A hugely important announcement.

Please understand my point, while made politely, was simply that criticism from DOERS is more valuable and more credible than criticism from (what was the acronym Linz used to use) "UINs". Yes, Liberty (or the LibertariaNZ), like philosophy, needs to be 'sold' LIKE a retail product, so feedback is important *to a point* in that regard. But Duncan, from one ex-leftist to another, I KNOW YOU DON'T EQUATE THE CAUSE OF LIBERTY WITH A NEW PAIR OF JEANS OR A NEW PIECE OF COMPUTER HARDWARE.

How much better does this sound - "When I'm talking about my political philosophy or participating in a special event for my local Libz candidates, I'd like to do things a little differently than what the Libz have done in the past, and here's what I'd suggest..." vs. "I am not going to speak a word about or offer a bit of support for the Libz unless you guys change thus-and-such..."

Yes, image is everything, especially in politics, just ask Senator Obama. I know damn well Duncan you're not suggesting sacrificing genuine libertarian content for image, the way the now-useless U(P)S Libertarian Party has done (to absolutely no advantage). It looks like the valid issues of professionalism raised not only by Paul but by others have been addressed and the Libz are moving forward for the upcoming election with all they've got. (GO LIBZ! )

I personally loved that Nanny State cartoon the Libz used back in the 90's... but there should always be, to continue the marketing analogy, lots of different 'presentation methods' to reach many different 'customers' and temperaments. The 'message' in all its KASS honesty and splendor remains the same, but the presentation varies based on the particular kind of person you're trying to 'reach' and naturally it boils down to one individual expressing themselves to another individual.

The thing is, Craig and Bernard and Peter and Nick, and all the others, are not only top-notch talented people who, as Craig has just pointed out, have been doing great work.

They - the Libz - are the ONLY game in town. If yu were to list the top-ten pro-liberty outfits in New Zealand you would get

1) Libertarianz
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

9)
10)

If Paul had some criticisms and received shoddy service, then there is nothing wrong with airing those grievances, but Party Office Holder Craig was nothing but polite and so I can't see any reason for him to withdraw his support.

Duncan, I will extend to you the same invitation I extended to Paul. This year provides the best chance yet for Libertarianz. We are well-resourced, key people in the party are ready to take weeks or months off work to campaign fulltime and there is no opposition to be found within National, Act or anyone else. You are clearly a committed libertarian and I would invite you to help out and fight for Libertarianz this election.

Craig, you couldn't have said fairer than that. I look forward to the responses of the two gentlemen concerned, mindful that Duncan is living in Australia now of course.

On the matter of the Libz Select Cttee appearances, I attended the last one with Richard Goode, on the BZP ban, not to speak but just for immoral support. However, they asked if I had anything to add to Richard's presentation, and I made a brief remark about our overarching objection to Nanny State's ever greater intrusion into NZers' lives. That was the bit that made it onto the 6 o'clock news.

Another one-liner that got media coverage was Colin Cross's response to an MP's question, do you think the Electoral Finance Bill should be watered down? "No, not watered down, drowned!"

KASSing is not only sexy, it's smart.

Libz got a good going-over earlier in the year in the Glenn Jameson thread. I believe all valid points were duly noted. Now it's time to get in behind. There's an election on, in case no one noticed.

Linz

Duncan wrote:
But would it hurt to do it in a way that would be equally at home in a boardroom or a University dormitory?

Linz wrote:
Show me a Libz press release or name any Libz action over the last year that doesn't meet this requirement.

I would like to echo Linz's challenge. To help you along the way, here is a smorgasboard of Libz activism over the last year and a bit:

Libertarianz leader - Bernard Darnton suing Helen Clark and the Labour party for using misappropriated taxpayer money in their election campaign. A case Bernard would have won if they had not retrospectively changed the law specifically (in part) to avoid the his case.

Libz member - Mitch Lees organising the anti-smacking march in Wellington.

Both of these issues have turned the tide on Labour and will be their downfall.

Nik Haden took a principled stance and fought his cencus charge in court - obtaining excellent publicity and was described as being completely honest and co-operative yet very determined. Hardly a student activist.

The party has produced a new brochure which has good visual appeal, sums up our core principles in a positive, professional framework.

Libz press releases have not used the words "Nazi", "Hitler" or "Neanderton" for the last couple of years despite the fact that those we lambast completely deserve such honorary titles.

Libertarianz has made a number of very professional submissions to select committees. Aside from the obvious exceptions of David Benson-Pope and Judith Tizard we have always received a civil welcome. After one select committee submission, it was reported in the DomPost that the minister of communications was "shot down in intellectual combat with three lanky libertarians". It wasn't reported that the Libz submission consisted of "Fuck you you socialist nazi" because, strangely enough, we do actually have some sense of how to operate in a boardroom.

Regarding the response to Paul Dinther's criticisms of the party, I urge you to go back and read my response to him and ask yourself whether I, as an officer of the party, was rude as you have insinuated? I believe I answered his criticisms, apologised for the lack of communications (something the party has now fixed - which is why he got something in the mail to complain about) and then invited him to join in and help. He refused. That's his choice and I have nothing more to say to him.

So Duncan, it seems the best you can come up with is to attack Libertarianz for the screw-up of 2002 when we were not on the ballot due to a secretarial fuckup. That was six years ago. The party has a new leader, president and secretary and those sort of fuckups will not happen again on my watch.

Duncan, I will extend to you the same invitation I extended to Paul. This year provides the best chance yet for Libertarianz. We are well-resourced, key people in the party are ready to take weeks or months off work to campaign fulltime and there is no opposition to be found within National, Act or anyone else. You are clearly a committed libertarian and I would invite you to help out and fight for Libertarianz this election.

Regards

Craig Milmine
Libertarianz President

I have zero tolerance for this sort of crap. It's the kind of inverted perversion that fixates on being polite to silent Muslims while militant Muslims who are fucking us up the ass are let off. It's the sort of insidious, treacherous pseudo-civil slimery that prompted John McCain to disavow a talk-show host who'd introduced him on stage just because that guy spoke the truth about Obama. It makes me sick.

Now, with that off my chest, let me go through your points:

The Libz does - or at least did while I was still in NZ - have a problem with image. I remember standing at a polling booth only a short while after finding out about the Libz, wondering why they weren't on the ballot. If memory serves me correctly, the reason was that there'd been a communication breakdown & the relevant payment & paperwork wasn't lodged in time. Then, there was the website taken over by porn vendors after the domain registration lapsed.

No one gave the Libz a harder time about that cock-up than I. Privately. It was inexcusable and the then-leadership's lax attitude to it once it had happened was also inexcusable. Prior to that, Libz had had a very solid showing in the 1999 election. Subsequent to it, Libz ran a creditable campaign in 2005 that unfortunately harvested stuff-all votes because that was the Don Brash election. This year, with Neville Key (oh, I suppose that's not allowed either?!) running National and Rodney intent on a "soft" campaign for Act, there's a yawning chasm opening up for Libz to fill and I don't doubt they'll rise to the challenge. Harping on about the 2002 stuff-up at this point in this context is just pathetic.

The point that Paul makes - which is 100% correct - is that professionalism is important in every aspect of life.

And no one disputes it. A point I have made constantly to Libz office-holders is that even though they're unpaid volunteers, they must behave like paid professionals. What I personally dispute is that professionalism is synonymous with weasely appeasement of evil, a refusal to call it what it is ... and the sugar-coating of what we stand for.

Another example: the growth of Nanny State in New Zealand (& that phrase is one I agree we should be using, if nothing else because it's provoking angry responses amongst the Nannies). I remember the Free Rad issue that discussed it; the cover had a large hairy cartoon dominatrix on it, the kind of thing that was guaranteed to offend a fairly large segment of the population who'd otherwise be quite open to the Libz' arguments. It certainly made me uncomfortable circulating it around work. Didn't stop me mind you - thick skin & all - but I'd certainly have preferred something different.

The only response I'm prepared to dignify this with is, "Oh for fuck's sake!"

I've known Paul for several years & consider him a friend. He's certainly not thin-skinned and can give as good as he takes in any exchange. The fact is that he received an astoundingly rude reception to his complaints & suggestions, and - just in case he decided to press on regardless - some mockery in the monthly summary as well. You have driven off a man who I know is happy to get elbow-deep in support of a cause in which he believes.

He behaved like a tantrum-throwing infant. He chose to raise his umbrage with Libz on SOLO, as though SOLO were accountable for Libz. He blamed the very folk fighting for freedom for the fact that it's being eroded. Then he said it wasn't being eroded to any extent worth getting exercised about. He called Libz a bunch of immature students or some such. Evidently he got called a name or two back. Boo-fucking-hoo. He was invited with impeccable politeness by Craig Milmine, the Libz president, to get in "elbow-deep" with Libz. He preferred to flounce. Personally I couldn't hold him in greater contempt. He's a disgusting, whining dilettante.

But I am not Libz. I hold no office in Libz and only rarely invoke any informal status as leader emeritus-fart behind the scenes, as I did recently in a matter which I think we resolved to the party's advantage. Dinther's prattishness lies in part in the fact that he allows his personal animus towards me to dictate whether or not he gets involved in Libz.

I'm not suggesting the Libz embrace weasel-words, or compromise their principles, or back down from calling evil people and ideas evil.

That's exactly what you're suggesting.

But would it hurt to do it in a way that would be equally at home in a boardroom or a University dormitory?

Show me a Libz press release or name any Libz action over the last year that doesn't meet this requirement. Nik Haden going to the wire over the census, perhaps? Bet you don't even know about that.

In disgust,

Linz

Edited to add: this bit of Shakespeare just posted on the Prince Harry thread is apt:

But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage;
Then lend the eye a terrible aspect;
Let pry through the portage of the head
Like the brass cannon; let the brow o'erwhelm it
As fearfully as doth a galled rock
O'erhang and jutty his confounded base,
Swill'd with the wild and wasteful ocean.
Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide,
Hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit
To his full height.

In other words, KASS!!

I was a member of the Libz for several years before leaving New Zealand; it was the Constitution for New Freeland that first caught my attention, that & the fantastic Prodos interview of Lindsay. I certainly got stuck in - letter writing, working on websites including SOLO, TFR and the InfidelGear store, riding to Waitangi in the freezing rain to stand at the Marae at dawn, marching in support of GE, and speaking out against Hezbollah (the latter with only one other Libz member, Tim Wikiriwhi). I also assisted with membership drives - including the one on which I 'recruited' Paul.

So I don't think anyone can accuse me of being an armchair critic when I say that I think Paul is right on a number of issues regarding the Libz - and when I say that Paul has been driven off by an harsh, in fact outright rude response to his criticisms by many people here. Linz, you know me - I'm quite happy to take a lot of flak over areas where we disagree. But that's not typical; most people, when called a stupid jerk-off weasel (in one post) won't stick around.

The Libz does - or at least did while I was still in NZ - have a problem with image. I remember standing at a polling booth only a short while after finding out about the Libz, wondering why they weren't on the ballot. If memory serves me correctly, the reason was that there'd been a communication breakdown & the relevant payment & paperwork wasn't lodged in time. Then, there was the website taken over by porn vendors after the domain registration lapsed.

The point that Paul makes - which is 100% correct - is that professionalism is important in every aspect of life.

I remember back when I was involved in student politics at University (solidly left-wing back then I'm embarrassed to admit). We wrote letters to all the parties then in Parliament asking about a particular issue - I can't remember what it was, but that's not the point. What happened was that a few parties ignored us, a few others sent boilerplate letters - and a few days later, two ACT guys in suits turned up. They knew the policy being discussed, had nicely printed handouts covering it, and gave the students there the impression that our opinion & participation actually mattered.

Another example: the growth of Nanny State in New Zealand (& that phrase is one I agree we should be using, if nothing else because it's provoking angry responses amongst the Nannies). I remember the Free Rad issue that discussed it; the cover had a large hairy cartoon dominatrix on it, the kind of thing that was guaranteed to offend a fairly large segment of the population who'd otherwise be quite open to the Libz' arguments. It certainly made me uncomfortable circulating it around work. Didn't stop me mind you - thick skin & all - but I'd certainly have preferred something different.

I've known Paul for several years & consider him a friend. He's certainly not thin-skinned and can give as good as he takes in any exchange. The fact is that he received an astoundingly rude reception to his complaints & suggestions, and - just in case he decided to press on regardless - some mockery in the monthly summary as well. You have driven off a man who I know is happy to get elbow-deep in support of a cause in which he believes.

What the hell are you trying to achieve here?

mvardoulis (one of the polite respondents, I might add) made the following point:

Otherwise, criticism just sounds like you're providing 'customer feedback' on a retail product - which individual liberty and the battle for its defense certainly is NOT.

Yes, yes it is. For rank & file party members - without the drive and stamina of people like Peter & Lindsay (& Paul, to those who know him) - that's exactly what it is. They join, they pay their dues, write the odd letter, and generally expect that the senior members of the party will act in a way that furthers their goals.

I'm not suggesting the Libz embrace weasel-words, or compromise their principles, or back down from calling evil people and ideas evil. But would it hurt to do it in a way that would be equally at home in a boardroom or a University dormitory?

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

Don't worry Linz, just part of the campaign

Don't feel left out. We love you really.

Let me explain something about Sandi, whom I've met and from whom I finally, in the flesh, extracted an "I need to give that some thought" on the abortion question: she's neither a genocidal maniac nor a baby-killer, though she can often do great impressions thereof. She is the second most stubborn person I know next to the Irishman O'Cresswell. The one thing guaranteed to deny you the reassurances you seek from her is to demand them.

Linz

Ode to the Faire Lady Suma.

To be read aloud.

Tenacious Pit Bull of the Month award to Mark Hubbard for his persistent advocacy of judging the individual (even when the individual is collectivist/racist Obama), and for not letting Sandi off the hook!