Hard News: Local Heroes?
212 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 9 Newer→ Last
-
All we're getting from Labout is "raising GST is evil, but we're not actually going to commit to anything concrete like repealing it"
Word. The Ax the Tax campaign is what actively stopped me from joining Labour. If that's Labour trying to focus on economic issues, I think they would hurt themselves less by trying to, I don't know, make everyone buy gay lightbulbs.
It drives me nuts.
Under Labour, you may or may not pay 15% less for those nuts.
-
3410,
Refusing to reverse [Section 59] seems to have done Key no harm at all
Sort of like how mum gets no thanks for cooking all week, and then dad's a hero for taking you out for an ice cream on Saturday.
-
I don't see how pandering to moral conservatives - which is what we're talking about - can be sold as "having listened to the electorate" the way that you have.
Harking back to that Olsen interview, wouldn't it be nice if the debate could be couched in terms of 'basic human rights', or even 'constitutional rights', especially in regards to, in Gio's words allowing gay people to enter into civil unions or protecting children from physical abuse (I'll leave out the the energy efficient bulbs, well, obviously) rather than 'pandering to the electorate'? In fact, is that not the case? Surely certain fundamental rights do exist, even in little old New Zealand. And these rights should not be at the whim of whichever party is in ascendency at the time.
</naive>
</optimist>
</often_disappointed> -
'Hey ladies, homos, and brown folk: could you stop pestering us *normal people* with all your weird little *needs* and whatnot? It's tiresome.'
Speaking of liberal "sneering 'we-know-best' arrogance"...
-
If you want proof Labour is currently a party colonised by an out-of-touch middle class liberal elite drawn largely from the top 20% of the income spectrum, who are more concerned with whether or not Chris Carter is being discriminated against because he is teh gay than the almost total public anger at his disgraceful abuse of public money and even more outrageous sense of entitlement
Or, gosh, here's a thought: talk to some actual Labour party members, because I haven't actually talked to one to date who agrees with any of the above.
I'm also curious: if Labour is the party of the top 20% of income earners, who the hell are National the party of?
-
Ah, Tom! Tom, Tom, Tom, Tom, Tom...
-
Tom is in a shitty mood today.
Bradford was a Green MP. I would like to think no Labour politician would have have handled the issue with her inept arrogance.
Section 59 IS a classic example of the liberal "sneering 'we-know-best' arrogance". Not because it was wrong, but because of how it was handled. The so-called party of the people was hurtled headlong into a confrontation with almost 100% of it's base support. And why? Because Sue Bradford was an arrogant MP who couldn't be bothered doing anything other than treating anyone who disagreed with her like a piece of shit on her shoe, until it was to late.Your reaction shows that it is all about your feelings towards Sue Bradford rather than what was a relatively simple bit of legislation. I have a feeling that the so-called "arrogance" may have just been Sue getting tired of people focussing on her rather than the legistlation.
-
Tom, dude, you don't get to call anyone else arrogant: I'm one of the people with vaginas you might as well be ordering to 'get in behind'. You'll forgive me if I find your dismissing my concerns as worn-out 'identity politics' just a tad... really fucking annoying.
(Sorry for 'sucking all the joy out of the discussion' with my pesky gender politics, Danyl.)
-
if Labour is the party of the top 20% of income earners, who the hell are National the party of?
John Key. The thin end of the wedgewood.
-
I'm one of the people with vaginas you might as well be ordering to 'get in behind'
That's because you haven't yet learnt to respond to whistles. It would be so much more efficient that way.
-
I'm not sure John Banks being seen as a campaigner for social justice is all that amazing.
Really? Let's go back, say, two years...
I have very firm recollections of an interview Banks gave about this on, I think, National Radio, and it was quite clear that he did not support the moves being mooted.
-
Surely a labour leader could get that over and not rely on ertzatz NACT policies washed down with dog-whistles to bigotry
A competently positioned one, yes.
I don't know if people are really sick of it. They're just not talking about it, or thinking in those terms.
Exactly - framing. The stuff that strategists, marketing folk and leaders are meant to be helping get right. If they're competent.
'Hey ladies, homos, and brown folk: could you stop pestering us *normal people* with all your weird little *needs* and whatnot?
How about talking (consistently and often) about needs rather than rights; fairness rather than equality; and social investment rather than entitlements.
You have to have some faith that many Kiwis believe in those things. However, acknowledging the playing field is far from level and that many require support to shine does not mean reaching back to the 1960s for your arguments.
-
Coincidentally, A Dog's Show is still one of my favourite programmes.
-
How about talking (consistently and often) about needs rather than rights;
Oh no you don't. My daughter has a right to participate in society, not a need. If it's a need, then the government can say sorry, we don't have enough money or resources to respond to it. Get in line. If it's a right, well, that changes. And you bet she's "entitled" to it.
-
Ah, Tom! Tom, Tom, Tom, Tom, Tom...
aaaargh! the drums, the drums!
-
NBH,
If you're interested in thoughts and discussions about 'where to now' for progressive politics in New Zealand, it might be worthwhile taking a look at the Policy Progress blog http://www.policyprogress.org.nz/ Since it doesn't shy away from theory it can get a bit dense at times, but the main writer is exceptionally good (as are many of his guest posters).
-
Gio, keep reading the rest of what I said - your daughter has a valuable contribution to make to society and to your family and community, and fairness suggests investment in making that possible.
Same result, different argument. Can you see there's a chance my framing is more appealing to those who need to agree to authorise public support services and suchlike - voters and our representatives?
You're seeing 'entitlements' eroded right now and yet the only really successful pushback seems to have been about mining public parks, where the word "rights" was not part of the slogans, was it?
-
All we're getting from Labout is "raising GST is evil, but we're not actually going to commit to anything concrete like repealing it".
Word.
I got an electorate mailout from Grant Robertson last week - it is quite clear that not only is Labour campaigning against all GST, they are also campaigning against there being any charge for electricity or rates and a bunch of other things as well.
-
Gio, keep reading the rest of what I said - your daughter has a valuable contribution to make to society and to your family and community, and fairness suggests investment in making that possible.
Currently she's being denied resources left right and centre and the philosophy of every single provider is that she has a need, not a right.
"Need" is what we might some day get around to responding to, when we feel sufficiently magnanimous and the budget allows for it. A "right" just has to be fulfilled as a matter of duty.
-
Currently she's being denied resources left right and centre and the philosophy of every single provider is that she has a need, not a right.
We're seeing he same thing: not as critical as yours, I'm sure -- but in a way that tells me that the "support into work and training" line is just so much bullshit. That's simply not what's happening in the system now, and it's a recent change.
-
You'll forgive me if I find your dismissing my concerns as worn-out 'identity politics' just a tad... really fucking annoying.
I don't know how you missed the memo, but people are sick to the back teeth with being treated with smug reverse snobbery for daring to disagree with a certain socially liberal POV. There was massive desire to punish Labour last election, exactly because of comments like yours and like a lot of people in the Labour party you don't seem to have grasped the message yet.
So why don't you actually argue your case instead of trying dismissive sarcasm with anyone who disagrees with your core beliefs? I might be fucking annoying, but if the opinion polls have been any guide it seems to me that when it comes to persuading anyone to vote for the left nowadays you are just fucking irrelevant.
Or, gosh, here's a thought: talk to some actual Labour party members, because I haven't actually talked to one to date who agrees with any of the above.
And i agree. The trouble is party members are more or less emasculated, and I would suggest the membership (and indeed, the general population) is much more economically to the Keynsian left than both our main political parties.
-
I have very firm recollections of an interview Banks gave about this on, I think, National Radio, and it was quite clear that he did not support the moves being mooted.
Yeah, well, as I indicated,, Banks' views on social issues change fairly regularly.
-
Word. The Ax the Tax campaign is what actively stopped me from joining Labour. If that's Labour trying to focus on economic issues, I think they would hurt themselves less by trying to, I don't know, make everyone buy gay lightbulbs.
Roflnui.
-
Well, here's a thought: People expect Oppositions to say that the Government sucks donkey cock, and will bring about the end of days if given a chance.
Well, this the crux of the debate, isn't it? As far as I can tell, you are saying the more things change the more they stay the same - my position is New Zealand society has shifted fundamentally into a more socially conservative phase, and Labour will be waiting more than nine years if it can't see this and complacently just expects power to fall back into it's hands using the same old issues and arguments.
-
The trouble is party members are more or less emasculated
I call bingo.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.