long-term emissions targets. But those targets are insufficient. Meanwhile, Denmark is showing us how its done:Denmark’s parliament adopted a new climate law on Friday, committing to reach 70% below its 1990 emissions in ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    3 days ago
  • New Fisk
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    3 days ago
  • Public sector dysfunction should not be allowed to undermine freedom of information
    Another day, another piece of legislation with a secrecy clause. This time its the innocuous-seeming Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission Bill, which (after establishing a new body and making it subject to the OIA in three different ways) includes the rapidly-becoming-standard clauses enabling it to request information from other public ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    3 days ago
  • “This is England, this knife of Sheffield steel…”
    The state of the United Kingdom is fractured, torn up, shredded. The Empire is gone, it died a long time ago. And yet, the country is still tracking with a lead in favour of the ones who play to the ingrained, class-bound division for political gain. It is a disgrace ...
    exhALANtBy exhalantblog
    5 days ago
  • CORSIA, coming soon to an airport near you
    On 27 September, Greta Thunberg addressed a crowd of 500,000 at the School Strike for Climate in Montreal, saying: “You are a nation that is allegedly a climate leader. And Sweden is also a nation that is allegedly a climate leader. And in both cases, it means absolutely nothing. Because ...
    SciBlogsBy Robert McLachlan
    5 days ago
  • Cloaking hate speech and fake news in the right to free expression.
    It should be obvious by now but let’s be clear: The same folk who regularly traffic in disinformation, misinformation and “fake news” are also those who most strongly claim that their freedom of expression rights are being violated when moves are made to curb hate speech (as opposed to protected ...
    KiwipoliticoBy Pablo
    5 days ago
  • The Physics (and Economics, and Politics) of Wheelchairs on Planes
    Michael Schulson When Shane Burcaw flies on an airplane, he brings along a customized gel cushion, a car seat, and about 10 pieces of memory foam. The whole arsenal costs around $1,000, but for Burcaw it’s a necessity. The 27-year-old author and speaker — who, alongside his fiancée, Hannah ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    6 days ago
  • To Advance Civil Rights, Oppose Transgender Extremism
    We are very pleased to publish this submission is from Lucinda Stoan. She is a social justice activist, mother, and educator, based in Washington State in the  US.   This detailed and comprehensive source-linked overview of trans issues and what is at stake will be useful for many people, especially in ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    6 days ago
  • Faafoi should be fired
    Newshub last night reported that Broadcasting Minister Kris Faafoi had apparently promised to help out a mate with an immigration issue. While its normal for people to approach MPs for assistance in this area, when you're a Minister, the rules are different: as the Cabinet Manual says, Ministers must "at ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    6 days ago
  • Adrian Orr – The Reserve Bank’s Revolutionary Governor?
    New Zealand's Underarm Banker: It bears recalling that the “independence” of the Reserve Bank Governor was for decades held up by neoliberal capitalists as the most compelling justification for passing the Reserve Bank Act. Interesting, is it not, how the ruling class’s support for the Bank’s independence lasted no longer than ...
    7 days ago
  • Driving Us Up The Poll.
    Rubbish In, Rubbish Out: Put all this together, and it’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that anyone who responds positively to a pollster’s request to “answer a few questions” is just ever-so-slightly weird. Desperately lonely? Some sort of psephological train-spotter? Political party member primed to skew the poll for or against ...
    7 days ago
  • Jordan Williams, Colin Craig podcast series announced
    “Free at last, Free at last, Thank God almighty we are free at last.” ― Martin Luther King Jr. A long and bitter court feud between former Conservative Party leader Colin Craig and Jordan Williams has been settled, with an apology and compensation from Williams. On Tuesday, Craig sent out ...
    The PaepaeBy Peter Aranyi
    1 week ago
  • How plant-based meat is stretching New Zealand’s cultural and legal boundaries
    Samuel Becher, Victoria University of Wellington and Jessica C Lai, Victoria University of Wellington Earlier this year, the New Zealand-based pizza chain Hell Pizza offered a limited-edition “Burger Pizza”. Its customers weren’t told that the “meat” was plant-based. Some customers complained to the Commerce Commission, which enforces consumer law in ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 week ago
  • Scientific integrity requires critical investigation – not blind acceptance
    Some people seem to want to close down any critical discussion of the current research into the relationship between water fluoride and child IQ. They appear to argue that claims made by researchers should not be open to critical review and that the claims be accepted without proper consideration ...
    1 week ago
  • Climate Change: The shameful reality
    The government has been congratulating itself over the passage of the Zero Carbon Act, which sets out long-term emissions targets. Meanwhile, Climate Action Tracker has the shameful reality: those targets are insufficient:While New Zealand is showing leadership by having passed the world’s second-ever Zero Carbon Act in November 2019, under ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • More secrecy
    The government introduced a Racing Industry Bill today. As an urban who horse racing as pointless-to-cruel, and gambling as a tax on stupidity and/or hope, this isn't normally a bill which would interest me in the slightest, beyond grumpiness at more government money for a dying industry. But there is ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Unlikely online bully, Liam Hehir
    Check. Check. One, two, three, four. Is this thing ON? Hello readers, I logged in last night (yeah, it’s been a while) to mark THE END of the landmark legal case, Jordan Williams v Colin Craig, which (gulp) reached The Supreme Court, in which New Zealand’s most-defamed man was suing the politician he ...
    The PaepaeBy Peter Aranyi
    1 week ago
  • The Birth Of Israel: Wrong At The Right Time.
    Before The Birth: Israel’s most fervent supporters set their clocks ticking in Biblical times. They cite the kingdoms of David and Solomon as proof that, in the words of the Exodus movie’s theme-song: “This land is mine.” The majority of Israel’s backers, however, start their clocks in 1933 – the year Adolf ...
    1 week ago
  • Hard News: Public Address Word of the Year 2019: Korero phase
    In an unreliable, strange and confusing world, Public Address is proud to present a measure of comfort and stability by annually asking everyone what words or phrases sum up the year that's been – and then giving some of them consumer goods as prizes for being clever or simply lucky.Well, ...
    1 week ago
  • Generalist to specialist
    Both my parents are pretty handy – and they seem to have the right tools for most jobs in the garage and they know how to fix practically anything. A similar story could be told about their generation’s experience in the workforce – being a generalist was not unusual and ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 week ago
  • A “coincidence”
    When it was revealed that NZ First had tried to enrich itself from public office via the Provoncial Growth Fund, the Prime Minister assured us that everything was OK as Shane Jones, the Minister responsible for the fund, had recused himself. Except it seems that that recusal came very late ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Member’s Day
    Today is a Member's Day, and probably the last one of the year. After the marathon of the End of Life Choice Act, most of the bills up for debate today are uncontentious. First up is the second reading of Chlöe Swarbrick's Election Access Fund Bill. This will be followed ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Worse than I thought
    The Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee has reported back on the government's odious and tyrannical control orders bill. As expected, the fraudulent select committee process has made no significant changes (partly because they couldn't agree, but mostly because it was a stitch-up from the start, with no intention of ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • The cannabis bill and the referendum
    Yesterday, the government released its draft Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill, which will be put to a non-binding referendum at the next election. I'm not a drug policy expert, but Russell Brown is, and he thinks its pretty good. And pretty obviously, it will be a massive improvement on the ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Hard News: The Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill: pretty good so far
    As you're probably aware, the draft bill outlining the proposed legal cannabis regime to be put to a referendum late next year was published yesterday, and has already attracted a flurry of comment. It's notable that a good deal of the comment is about proposals that aren't actually new.A minimum ...
    1 week ago
  • Climate Change: Alignment
    One of the big problems in New Zealand climate change policy is the government working at cross-purposes with itself. It wants to reduce fossil fuel use, but encourages oil and gas exploration. It wants to reduce transport emissions, but then builds enormous new roads. The problem could be avoided if ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • How climate change will affect food production and security
    Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz According to the United Nations, food shortages are a threat ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 week ago
  • More bad faith
    Last year, the government announced it was ending offshore oil exploration by no longer issuing new permits. The idea was that the industry would then die off as permits expired. Except almost immediately the government revealed its bad faith, by saying they would extend permits and alter conditions to keep ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Banning foreign money from our elections
    The government has said it will ban foreign donations to political parties and candidates, and will be introducing legislation to be passed under all-stages urgency this afternoon. While I agree with the goal, I don't see a particular case for urgency, unless the government is concerned about a flood of ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Reforming the Education Acts
    The government introduced the Education and Training Bill to Parliament yesterday. Its a massive bill, which replaces both existing Education Acts, as well as various other bits of legislation (including some which are still proceeding through the House). I'll leave the serious analysis to teachers and people who actually know ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Bite-sized learning
    Amelia SharmanThere’s no one-size-fits-all when it comes to micro-credentials, those bits of bite-sized learning that can help workers stay on top of technological change.  What’s a micro-credential? While definitions vary, micro-credentials can be understood as short courses that allow people to learn new skills or have an existing competency recognised. ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 week ago
  • “Not The Labour Party We Once Knew.”
    All Smiles Now: Claire Szabo is taking up her presidential role after serving as the CEO of Habitat For Humanity. Which is absolutely perfect! After KiwiBuild was so comprehensively mismanaged by Phil Twyford, the party has not only elected a new president from a thoroughly respectable not-for-profit, but one who ...
    1 week ago
  • Marxist versus liberal methodology on transgender ideology/identity politics
    While much of the NZ left has transitioned to postmodern and identity politics in relation to transgender ideology, there are some very good articles about that deploy Marxist methodology in relation to this subject.  The one below is from the British marxist group Counterfire and appeared on their site here ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    1 week ago
  • Book review: The Farm by Joanne Ramos
    by Daphna Whitmore At Golden Oaks, a luxurious country retreat in the Hudson Valley, pregnant women have the best care money can buy. From the organic food, personalised exercise programmes, private yoga instruction and daily massages Golden Oaks looks like a country lodge for the upper class. Set some time ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    1 week ago
  • Loosening the purse strings
    When Labour was running for election in 2017, it felt it needed to demonstrate "fiscal responsibility" and signed itself up to masochistic "budget responsibility rules". It was a fool's errand: the sorts of voters who demand fiscal responsibility are also the sorts of voters who believe that labour can never ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Climate Change: How to get there
    Writing in Stuff, Joel MacManus looks at what we need to do to meet the Zero Carbon Act's targets. The core of it:1. Convert 85 per cent of vehicles on the road to electric. 2. Eliminate fossil fuels from all industrial heating up to 300 degrees Celsius. 3. Double our ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • anti-vaxxers in a measles epidemic: so many ways to be untruthful
    “Anti-vaxers are a pro-death movement,” those comments from Dr Helen Petousis-Harris speaking about six more Measles related deaths in Samoa over the past twenty-four hours. “Anti-vaxers are a pro-death movement,” those comments from Dr Helen Petousis-Harris speaking about six more Measles related deaths in Samoa ...
    SciBlogsBy Alison Campbell
    1 week ago
  • Is Youth Vaping a Problem in New Zealand?
    Professors Janet Hoek and Richard Edwards, Emeritus Professor Phil Gendall, Jude Ball, Dr Judith McCool, Anaru Waa, Dr Becky Freeman Recent media reports have presented conflicting evidence on youth vaping in NZ. While some NZ school principals report concerns about increasing vaping on school grounds and confiscating vapes, ASH Year ...
    SciBlogsBy Public Health Expert
    2 weeks ago
  • In pursuit of “Freedom and Democracy”: Forever Wars in “America’s backyard”.
    “America the Beautiful!”, staunch defender of democracy, freedom and… a whole lot of despotic tyrants that play nice with what is called “the Washington Consensus.” America is indeed capable of immense good, but like any Nation, and most assuredly any aspirant to the mantle of Empire, great, immense evil. All ...
    exhALANtBy exhalantblog
    2 weeks ago
  • November ’19 – NZ blogs sitemeter ranking
    Image credit: The beginner’s guide to blogging I notice a few regulars no longer allow public access to the site counters. This may happen accidentally when the blog format is altered. If your blog is ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Whodunnit? Finding the mystery 1080 testing lab
    1080 is used to control pests in NZ. Its use is contested by a noisy few. A new report claims high levels of 1080 in rats washed up on a beach. Flora and Fauna of Aotearoa (F&F) won’t name the laboratory that did their testing. It has sparked a hunt ...
    SciBlogsBy Grant Jacobs
    2 weeks ago
  • Authoritarian Friends, Democratic Enemies.
    What Kind Of Empire? The thing for Kiwis to decide is what kind of empire they want to belong to. The kind that, while offering its own citizens democratic rights, demands absolute obedience from its “friends”? Or, the kind that, while authoritarian at home, takes a relaxed attitude to the ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Boris Johnson Goes Down
    It hasn't been a good week for the Conservatives, pollwise.  All major recent polls are showing their lead shrinking.Comparing each pollster's current (between 29/11 and 22/11) and previous most recent poll.Com Res - Conservative lead down 3 points.You Gov - Conservative lead down 1 point.Kantar - Conservative lead down 4 ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Interesting
    Within quick succession, Countdown maths wizard and twitterer Rachel Riley, alleged comedian David Baddiel and prominent lawyer Andrew Julius have all expressed very similar opinions / ideas:
    These #3billboards are going round London today, organised by ex-Labour people, horrified by what their party has become. Their principles haven’t changed, they’re ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Damn the Polls
    So, there have been a bunch of bad polls out for Labour, and even the Leftie's friend, Survation, have recently given the Conservatives a rip-snorting 11% lead.  You Gov's much vaunted MRP poll - which pretty much nailed the result in 2015 - is currently predicting a comfortable majority for ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Climate Change: Europe declares an emergency
    The European Parliament has voted overwhelmingly to declare a climate emergency:The European parliament has declared a global “climate and environmental emergency” as it urged all EU countries to commit to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The vote came as scientists warned that the world may have already crossed ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 weeks ago
  • A Bi-Partisan Commitment To X-ing “P”.
    Pure Fear: Worse than Heroin, this drug’s addictive power was terrifying. People under its influence didn’t drift off to Elysium. Nor did it persuade inadequate individuals that they could conquer the world. No, this drug – pure crystal methamphetamine, “P” for short – unlocked the gates of Hell itself. It ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Advice about measles: when ignorance is definitely not a virtue
    As the rate of measles infection, and of deaths, continues to climb in Samoa, antivaccination activists infectious disease proponents seem intent on doubling down on their claims about vaccination. (Check pretty much any news-media FB post about measles & you’ll see exactly what I mean.) Unfortunately, some of them have ...
    SciBlogsBy Alison Campbell
    2 weeks ago

  • Government takes bite out of loan sharks
    The days of vulnerable consumers falling victim to loan sharks, truck shops and other predatory lenders are numbered, following the Credit Contracts Legislation Amendment Bill passing its third reading tonight. “Too many Kiwis are being given loans that are unaffordable and unsuitable, trapping them in debt and leaving their families ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 hours ago
  • New Zealand safer as Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders Bill) becomes law
    A Bill that prevents terrorism and supports the de-radicalisation of New Zealanders returning from overseas has passed its third reading, Justice Minister Andrew Little says. The Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders) Bill is a carefully targeted response to manage the risk posed by a small number of New Zealanders who have ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 hours ago
  • Foreign Minister and Pacific Peoples Minister to visit Samoa
    Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters and Minister for Pacific Peoples Aupito William Sio will travel to Samoa on Friday, where New Zealand medical teams are helping Samoa respond to an outbreak of measles. “New Zealand has been working closely with the Government of Samoa and offering our assistance from the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    8 hours ago
  • New Pastoral Care Code will support tertiary students in 2020
    The Government has changed the law to improve student safety and welfare in university halls of residence and other student accommodation. The Education (Pastoral Care) Amendment Bill passed its third reading this afternoon and details of an interim Code of Practice setting out the Government’s expectations of tertiary providers have also been released. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    8 hours ago
  • New infrastructure funding tool to build housing developments faster
    A new tool to help councils fund and finance infrastructure could mean some housing developments happen a decade earlier than currently planned, Urban Development Minister Phil Twyford said today. “This new tool, developed by the Government in partnership with industry and high-growth councils, will allow councils to access private debt ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    10 hours ago
  • Vision to unite the primary sector launched today
    Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor has welcomed the release of a bold new vision for the country’s vital food and fibre sector. “I’m delighted that New Zealand’s major farmer and grower organisations are today supporting the Primary Sector Council’s vision – Fit for a Better World,” he said. “The international consumers ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    12 hours ago
  • NZ congratulates PNG and Autonomous Bougainville Government on referendum
    Foreign Minister Winston Peters has congratulated the Government of Papua New Guinea and the Autonomous Bougainville Government for completing a well-conducted referendum on the future political status of Bougainville. “New Zealand supported the referendum process by providing technical advice through the New Zealand Electoral Commission and leading a Regional Police ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    13 hours ago
  • Next steps for Upper North Island logistics
    In light of Cabinet’s position that freight operations on prime land in downtown Auckland are no longer viable, the Government will now embark on a short work programme to enable decision-making in the first half of next year, Associate Transport Minister Shane Jones says. Minister Jones is today releasing the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    13 hours ago
  • Surgical mesh restorative justice report received
    Associate Health Minister Julie Anne Genter has received the report back from a surgical mesh restorative justice process undertaken by Victoria University. The process heard stories, either in person or online submission, from more than 600 people affected by surgical mesh. “The report made for heart-breaking and confronting reading,” says ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    14 hours ago
  • The Water Services Regulator Bill – Taumata Arowai a milestone for drinking water safety
    The Water Services Regulator Bill – Taumata Arowai , introduced to Parliament today, is a milestone for drinking water safety in New Zealand and will help improve environmental outcomes for urban waterways, rivers and lakes.  “This is a breakthrough for New Zealanders in terms of providing safe drinking water throughout ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    15 hours ago
  • Speech to new direction for criminal justice reform announcement
    Kia ora koutouE ngā mana, e ngā reo, e ngā matā wakaTēnā koutou katoaHaere ngā, moe maiKoutou ma ngā Rangatira Ko Anaru ahauKo au te Minita mo ngā TureHe Honore tino nui kei roto I ahau No reira tena koutou katoa Today, we are releasing two reports that are the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    15 hours ago
  • New direction for criminal justice reform
    The Government is looking to turn around the long-term challenges of criminal justice by taking a new approach to break the cycle of offending to ensure there are fewer victims of crime. Justice Minister Andrew Little released two reports today, Turuki! Turuki! from Te Uepū Hāpai I te Ora, and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    15 hours ago
  • New law sets up $300m Venture Capital Fund
    New Zealand firms expanding beyond the start-up phase are set for more support after today’s passage of the Venture Capital Fund Bill, Associate Finance Minister David Parker said. The Bill, which establishes a $300 million Venture Capital Fund, puts in place a key initiative of the Wellbeing Budget’s economic package. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • New Zealand’s National Statement to COP25
    E ngā mana, e ngā reo, e ngā iwi, e ngā rau rangatira mā. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa. Señora Presidenta, Excellencies, Delegates. International action A common thread that runs through the Paris Agreement is the commitment we have made to each other to do what we can to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • $12 billion in extra infrastructure investment
    The Government is lifting capital investment to the highest level in more than 20 years as it takes the next step to future-proof New Zealand. Finance Minister Grant Robertson has announced $12 billion of new investment, with $8 billion for specific capital projects and $4 billion to be added to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Strong economy, careful spending gives $12bn of surpluses
    The Government is forecast to run $12 billion worth of surpluses across the four years to 2023/24 as the economy continues to grow. The surpluses will help fund day-to-day capital requirements each year. These include fixing leaky hospitals, building new classrooms to cover population growth and take pressure off class ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Priorities for 2020 Wellbeing Budget outlined
    Budget 2020 will continue the Coalition Government’s focus on tackling the long-term challenges facing New Zealand while also investing to future-proof the economy. When the Government took office in 2017 it was left with crumbling infrastructure, severe underinvestment in public services, degraded rivers and lakes, a housing crisis and rising ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Minister welcomes data-rich coastline mapping tool
    The Minister responsible for the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 (te Takutai Moana Act 2011), Andrew Little has welcomed the launch of an online geospatial tool that provides data-rich, dynamic coastline maps that will significantly boost research and evidence-gathering under the Act. Te Kete Kōrero a Te ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Chief Victims Advisor reappointed for a further two years
    The Chief Victims Advisor to Government Dr Kim McGregor, QSO, has been reappointed in her role for a further two years. Dr McGregor has held the role since it was established in November 2015. She provides independent advice to government on how to improve the criminal justice system for victims. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • New Zealand tsunami monitoring and detection system to be established
    Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters and Civil Defence Minister Peeni Henare have today announced the deployment of a network of DART (Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunami) buoys. “New Zealand and the Pacific region are particularly vulnerable to natural disasters. It is vital we have adequate warning systems in place,” ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • DART Buoys Announcement
    DART Buoys Announcement Aotea Wharf, 9.30am 11 December 2019   Acknowledgements Acknowledgements to Minister for Civil Defence Hon Peeni Henare also here today. White Island It is with regret that this event shadows the tragic natural disaster two days ago. The volcanic eruptions on White Island have claimed 5 lives, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Final steps for racing industry reform
    Racing Minister Winston Peters has welcomed the first reading of the Racing Industry Bill in parliament today. This is the second of two Bills that have been introduced this year to revitalise New Zealand’s racing industry. “Our domestic racing industry has been in serious decline.  The Government is committed to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Funding to promote New Zealand Sign Language initiatives
    Minister for Disability Issues, Carmel Sepuloni, is pleased to announce that $291,321 is to be awarded to national and local community initiatives to maintain and promote the use of New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL). “New Zealand is one of the few countries  in the world where Sign Language is an ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • How New Zealand defines and recognises veterans
    Minister for Veterans Ron Mark has announced today the Coalition Government’s initial response to work completed by the independent statutory body, the Veterans’ Advisory Board. “When Professor Ron Paterson completed his review of the Veterans’ Support Act in 2018, he made a number of recommendations, including one which I referred ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Government to fund lion’s share of Ohakea water scheme
    The Government will fund the bulk of the cost of a rural water supply for the Ohakea community affected by PFAS contamination, Environment Minister David Parker announced today at a meeting of local residents. This new water scheme will provide a reliable and clean source of drinking water to the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Prime Minister statement on White Island eruption
    I have had the opportunity to be briefed on the details of the volcanic eruption of Whakaari/White Island, off the coast of Whakatane in the Bay of Plenty.  The eruption happened at 2.11pm today.  It continues to be an evolving situation.  We know that there were a number of tourists ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Govt funds $100k for weather-hit communities
    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Minister of Civil Defence Peeni Henare have today confirmed initial Government support of $100,000 for communities affected by the severe weather that swept across the South Island and lower North Island over the weekend. The contribution will be made to Mayoral relief funds across the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Death of NZ High Commissioner to Cook Islands
    New Zealand's High Commissioner to the Cook Islands, Tessa Temata, died in Palmerston North over the weekend, Foreign Minister Winston Peters said today. Ms Temata, 52, had recently returned to New Zealand for medical treatment. "On behalf of the Government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, we extend ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Wellington rail upgrade full steam ahead
    Transport Minister Phil Twyford today announced construction is underway on Wellington commuter rail upgrades which will mean more frequent services and fewer breakdowns. The upgrades include converting the Trentham to Upper Hutt single track section to a double track, with a new signalling system, upgraded stations and level crossings, and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Defence Climate Change Implementation Plan released
    Minister of Defence Ron Mark and Minister for Climate Change James Shaw have announced the release of a Defence Climate Change Implementation Work Plan, titled Responding to the Climate Crisis: An Implementation Plan.  The plan sets out a series of recommendations based on the 2018 New Zealand Defence Assessment, The ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Govt releases funding to support South Canterbury
    A medium-scale adverse event has been declared for the South Canterbury district, which will see up to $50,000 in funding made available to support farming communities which have been significantly affected by recent heavy rain and flooding in the area, says Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor. “Two weeks of solid rain ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Speech at launch of Rethinking Plastics Report
    Thank you Professor Juliet Gerrard and your team for the comprehensive and extremely helpful report and recommendations. Thank you too to all the stakeholders and interested parties who have contributed ideas and thinking to it. “Making best practice, standard practice” is a great framework for change and the action plan ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Govt pledges next steps on plastic waste
    The Government will phase out more single-use plastics following the success of its single-use plastic bag ban earlier this year and the release today of a pivotal report for dealing with waste. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has welcomed the Rethinking Plastics in Aotearoa New Zealandreport, released by her Chief Science Advisor ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • International student enrolments grow in universities and the regions
    International education continues to thrive as the Government focuses on quality over quantity, Education Minister Chris Hipkins said. The tuition revenue from international education increased to $1.16 billion last year with the average tuition fee per student increasing by $960. The total number of international students enrolled in New Zealand ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Speech to Government Economics Network 2019 Conference
    I want to talk about one of the most pressing issues in our national life: the housing crisis and the poor performance of our cities. The argument I want to make to you is that generations of urban land use policy have lacked a decent grounding in economics. The consequences ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • DHB leadership renewed and strengthened
    Health Minister Dr David Clark says new appointments to DHBs represent a significant changing of the guard, with 13 new chairs including four Māori chairs. Today 76 appointments have been announced to complement elected board members, as well as eight elected members appointed as either chair or deputy chair.  Four ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Tabuteau to advance New Zealand’s trade and political interests with European partners
    Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Fletcher Tabuteau, is travelling to Germany, Poland, Austria, and Spain next week to bolster New Zealand’s political and trade relationships in Europe. While in Spain, Mr Tabuteau will represent New Zealand at the 14th Asia-Europe (ASEM) Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Madrid. “New Zealand strongly supports ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Statement from the Prime Minister on Kris Faafoi
    “I’ve spoken to Minister Faafoi, who has apologised for his poor handling of this issue,” Jacinda Ardern said. “I have confidence in Kris as a hardworking and effective Minister, but this should have been dealt with in a much clearer manner, and I’ve made my views on that very clear ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Tonga-New Zealand Joint Ministerial Forum
    Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters met with Tongan Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pohiva Tu'i'onetoa in Wellington today. The pair signed a Statement of Partnership setting out joint priorities for cooperation out to 2023.  “We welcomed Prime Minister Tu'i'onetoa on his first visit to New Zealand as Prime Minister. Tonga ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Shooting in Kurow
    The Minister of Police Stuart Nash says his sympathies are with the family of a man who died after being shot by Police in Kurow. “Initial reports are that Police were called by a family member to help the man who was threatening to harm himself,” Mr Nash says. “However ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago