(e)To excite such hostility or ill will between different classes of persons as may endanger the public safety.
Wow. If the sedition laws weren't almost entirely abused for evil purposes, they might almost be worth keeping just for that clause.
The number of people liable over the last few years of political campaigning would be enormous.
Anarchy the only answer.
I don't mind that, but we could look into nuclear power as well.
Nuclear Anarchy sounds like so much fun.
Wait, I've played that before.
So where do we keep the power armour in NZ?
Where the major pitfall to be avoided is moving to spin doctored talking points being regurgitated by ditto heads. It's engagement, of a sort, but there's not that much difference between being disempowered through lack of knowledge, and being disempowered through lack of unfiltered knowledge.
Craig said "fit". This was always what Craig said.
Where will the Rove blame the other guy strategy hit? I would have thought it had already hit. The "underclass" speech was a rainbow-six style double tap. It tagged the emotional buttons, it tagged the supporting the people who struggle within a society.
Basically, he's claiming that the benefit system (is evil and must be replaced with tax rebates) isn't up to the job of ensuring all NZers are equal. When National have a clear history of creating inequality in NZ(ers) - bing, both Rove requisites tagged.
[this comment is admittedly hideously partisan, given the generally bipartisan and cosmopolitan nature of these boards (nice work Russell et al), but I've lived enough of Nationals solutions to a failing economy and families that can't support themselves alone to know I don't like it.]
Hmm? Me? I was there, lurking as ever. I even dragged along a generally unpolitical geek friend to see the smart people talk about the smart things.
Main thing to take away from it for me was a complete disagreement with the consensus reached that it was "unrealistic to think that you might change the number of people who are interested in politics in any given population". It wasn't those words, but it was there more or less. And me being the optimist, as far as people go, I'm going, well, maybe we can get there.
Far as I can see it, the problem is reaching the critical number of translation nodes. Ie, converting what is appealing to pol geeks, into what is conceptionally worthwhile to the majority of the people who live in NZ. It's a big thing, but the big web changes (tech is catching up to thought, we always need more Rob McKinnons) are really only enabling a small portion of the population at this point.
Tangential:And again, grating, for me, was the continual return to "the govt must do this" to make whatever we want happen. I'm a firm believer in, we do it. We are the public, we have to make it happen.
So yes - big challenge : make the geeks capable of being the activation points for the political conciousness of all their friends.
Major risk: the middle class gets fucked over enough that they react without being informed, and we get another revolution to put the same type of people in charge. With all the pain that goes with that sort of endeavour.
Chances are you're talking about a different Greg though, so you know, whatevers.
You should have got a confirmation to print and take with you, according to what happened to me.
From Mr Cresswell:
And "how affordable will it be to live in his sprawling, car-dependent suburbs when oil prices soar even higher?" Well, isn't the future affordability or unaffordability up to those who choose to live in these sprawling, car-dependent suburbs, and to invest in their own future?
After all, neither Tom Beard nor Dick Hubbard nor Al Bore nor any planner anywhere in the world has a direct line to the future. Freedom means we're each allowed to plan our own futures, with the full knowledge of our own context, our own lives, and our own hopes and dreams, and -- provided we don't initiate force against anyone else -- we should all be free to do so.
Tangential to the sprawl argument, he slings in some for gated communities.
I get really tired of these arguments that basically boil down to "fine! we'll take our bat and ball and leave!" - same old reason as ever, they'll be back as soon as they get screwed looking for a handout to get them back on their feet.
And despite what he claims, privatised utilities are more often than not simply not working in the real world - water anyone?
It wouldn't be too hard to start a John Key/Mayor Quimby meme, with a little bit of guerilla advertising. If someone wants to photoshop up a suitable graphic...
Not that I'd ever suggest such a thing as political activism in polite society.
Although I did jump somewhat to a conclusion there. I know there are some farmers in NZ that are working towards incorporating balance to the externalised costs (largely environmental). If you are one of those brave few, then I apologise, and commend you.
Possibly the same place that the subsidies and unreclaimed externalities which make it economically wonderful come from.
Someone didn't get the tonka truck they wanted for christmas.