NRT: I don’t see it either

Written By: - Date published: 2:49 pm, March 25th, 2014 - 49 comments
Categories: mana - Tags: ,

no-right-turn-256Idiot/Savant at No Right Turn allows us to cherry pick and reproduce his interesting posts for comment like this one.

The “big” political news today (this being a non-sitting week when the politicians are on holiday, some of them literally) is that the Internet Party is in talks with Mana to form an electoral alliance (which presumably means a joint party list). Like pretty much everyone else, I’m boggled by this. Its easy to see why the Internet Party would want to talk to Mana: they’re unlikely to make 5%, so they need to find an electorate MP to get their people into Parliament. But its much harder to see why Mana would be interested in assisting a party founded by a multi-millionaire (who sought to buy influence via John Banks), and whose platform and core constituency has virtually nothing in common with theirs. Even talking to Dotcom undermines Mana’s sense of authenticity and alienates its supporters and activists. For them, its all cost and no benefit.

But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe Maori and the poor are deeply interested in internet freedom, and maybe there’s a lot of IT geeks who support the Treaty and worker’s rights. Or maybe, despite those enormous differences, they’ll be able to get along, or at least co-habit. After all, Winston manages it – though largely by ensuring his two core constituencies of conservative Maori and racist Pakeha pensioners are never in the same room together. But I doubt it.

49 comments on “NRT: I don’t see it either ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. karol 1
    25 March 2014 at 3:16 pm

    I tend to agree. While Dotcom and the left are opposed to John Key and his government, I don’t think there’s much in common policy & principles/values-wise.

  2. Ergo Robertina 2
    25 March 2014 at 3:24 pm

    Most voters are only vaguely aware of Mana, and the fact it is the one party not espousing neoliberal and market based solutions. This alliance, albeit idiosyncratic, would draw attention to Mana’s other policy platforms and make the party relevant.

    • Chooky 2.1
      25 March 2014 at 8:44 pm

      ER +100 …agreed!…could be a brilliantly smart move on the part of Mana…certainly give them a higher profile…and a trendy one amongst the gamers and computer nerds…most of whom would not have an objection to socialist principles as long as they have internet freedom

      ….gamers live in a postmodern world or an internet world of many worlds and virtual worlds.

      …Dotcom could be just the PR sugar coating to the socialist pill that Mana needs!

      ….cant see that an alliance with a socialist party would hurt Dotcom either …it would give him the political platform, alliances and connections he needs to pursue his internet freedom principles and escape the harassment of the Americans and John Key

  3. Ant 3
    25 March 2014 at 3:37 pm

    Seems like an idiotic move for Mana if true, Bomber must have something to do with it.

    • Murray Olsen 3.1
      25 March 2014 at 7:53 pm

      Pretty much my guess as well, Ant. I can’t really think of anyone else who would consider it a good idea.

      Mana has been slowly, but steadily, building a movement around some core issues. It has provided a focus for many new, young and not so young activists. This move, if there is anything to it, smacks of desperation and shortcuts. It could only appeal to someone who sees politics in terms of birth year rather than class.

    • Populuxe1 3.2
      25 March 2014 at 10:41 pm

      Yeah, this has Bombast’s fingerprints all over it. There is no common basis here – Dotcom is essentially Pirate/Libertarian, and MANA is an already stange hybrid of Tino Rangatiratanga and Socialism. It makes no sense.

    • the pigman 3.3
      26 March 2014 at 2:50 am

      One-time-Internet-Party-consultant Bomber has been talking it up on the Daily Blog today.. to admittedly a fairly lukewarm response: http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/03/25/confidence-and-supply-bottom-lines-in-mana-movement-internet-party-alliance/

      Sue Bradford fairly squarely torpedoed the idea, but one wonders how much control anyone in the Mana movement has over HH.

      • Populuxe1 3.3.1
        26 March 2014 at 9:54 am

        Enough that they managed to get HH to modify his views on marriage equalisation, but, hell, the Maori Party managed to get him to toe the tine for a while too. This is just a hideous move – it will taint MANA’s branding and I suspect make a coalition even more difficult.

  4. Tracey 4
    25 March 2014 at 3:38 pm

    unless dotcom is promising cheap internet and computers for low income families i cant see how manas goals are furthered by this either.

  5. Anne 5
    25 March 2014 at 3:46 pm

    There is one possible link (I would think its more of an empathetic understanding) they may have in common. Both parties have experience of the authoritarian regimes within democratically elected governments such as ours which can be so devastating for the groups they choose to target.

    Maori have been subjected to hounding and harassment for more than 150 years and it has had a terrible effect on both their physical and in some cases psychological well-being. They know what its like to be under constant suspicion and frequently mistreated by the authorities for no other reason other than they are Maori. Prejudice and bigotry is still rife among a certain section of the Pakeha population.

    Kim Dotcom has been subjected to a different kind of harassment and intimidation but the emotional response is probably much the same. The gentleman is an enigma to me – I can’t make him out – but there is no doubting he is being targeted by US authorities because he is seen as a threat to their world domination of cyberspace. The charges laid against him may have an element of truth to them, but they have been grossly exaggerated for self-serving purposes.

    I still find it hard to see a truly common link between them however…

    • Tracey 5.1
      25 March 2014 at 4:07 pm

      the biggest difference between them, to me, is that hone gives a shit about his constituency, the maori poor, maori health and maori education. dotcom does what is best for dotcom. it is a HUGE difference, imo, and one i cant see bridged, unless dotcom is going to “buy” the arrangement and MANA use the mo ey for their people and to fight the good fight in the Maori seats?

      • Skinny 5.1.1
        26 March 2014 at 4:47 pm

        A friend of mine may stand for the new NZ independent party trying to be established by Bendan Horan, I would have thought Dotcom’s party would have been a smart move to combine with?

        I turned down the offer myself as I would hate to distract from the any votes to L/G. Anyway here is Brendon’s link
        http://nzindependent.org.nz/

  6. Craig Glen Eden 6
    25 March 2014 at 5:01 pm

    I personally find it interesting that people feel they know Kim Dotcom well enough to make judgement about his political beliefs. Secondly just because he held a belief at one time dosent mean life’s recent event’s wont have changed his views now. I mean look at Gareth Morgan hell that guy has had a road to Damascus change in his views which is almost unbelievable. While those of us on the left dont have to hold the guy up as a hero we dont have to stone him either.

    Declaration; No money was received from Kim Dotcom to make this post, I have never been to his mansion or been in a helicopter with him.lol

  7. Caleb 7
    25 March 2014 at 5:39 pm

    I agree. I’m all for strategic use of MMP (and the left getting in on the action, given that the next election could potentially be won by National’s two or three cups of tea). But an alliance between these two seems bizarre.

    Anyway, you should repost this blog of NRT’s – hits the nail on the head (even if it’s just paraphrasing Duncan Garner. Garner sometimes does get it right!). http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2014/03/the-real-barrier-to-fixing-housing.html

  8. Arthur 8
    25 March 2014 at 6:28 pm

    The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

  9. ian 9
    25 March 2014 at 6:43 pm

    Hone needs the money.Dotcom needs an entrypoint to politics. This is whoring 101.

  10. The Real Matthew 10
    25 March 2014 at 8:16 pm

    If Dotcom has an existing electorate MP ready to defect and is talking to another 3-4 MP’s as claimed over the weekend then why would he be talking to Hone?

    More BS from Mr Dotcom.

    Mana need to stick to their guns and tell Mr Dotcom to go and get stuffed.

    • Populuxe1 10.1
      25 March 2014 at 10:45 pm

      Simple. I’d say he’s got Horan, but Horan doesn’t have a party and probably no future beyond the next election without some machinery behind him. He never said he had an electorate MP, just that he had a sitting MP.

      • Tracey 10.1.1
        26 March 2014 at 10:16 am

        then he doesn’t have an electorate MP. Horan is a list MP now sitting on his own.

  11. Once was Tim 11
    25 March 2014 at 9:11 pm

    Did not Hone say something like “I’d do a deal with the Devil himself if it would get rid of this gubbamint”?
    Just wondering if that was my imagination working :p

    But ….. bizarre indeed

    • Rosie 11.1
      26 March 2014 at 8:54 am

      Yeah, I think he did, Once was Tim. Where did we hear it?

      Like Arthur said above at 8 “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”

      Anne raises a good point at 5 as a possible explanation in terms of a sense of connection but agree the idea of Mana and The Internet Party hooking up is bizarre. As much as I respect Hone Harawira and the work he does I’m with Sue Bradford on this one.

      Maybe it’s just one of those election year moments of weirdness and won’t amount to anything

      • Populuxe1 11.1.1
        26 March 2014 at 10:28 am

        “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” ended up creating Al-Qaeda

        • Tracey 11.1.1.1
          26 March 2014 at 10:33 am

          is that the new 21st century version of Godwin’s law?

          • Populuxe1 11.1.1.1.1
            26 March 2014 at 10:36 am

            Godwin’s law gets brought up far too often when something can quite legitimately be compared with the Naz1s

            • Tracey 11.1.1.1.1.1
              26 March 2014 at 10:41 am

              I agree. It’s a lame phrase design to shut down argument/discussion without any genuine opposing argument. Much like when someone says something is “PC”. Same thing.

  12. Populuxe1 12
    26 March 2014 at 10:09 am

    Ideologically Dotcom doesn’t respect IP. In the digital economy IP is the equivalent of worker capital. Ergo, Dotcom doesn’t want the workers of the digital economy to retain control of production and therefore he is an enemy of socialism. Tikanga is the traditional Maori equivalent of IP, and therefore it is unlikely Dotcom respects the traditional rights of Maori to control their Tikanga. It’s really quite simple. MANA shouldn’t go near Dotcom.

  13. Ant 13
    26 March 2014 at 10:30 am

    The word from Mana:

    “MANA will work co-operatively with any party, as we do with the Greens and Labour, that is committed to changing the government we’ve got now” said Harawira “”And I don’t think the Internet Party is ready to take that stand at the moment”

    “They don’t have a real membership base, clear policies, recognisable political leaders or any candidates.” “We were happy to talk about the potential for co-operation, but time is short” said Harawira. “We’ve got an election coming up and campaigns to organise, especially in the Maori Seats. Asking the membership to put all that on hold while we wait for the Internet Party to decide what they stand for is just not an option”.

    “Our Executive has decided that there won’t be any more meetings on possible co-operation until their intentions are clear” said Harawira “and we’re just going to get on with planning our electorate and party vote campaigns.”

    http://mana.net.nz/2014/03/no-to-national-or-no-deal-with-mana-harawira/

    • Rosie 13.1
      26 March 2014 at 1:12 pm

      Thanks for that Ant. Good to know. Onwards and upwards.

    • Populuxe1 13.2
      26 March 2014 at 1:36 pm

      Haha – I posted that on The Daily. Predictably Bombast deleted it. One can only assume how much he hates Sue Bradford right now – good on her for talking sense.

      • freedom 13.2.1
        26 March 2014 at 3:11 pm

        Well, just post it again then Populuxe1.

        Maybe you can invite Martyn Bradbury to respond to this accusation?
        Might just pop over there and do it myself, as it is a serious (and somewhat baffling) accusation and if blogs are going to ever hold a position of credibility regarding the social discussion they foment then hosts not posting comments purely because of perceived personal bias is an unwelcome agent.

        All blogs have certain rules and yes posts sometimes get pulled, but most often it is the veracity of content or information in a post, or the nature of the post itself. You are suggesting Martyn Bradbury pulled a link to a press release from a party clarifying a topic he had written a story on, based on nothing more than conjecture of political associations.

        You make a big claim and I am sure that after it is brought to the host’s attention then due explanation would be forthcoming.

        saved you the time, I popped over and did it myself after all

        • Populuxe1 13.2.1.1
          26 March 2014 at 3:27 pm

          Perhaps you are unfamiliar with Bombast’s modus operandi. His fondness for censorship is well known – one of themore interesting cases being the tantrum he threw when Giovanni Tiso, Russell Brown and others pointed out that a cartoon he had posted was antisemitic.
          http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/12/22/benefit-of-the-doubt-daily-gallery-image/

          • freedom 13.2.1.1.1
            26 March 2014 at 3:42 pm

            May I’m a bit dim but I fail to see how that example is relevant to your accusation?

            Either way, I am not defending Martyn Bradbury, I am looking for validity of your claim that he is censoring some widely accessible information, namely a Mana Party press release.
            It is a press release populuxe1, what is there to censor that won’t be discovered elsewhere?

            • Populuxe1 13.2.1.1.1.1
              26 March 2014 at 3:53 pm

              I never suggested he was censoring “widely accessible information” – I did, however, say he was censoring me – which is something he is wont to do if you discredit his hobbyhorses with mere facts or show him up in any way, shape or form.

            • Rosie 13.2.1.1.1.2
              26 March 2014 at 4:00 pm

              Hi freedom – I must say Bomber has censored lil’ ol’ mild mannered me in the past. I think his ego gets in the way and he doesn’t like being crossed, he tends to bruise easily.

          • freedom 13.2.1.1.2
            26 March 2014 at 4:00 pm

            well, my TDB comment asking for some clarification has gone from moderation to ? nowhere!

            Which I admit is a disappointment and casts an unfavourable light on my view of TDB.
            That seems a common enough occurrence lately, be it blogs or reality, it’s all a bit shit.

            even saved you the trouble of responding to this comment Populuxe1
            http://joshywashington.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/screen-shot-2010-02-18-at-11-15-22-pm.png

            • Populuxe1 13.2.1.1.2.1
              26 March 2014 at 4:07 pm

              Not at all. You were polite even if you didn’t give me the benefit of the doubt. Bombast is just the NZ Left’s burden to bear.

            • Ant 13.2.1.1.2.2
              26 March 2014 at 4:18 pm

              Censoring inconvenient user comments (going beyond mere moderation) is fairly common across the blogosphere.

              Unsurprising because there is always little bit of ego involved in the act of blogging and in the act of commenting on blogs. 😀

              [lprent: We do that on first time comments, people who are banned, or we make it bloody clear why we are moderating because we mark what we are deleting.

              First time commenters are presumed to be spambots until they manage to say something that proves them to be intelligent humans. Some appear to find that quite difficult to do. It isn’t hard for newcomers to pick up bans as they’re repeatably asked to read the policy – another humanity test called “being a guest”.

              Typically making unsubstantiated assertions of fact, to attack authors or the site, appearing to be trying to start a silly flamewar and of course the old favourite of wasting the time of the moderators are all fast ways to lose the ability to comment.

              I don’t really like that “make the comment quietly disappear” approach. It doesn’t educate about why it was a bad idea to write that comment. So it actually engenders more support work because people don’t learn. ]

  14. PapaMike 14
    26 March 2014 at 2:04 pm

    Can anybody tell me where is DotCom going to get his million – he still owes his tradesmen ?

  15. Once was Pete 15
    26 March 2014 at 2:10 pm

    Looks like Hone is in full reverse gear. Latest news reports are saying there will be no ‘cooperation’ until Dotcom commits to getting rid of Key.
    I guess the money is coming with too much downside!

    • Tracey 15.1
      26 March 2014 at 2:37 pm

      reverse? perhaps post his statements on this in chronological order.

    • Ant 15.2
      26 March 2014 at 2:56 pm

      Reverse gear? What a load of shit.

      • Hone met with Dotcom
      • Said he’d talk to the exec at the Mana AGM
      • Goes to Mana AGM
      • Exec decided Dotcom is dumb
      • Announcement: Mana isn’t dealing with Dotcom.

      • Populuxe1 15.2.1
        26 March 2014 at 3:08 pm

        Bombast must be heartbroken that his wee deal has fallen through and he can’t crow about being a (hahahahaha) political mastermind….