who is chatting on SOLO ChatThe Free RadicalPopular contentWho's newWho's onlineThere are currently 4 users and 23 guests online.
Online usersPollWhat should the government do about ailing financial institutions? Nothing, except to back off and get out—as any Objectivist knows, intervention is treating the disease with the disease 83% Intervene judiciously—enough to avert a catastrophe that is otherwise imminent 3% Intervene massively—as it's doing 3% Nationalize the whole economy and be done with it. Bring on the USSA! 1% Something else (specify) 11% Total votes: 80
|
SOLO-NZ Op-Ed: Socialism By Any Other Name ...Submitted by Lindsay Perigo on Fri, 2008-09-12 11:04.
SOLO-NZ Op-Ed: Socialism By Any Other Name ... Lindsay Perigo September 12, 2008 Next to unreason, the most loathsome vice on the face of this earth is cowardice. The National Party is cowardice writ large. Supposedly the party of free enterprise and individual liberty, the National Party are verminous traitors to those values. Now that the election date has been announced, it's timely to reiterate that anyone looking for an alternative to the rampant socialism of the Labour Government should not even think about voting for them. National are the lowest life forms in Parliament, the intensity of the competition notwithstanding. Consider this unmitigated twaddle from leader Neville Key's newsletter following the election announcement: “November 8 2008 represents a big opportunity for this country. It is the chance for voters to choose a brighter future for New Zealand in this 21st century world. This election is about New Zealanders having the opportunity to choose a government that is focused on what matters to them. It is about being able to turn a fresh page and put all the political distractions and intrigue of the past three years behind us.” This is the same Neville Key, remember, who fancies himself as Barack Obama, who reiterates ad nauseam the oily ad-men's and spin-doctors' revolting platitudes about turning a fresh page, opening a new chapter, standing up, moving forward, reaching out, meeting the challenges of the twenty-first century, etc., etc., etc. This ick is simply marshmallow coating on a socialist core in both cases. Listen as this gelatinous fraud continues (Neville, I mean, not Obama): “This election is the opportunity for voters to choose a government that will focus on strongly growing our economy, on steadily reducing taxes to provide incentives for people to build their lives here in New Zealand, and on investing in breakthrough technology like ultra-fast broadband to get us up to speed with the rest of the world.” Well, ain’t that liberating and empowering, dudes? Neville's Nats will personally make sure we're all hooked up to ultra-fast broadband. Just what governments are for. If you're a communist or a fascist. What next in this “advance auction of stolen goods,” as H. L. Mencken would put it? DVD vouchers for all? Why not a million dollars a year for every citizen and be done with it? “This election is the opportunity to choose a government that will concentrate on improving our education system; a government that will run a crusade on literacy and numeracy; and a government that will focus on high standards and achievement so that every Kiwi child gets the opportunity to succeed in life.” That's a damned good reason not to vote for a government comprising Lockwood Smith, the worst Education Minister in history, the craven quisling who capitulated to the teacher unions and the bureaucracy and expedited the surrender of education to the forces of Political Correctness, the Gramscians who banned grammar and had kids sitting around singing Kumbaya and seeking consensus on the location of the liver in a cow’s body. “National is determined to get better results out of all of our public services. We will cap the core bureaucracy and ensure more of our precious tax dollars are spent on frontline services.” Cap? How about knee-cap?! How about aggressive privatisation — real privatisation, not sale to cronies — whereby New Zealanders become shareholders in more than name only?! Oooops. Don't mention the 'p' word. It might be in our constitution, but we're not supposed to say it. “In health in particular we are determined to get maximum value out of every dollar. National will manage the public health service to deliver better, sooner, more convenient healthcare for all New Zealanders. We will deliver shorter waiting times, less bureaucracy, and a trusted and motivated health workforce.” In fairness, it must be conceded that National will improve the health of all of us well before the election with statements like this. Laughter is the best medicine, after all. “Finally, and very importantly, National is determined to improve safety in our communities. We will crack down on criminal gangs, and we will strengthen the bail laws, parole laws, and sentencing laws, to keep dangerous criminals off our streets.” Yeah, yeah, yeah. The party that merged traffic into general policing and gave us a revenue-gathering speed fixation and an obsessive checking of drivers' sobriety in place of real law enforcement. The party that wants more of the remaining resources devoted to the anti-freedom war on drugs, the party that believes the only crimes worth prosecuting are those without victims. “On November 8, New Zealanders have a chance to rule a line under the past three years and choose a fresh start with fresh optimism and fresh hope. It is their opportunity to choose a brighter future with a government that is determined to focus on the real issues that matter in their lives. This election is not about the past. It's not about the old political battles of the past 20 or 30 years. It's about the future. It's about New Zealand's future, it's about the future of New Zealand families. It's about seizing the opportunities of a new century in a positive optimistic way.” Don't you think you're overdoing the Obama impersonations, Neville? Helen Clark is absolutely right about National. It's the party of focus groups and flip-flops. It not only doesn't have the courage of its convictions; it has no convictions to have the courage of. There is a party in New Zealand that stands unashamedly and uncompromisingly for individual liberty and free enterprise. Its name begins with 'L' and it's assuredly not Labour, though it appears next to Labour in ballot papers. To date, it hasn't fared well precisely because of its integrity and because sympathisers have been confused and seduced by the double-speak of the ACT compulsionists. It doesn't promise to take care of everyone; it promises to leave everyone alone. It says all adult interaction in all spheres of life should be voluntary. Libertarianz will prosper when enough people display the courage of their adulthood. In the meantime, Labour and National Socialists alike will continue to treat us like children in servitude. Lindsay Perigo 021 255 8715 SOLO SOLOPassion.com
( categories: )
Yes, a splendid post,
Submitted by Elijah on Sat, 2008-09-13 05:36.
Yes, a splendid post, Scott...although would you believe the minimum wage in NZ is already at the disgraceful level of $12-50 per hour? Anthony Blomfield...when you ACT chaps mention the word 'pragmatic' I always cringe. "Pragmatic" is what Lindsay is criticising National for...focus groups and flip flopping; and it is astounding you chaps do not realise how deceitful you are being with pragmatism. The big problem with ACT is none of you chaps really believe what you are doing. ACT people believe they are being a**holes and feel guilty when they mention things like welfare reform or tax cutting. Deep down you chaps believe the Welfare State and Socialism is the 'standard' and you are deviating from it, whereas the Libz believe that centuries of free market capitalism is the standard. We do not need to be pragmatic.....BECAUSE WE ARE RIGHT ..on every single issue, on every single occasion we are right and everyone who disagrees with us is wrong. 100% wrong. No middle ground. good stuff DeSalvo
Submitted by gregster on Sat, 2008-09-13 04:53.
When are you visiting downunder? I'll buy the drinks. Ta. but what next
Submitted by Kiwihub-Anthony on Fri, 2008-09-12 22:37.
Hi Lindsay, Would you stop bloody banning me from your website.
If you really care then you should be facitliting people like me. You have the right ideas but do you have the conviction to put them in to progress. Would you rather be happy being on the offensive than really leading a pramagtic change. Will you be happier to be right, and see the wrong happening. Personally what you have been saying, you would have to be stupid if someone did not agree. So lets not debate anymore on who is right, or what version of the truth. Many agree you correct. So what do we do now? Is not Act the best way for this to happen, why can't you join Act and help move this through. For me it comes down to a Constitution which does not allow forced taxes or such. We should really be putting a constitiuon together and asking for the UN to help.
Yes th UN. and Also I thought 4 years ago possible the only way if Act does not get in is for th Queen to act on our behald and enforce rule on our evil Excutive. Does she have the power to do this.
Anthony Blomfield This should be on a
Submitted by Mark Hubbard on Fri, 2008-09-12 21:26.
This should be on a billboard. Change the Libz Platform
Submitted by atlascott on Fri, 2008-09-12 15:09.
1. Promise $10,000 for every person in NZ as a rebate from the government. Then, once you are in power, do the right thing--keep none of the promises and work towards fixing the government. After all, NONE of the politicians ever keep ANY of their promises, so go for it. For the few people who are shocked by the change in policy, explain to them that the Party is lying in order to get into power. Accuse anyone accusing you of lying of lying and make a bigger show of their bias. Hire a local hooker to accuse the accuser of drug abuse, rape, being mean to kittens and puppies, throwing water at people (battery). For anyone other than a trusted source, use politicians-speak and never answer the question. Just watch some American TV where Barack Hussein Obama is answering a direct question--master at not answering anything. If other parties get in on it, just out-promise them. Seriously, if Labour says that it is going to ensure that the minimum wage is raised to $10/hour, then you promise to raise it to $20/hour. It seems the enormity of the lie doesn't matter. Ideologically, the voters seem to have accepted the premise the the government is here to do everything for them. So that's the road to power. When addressing business, just tell them that you will eliminate all business taxes, and the government will supplement their workers' pay to the tune of $12 per hour, so the minimum wage that the employer pays will actually be REDUCED by $2. No one is really asking or answering how anyone is really going to PAY for anything. People don't CARE how any of this is going to be PAID for. They just WANT, WANT, WANT. If someone DOES corner you and ask how you are going to PAY for any of this, just tell them "by reducing redundancies and government corruption and by moving to cleaner "green" sources of energy which which help us release cost savings with economies of scale." It does not mean anything but it sounds like it might, and that should satisfy voters. Scott DeSalvo www.desalvolaw.com |
User loginFeatured BookNavigation |
Only $1M each?
Make it $2M and you've got my vote!
(kidding, of course).
Lie and the world lies with you.
Tell the truth, and the world lies about you.
-Oscar Wilde
Whose platitudes?
At the risk of stating the obvious, the platitudes I referred to were the ones Linz quoted.
Exemplary platitudes!
The quotes in Linz's post are like a lesson in what a platitude is. It gave me an idea. Collect quotes of that sort from each party, except Libz, I presume, and mix them up, without any note of authorship, of course, then hand it out as a flyer at grocery stores, etc.
Title it "Who's Who in Election Promises" or something like that, and have multiple-choice check boxes below each quote, for the reader to mark which party they think said it. On the back, reproduce the whole thing, with party of the author indicated, that is, with the answers.
(You could set up a table with this done on poster boards, where the person has to flip up the quote, or a piece of covering paper, to see which party is making the claims. Operators could get people to say who they thought made the quote, and laugh with them when they are wrong. Hand out your literature, which, of course, MUST be written in a straight-forward way, contrasting dramatically with the collected quotes they couldn't tell apart.)
I haven't been reading NZ election materials, being in the U.S., but I'd be willing to bet that the quotes, without any distortion, do not sound more like one party than the other. In trying to attribute them, people will see that they don't know one party's ideology from another, that so much of their rhetoric is foolishly vague, and that to cast a meaningful vote, they'd better look closer at their options.
This could also be done in a newspaper article, with the answers at the end, or in an ad. If anybody tries it, let me know, OK?
= Mindy
Excellent post Elijah
And right on!
What you opponents seem not to understand is that what YOU and Libz propose IS better--for everyone. Men will become men, for the first time in their lives, when they stand up on their own two feet. Women will stop relegating themselves to the role of baby machines and invest in themselves and their education so that they can be the NZ Sarah Pallin.
The economy will be more robust, more and better jobs result, freedom allows more entrepreneurs to come on in and join the party.
The faster you get to this, the faster people will begin reaping the rewards. See? TOTALLY altruistic (snicker).
Scott DeSalvo
www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!
We can
Sorry.
I don't have much sympathy
kaiwai on Sat, 2008-09-13 11:54.
NZs are fucken slackers who rely on the state, I dont care if they all go to a jail and work to make clothes etc.
We need to move fast if some are to slow then they can work in a jail.. (private jail.)
lazy stupid socilist are sick and they have lived of many others for years.
For a transformation to
For a transformation to occur and for it to last long term, you need to bring the public along - if you don't, in a few years there will be a backlash and a reversion back to the old system. We're already seeing this in Russia with the revert back to dictatorship as Russians experience with Democracy was that of chaos rather than freedom.
We could 'achieve' a 'Libertarian paradise' tomorow, but it would be like taking a drug off an addict who has used it for 50 years - there are going to be consequences with the 'cold turkey approach'.
Ah So
You are waltzing with Matilda. You have escaped NZ.
Which team are you cheering for? Wallabies?
Back to Sutton.
Yeah, what ever Elijah.
Yeah Elijah, thanks. I can understand what you are saying. I don't know if Act members are like that. [Sort of a believe halfway. - That social assistance in imperative in a free market. ]
I am not, actually the theory is pretty basic. Sorry to offend but this is embarrassing that we are having a conversation on this when many countries worked this out 15 years ago.
So the pragmatic side is that Act may be able to get these changes started. I just don't want to see more ignorance, for me Act have thought of the best way to get this working, Libertarians seem more happy just to see it all working.
Being right is the easy part. We need to get an entire country to move, and be happy with the move. Welfare is great it is nice, forcing others to pay for this is incorrect. I can over look it pragmatically yes of course, I see that some level needs to be there until people majoure, but that does not mean I believe it is right. can you understand.
its like a stop gap until people become happy with a modern free-market.