I still have several of their titles, including books on how to grow magic mushrooms, how to start my own country, how to build a nuke in my parents’ basement, etc. … and Jerry Mander’s classic Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television.
Here’s One Argument for the Elimination of State Television. (There are many, many more.)
The Libertarianz Party today condemned the state-owned Maori TV channel for blocking participation by ALCP leader Michael Appleby in a panel interview of candidates in the Ikaroa-Rawhiti.by-election.
“A television channel that belongs to taxpayers has no business telling a candidate they do not have ‘Maori credibility’. That is for voters to decide on election day,” said Libertarianz leader Richard McGrath.
“We believe all candidates should be given equal exposure in order to ensure that voters are fully informed.”
“This situation reflects very poorly on the people who run Maori TV. Clearly, they are hopelessly biased in favour of the left wing candidates, who want to further entrench soul-destroying welfare dependency on their prospective constituents.”
Of course, it would be an entirely different story if Maori Television were privately owned. Then, they’d be quite within their rights to exclude Michael Appleby from their interview panel, or to have only Michael Appleby on their interview panel, or to ignore the Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election altogether.
But Maori Television is government owned and taxpayer funded. It’s obscene that the NZ government is allowing one of its media arms to rig the election.
This is what the Sovereign Lord showed me: He was preparing swarms of locusts after the king’s share had been harvested and just as the late crops were coming up. When they had stripped the land clean, I cried out, “Sovereign Lord, forgive! How can Jacob survive? He is so small!”
So the Lord relented.
“This will not happen,” the Lord said.
This is what the Sovereign Lord showed me: The Sovereign Lord was calling for judgment by fire; it dried up the great deep and devoured the land. Then I cried out, “Sovereign Lord, I beg you, stop! How can Jacob survive? He is so small!”
So the Lord relented.
“This will not happen either,” the Sovereign Lord said.
This is what he showed me: The Lord was standing by a wall that had been built true to plumb, with a plumb line in his hand. And the Lord asked me, “What do you see, Amos?”
This is an update to the lists here and here of synthetic cannabinoids banned by Peter Dunne.
Banned as from 9 May 2013
BB-221-(cyclohexylmethyl)-8-quinolinyl ester-1H-indole-3-carboxylic acid 5F-AKB48 or APINACA 5-fluoropentyl analog or 5F-APINACA N-((3s,5s,7s)-adamantan-1-yl)-1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide
This is another blow to the industry and one of many we have delivered – but I fully acknowledge it is more of the cat-and-mouse game until we can deliver the killer punch in August when the Psychoactive Substances Bill will become law
said Peter Dunne when he banned BB-22 and 5F-AKB48 last month.
But take a look at the trend here. There were 20 synthetic cannabinoids banned in 2011, 11 banned in 2012 and, so far this year, just 2.
I think the cat is getting tired.
And the industry is in very good health, despite having had to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous prohibitions. Tonight on Cuba Street, Wellington, I counted 9 synthetic cannabinoid products, in 2 different stores, probably containing 3 or 4 different synthetic cannabinoids. (And that’s not even to mention the flourishing herbal cannabis industry.)
I think the mouse won this cat-and-mouse game a long time ago.
Friday, 14 June 2013, 12:43 pm
Press Release: Libertarianz Party
Libz Endorse ALCP Candidate in Ikaroa Rawhiti
The Libertarianz Party today endorsed the candidacy of Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party leader Michael Appleby in the Ikaroa Rawhiti by-election, but labelled the continuing existence of Maori seats in Parliament as insulting and demeaning to New Zealanders of Maori descent.
Spokesman Richard McGrath, who works as medical officer at a drug and alcohol treatment clinic, said the ALCP and Libertarianz Parties share the core value of freedom of choice for adults and a policy of ending the expensive and fruitless war on people who use recreational substances.
“We are happy to endorse Michael in his efforts to stop the harrassment of peaceful New Zealanders,” said Dr McGrath.
“However, it is high time the Maori seats were consigned to the dustbin of history. There should be one law for all in New Zealand, with no room for the institutionalised racism and tokenism of Maori seats in the House of Representatives.”
“That we continue to tolerate this slight upon Maori people reflects badly on our politicians. Maori New Zealanders are just as capable as those of other ethnicities. To treat them as helpless cripples is disgraceful and a blight upon our electoral system.”
I spotted this bumper sticker on the way to work today. (The driver and the vehicle were also looking a bit the worse for yesteryear, which is why I noticed them.)
Mature readers from Wellington might like to try to remember the year that Wellington’s morning paper The Dominion and Wellington’s evening paper The Evening Post merged to become today’s metropolitan daily The Dominion Post.
This silky-smooth stout contains select malt and hops to produce a beer that is rich and complex. It contains Bluff oysters and has a slightly smoky flavour.
Contains Bluff oysters?! A “slightly smoky flavour”?! No wonder, this ungodly beer is a burnt offering to Baal! It’s an abomination! It goes directly against God’s word as clearly spelled out in Leviticus 11:9-12.
These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.
I have previously warned of the addition of foodstuffs to beer. Beer is water, malt and hops ONLY. Chocolate and coconut were but thin ends of the wedge. And now, alas, it’s come to this.
No doubt, my Dispensationalist co-blogger will tell me that these dietary strictures do not apply in the present Age. I am unmoved.
It’s time for some more second-rate drivel on constitutional matters. While I have no right to claim credibility on such issues, I feel that ignorance, bigotry and small-minded denigration are not at all out of place when demolishing the case for a New Zealand republic. So I pass off the following ignorant rant as informed comment. Because it is. Badly cobbled together assumptions, fundamental errors, and rank ignorance are important debating tools for the limited thinker whose mind is closed.
The case for a New Zealand republic sets out the main arguments for why New Zealand should become a republic. They fall into three categories:
Independence — New Zealand should have a New Zealander as the head of state; Nationhood — the constitution and head of state of New Zealand should reflect New Zealand’s national identity, culture and heritage; Democracy — New Zealand should have a democratic and accountable head of state.
I’ve already demolished the “Independence” argument that New Zealand should have a New Zealander as the head of state. In this post, I’ll take a look at the Republicans’ argument that the constitution and head of state of New Zealand should reflect New Zealand’s national identity, culture and heritage, under the heading “Nationhood”.
Nationhood
“The case for an independent republic of New Zealand is summed up in one word — nationhood. It is a statement to the world and ourselves that New Zealand is a mature nation, that we possess a constitutional framework that best suits New Zealanders.” — Michael Laws, Mayor of Wanganui.
Well, according to the Republican Movement of Aotearoa New Zealand, the case for an independent republic of New Zealand is actually summed up in three words — independence, nationhood and democracy. So why quote Michael Laws—of all people—if you consider him not even half right? Last I heard, Laws was claiming that the city of which he is mayor does not possess a name that best suits New Zealanders. His opinions on what constitutional framework best suits New Zealanders are surely tendentious.
New Zealand is a unique, dynamic and diverse country. New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements, national symbols and head of state should reflect this.
There’s no argument here. Just the assertion that New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements, national symbols and head of state should reflect the fact that New Zealand is a unique, dynamic and diverse country. Why should New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements, national symbols and head of state reflect this? And how? It’s unclear.
A republic affirms New Zealand’s sense of nationhood
“We exhibit symptoms of retarded nationhood: a widespread insecurity about what others think, a search for applause and endorsement by visitors; and, conversely, a begrudging willingness to extend applause here at home.” — Simon Upton former minister and National MP.
I frankly confess, in my teen years I used to exhibit symptoms of retarded nationhood. I felt insecure about what others thought of me and sought applause and endorsement by visitors. If the young folk of today can be spared the terrible angst I endured simply by promoting Dame Susan from Governor-General to Head of State, then I must be all for it. But I remain skeptical.
Becoming a republic and electing New Zealand’s head of state will foster a deeper and more sophisticated sense of nationhood. It will clarify to New Zealanders, and to the world, what New Zealand stands for.
What do you stand for? Republicanism can help you answer this important question. Perhaps you have some idea but you’re not clear. Or perhaps you’re just shallow and unsophisticated. What you need is to wake up one day to find yourself living in a republic, and everything will come swimming into focus. You will carry on living as before, but now with a deep sense of nationhood.
How New Zealanders understand their place in the world is crucial to New Zealand’s success in an increasingly globalised world.
We’re a small nation of 4.5 million people in the South Pacific. It helps to know that.
New Zealand excels in sport, in its human rights record, in business and in the arts. New Zealand’s constitution lags behind these achievements.
New Zealand’s constitution lags behind Nathan McCullum’s dismissal of England’s Joe Root at Trent Bridge. Does that even make sense?
Our current constitutional arrangement causes confusion overseas as to whether New Zealand is linked to Britain, or whether it is part of Australia.
I think overseas confusion over whether New Zealand is part of Australia is caused by ignorance of the geography of the South Pacific, not by our current constitutional arrangement.
We send conflicting messages about who we are and what we stand for.
I don’t think I do. Perhaps the author is using the “royal” we. Wouldn’t that be ironic?
The debate and discussion around becoming a republic affirms the values that are important to New Zealanders. It will promote discussion about New Zealand’s history and future. It will clarify the values we all see as important. Becoming a republic will be a celebration of New Zealand’s unique culture and heritage.
No, it won’t. New Zealand is a bicultural nation. While many Maori (and, indeed, non-Maori) go to strenuous lengths to preserve Maori culture and heritage, many Pakeha seem hell-bent on severing all connection with their own. New Zealand originated as a British colony. Becoming a republic will be a deliberate repudiation of our colonial heritage and cultural past which has its roots in Great Britain, Ireland and Europe.
It will demonstrate New Zealand’s confidence and independence and it will symbolise a shared sense of nationhood.
I’m going to close on a serious note here. The last time I read someone banging on and on about a shared “sense of nationhood” was when I read the opening pages of Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler. Let’s be clear. All talk of and nurturing of “nationhood” is thinly disguised fascist social engineering. There, I’ve gone and done it. I’ve invoked Godwin’s Law and completely and utterly demolished my own argument.
Feel free to name-call in the series of strange comments below. Diatribes welcome.
Having brought the apostles, they made them appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,” he said. “Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man’s blood.”
Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than men! The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead—whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might give repentance and forgiveness of sins to Israel. We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.”
When they heard this, they were furious and wanted to put them to death. But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while. Then he addressed them: “Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.”
Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party candidates for next year’s General Election pictured (from left to right) Fred Macdonald (Otaki), Alistair Gregory (Rongotai), Richard Goode (Mana) and Michael Appleby (Wellington Central).
ALCP Leader Michael Appleby is also our candidate in the forthcoming Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election to be held on 29 June. Today Michael announced his candidacy and launched the ALCP campaign.
David Shearer’s comment that the Labour Party will “terrorise our political opponents” during its Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election campaign is “reprehensible”, a candidate for the seat says.
In a press release announcing Labour’s candidate Meka Whaitiri’s official campaign launch, the Labour leader said: “Labour will campaign relentlessly to once again earn the trust of the people of Ikaroa-Rawhiti.
“We will organise, mobilise and terrorise our political opponents.”
The leader of the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party, Michael Appleby, who was at Parliament today to launch his by-election campaign, said Labour should apologise over the comment.
“Threatening terrorism against opponents is offensive and unacceptable in a democratic by-election and the comments are extremely insensitive to the Tuhoe settlement which occurred today at Parliament,” he said.
He said Shearer’s comments were “outrageous, offensive and unacceptable”.
“I do not want to be terrorised just for standing up for my political beliefs,” Appleby said.
Thanks, Michael, for standing up for Truth, Freedom and Justice! 🙂
