In 1995 National Party MP Michael Laws sought to introduce his Death with Dignity Bill. The Bill failed, as did NZ First MP Peter Brown’s Death with Dignity Bill in 2003.
More recently, in 2012 Labour MP Maryan Street submitted her ‘End of Life Choice bill’ to the private members ballot. But then Voluntary euthanasia bill withdrawn. Street admitted at the time that “”the move was simply pragmatism, she said, and she “absolutely” planned to put it back in the ballot after the election.”” Unfortunately, due to Labour’s dire defeat at the polls in 2014, Street failed to re-enter Parliament. Moves by Iain Lees-Galloway to adopt Street’s bill were scotched by new Labour leader Andrew Little.
That the House of Representatives investigate fully public attitudes towards the introduction of legislation which would permit medically-assisted dying in the event of a terminal illness or an irreversible condition which makes life unbearable.
The petition asks for a change to the existing law. The closing date for submissions is today, Monday 1 February 2016. You might have missed it.
In October last year, ACT leader David Seymour lodged a private members bill that would legalise voluntary euthanasia, the End of Life Choice Bill. Seymour’s bill may or may not get drawn from the ballot.
So that’s the state of dying in New Zealand. Our deaths remain natural, illegal, or self-inflicted. Or life goes on, sometimes in terminal pain.
Can people simply stop eating and drinking to hasten death?
Yes, stopping eating and drinking will hasten a death, eventually. This is the option many New Zealanders use now. However, it is less than optimal, can take days or weeks, and often requires palliative sedation to relieve negative symptoms of the fasting process.
But what if there’s a legal loophole, wider than a gaping arterial wound, that permits the possibility of a quick, painless, assisted and *legal* means of dying for the terminally ill whose ongoing existence does them more harm than good and who wish to end it all prematurely? I think there might be. Here’s why.
1. Giving blood is legal.
2. Taking blood is legal.
3. Refusing a blood transfusion is legal.
Therefore,
Assisted exsanguination is a legal means of voluntary euthanasia.
This simple means of dying with a little help from your friends and family is subject to some minimal legal constraints that must, of course, be observed.
The Human Tissue Act 2008 covers the legalities of taking blood. Read it and you’ll be displeased but not at all surprised to learn that blood is a “controlled human substance”. But you don’t have to be a “qualified person” to take blood, provided it is not “for therapeutic purposes or for health practitioner education or any kind of research” and the blood is not for sale or transfusion.
Libertarians uphold the right of the individual to his/her own life, liberty—and lifeblood.
Mana – Safe Labour – Richard Goode Kris Faafoi or Hekia Parata? To hell with them both, vote for libertarian Richard Goode standing under the ALCP banner. He believes in more than just legalising weed, he believes in a smaller state and so your vote will be principled.
It’s true. I do believe in a smaller state and I am principled. Well, mostly.
I ran out of time, as I so often do. More exactly, I ran out of time to do a proper job. I’m a bit of a perfectionist, you see. And that brings me to the other reason I posted only two endorsements in the end. The paucity of perfect candidates, indeed the paucity of anywhere-near-perfect candidates. As far as candidates worthy of a Christian libertarian’s endorsement go, Alistair Gregory is about as good as it gets. But I have since had serious qualms about my other candidate endorsement and I resile from it.
Here at Eternal Vigilance we champion principle over pragmatism. Two of us (me and Tim) are former Libertarianz activists, candidates and spokesmen. Libertarianz was New Zealand’s only Party of Principle, and Tim and I actively carry on its proud tradition of promoting more freedom and less government. As do some other former Libz members, two of whom are running as candidates for the pseudo-libertarian ACT Party this election. (Although at least one former Libz activist is beyond giving a shit.)
To its great credit, and the credit of all in the party at the time, Libertarianz never compromised. Even to the point of promoting the practically unworkable Tracinski’s ratchet. The Libz recognised that the greater good is never a moral defence of government action, and voting for the lesser evil is always morally indefensible. (Are you ratcheting evil?)
Sensing the Libertarianz Party’s impending demise, I jumped waka and joined the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party. Legalising cannabis is a libertarian policy, and it was the policy of the Libertarianz Party for which I was the Spokesman on Drugs, so there was no cognitive dissonance for me and no ill-feeling from any of my fellow libertarians who all wished me well with my open infiltration of the ALCP. (Check out the ALCP’s ten principles and tell me if you see a libertarian influence.)
But the devil is in the details. While I steadfastly stand by my party’s policy of regulating cannabis Colorado-style, I recognise regulation for what it is.
Regulations are actually prohibitive – if government defines the one way they will allow something they are really prohibiting all other ways.
Thus I fail any libertarian purity test.
1. Is there a positive candidate to endorse?
But so does Liberty Scott. As a libertarian, does he really have any business asking questions 2 and 3?
2. Is there a likely winner worthy of tactically voting to eject because he or she is so odious??
3. Is there a tolerable “least worst” candidate?
It’s no secret that I consider Peter Dunne to be New Zealand’s most evil Member of Parliament. Evil in an utterly banal way, like Adolf Eichmann. Dunne now faces the very real risk that he will lose his Ohariu electorate seat to Labour Party challenger Virginia Andersen. So I hope and pray that Virginia Andersen is Ohariu’s new MP when the votes are counted tomorrow night!
I admit I was even tempted to get out on the streets and help Andersen with her electorate campaign. But I didn’t, and in the end I couldn’t even bring myself to endorse her candidacy explicitly when I spoke at a recent Meet the Candidates evening in the Ohariu electorate. Compared to Dunne, Andersen is the lesser evil. But what about the even lesser evil on the Ohariu voter’s ballot paper, fellow libertarian Sean Fitzpatrick? He’s explicitly stated he’s seeking only the party vote for the pseudo-libertarian ACT Party. Perhaps he, too, secretly hopes that Ohariu voters will give their electorate vote to Andersen? But aside from that, Fitzpatrick’s party has no cannabis policy. That’s why I call it pseudo-libertarian. Drug legalisation is the litmus test for being a libertarian. The ACT Party fails on that count. What’s more, post-election the ACT Party may enter into a coalition agreement (to provide confidence and supply) with the National Party. How evil is that?
Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? (ESV)
Jamie Whyte & co. are believers in individual freedom and personal responsibility at least.
They’re lesser evils. But what about my own candidacy? Am I evil? Yes I am!
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (ESV)
but some fall shorter than others. I’ve come to the reluctant conclusion that I’m a lesser evil just like all the candidates in the list below. I’m standing to give Mana voters the choice to vote for a lesser evil. Am I evil? I’m your man!
Without further ado, here are my candidate endorsements. I’ll spare you the details.
Politics is a dirty, worldly business and we know who is god of this world. Should Christians, who are in this world but not supposed to be of it, even get involved in politics?
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities.
I wasn’t physically present at yesterday’s NORML conference—one of the few usual suspects who wasn’t—but I was there in spirit and by live stream.
The conference went well. Credit where credit’s due and credit is due to Phil Saxby who put in a colossal effort organising the event. Thanks, Phil. Job well done. Also, thanks to Vinny Eastwood and Gary Chiles for setting up the live stream on YouTube.
It’s no secret that I’m at loggerheads with some of the peeps in NORML. There are right ways and wrong ways to go about implementing drug law reform. To hell with the Psychoactive Substances Act! Dissent to be continued …
Here’s the event in two parts, the morning session and the afternoon session, for those interested.
Wednesday night last week I was at the Backbencher pub on Molesworth Street, across the road from Parliament Buildings, for the filming of the first episode of the 2014 season of Back Benches.
Back Benches is a political panel discussion show. Hosted by Wallace Chapman and Damien Grant, it airs on Prime TV 10:30 pm Wednesday evenings, having been filmed earlier in the evening. It’s a great show. (You can watch it here.)
Last week’s political panel featured Labour MP Trevor Mallard, National MP Mark Mitchell, Green MP Jan Logie … and Peter Dunne. Topics included cannabis law reform … and animal testing.
Animal testing has been a hot topic in New Zealand in the last couple of years because of the Psychoactive Substances Act. The Psychoactive Substances Act, which became law in July last year, made provision for the testing of new psychoactive substances on animals. Peter Dunne, the National government’s Associate Health Minister, was the bill’s main architect and front man.
Earlier this month, in a surprise (to some) move, Parliament enacted the Psychoactive Substances Amendment Bill. The amendment, drafted by Peter Dunne himself, rules out the prospect of any testing of psychoactive substances on animals being incentivised by the government. This is very good news.
Section 12 replaced (Duty of advisory committee relating to use of animals when evaluating psychoactive products)
Replace section 12 with:
“12 Advisory committee not to have regard to results of trials involving animals
“(1) In performing the function set out in section 11(2)(a), the advisory committee must not have regard to the results of a trial that involves the use of an animal.
“(2) However, the advisory committee may have regard to the results of a trial undertaken overseas that involves the use of an animal if the advisory committee considers that the trial shows that the psychoactive product would pose more than a low risk of harm to individuals using the product.”
Wednesday night last week, Peter Dunne made the following remarks.
Can I just say two things.
I’m in favour of testing for medicinal purposes on low down the stratum [sic] sets of animals.
With regard to psychoactive substances I ruled dogs and that level out as long ago as November 2012. They were never, ever in the frame. The debate subsequently was about rodents and more latterly rabbits …
Well, that’s not how I remember it. I remember a headline from December 2012 which told a very different story.
But how do we best square what Peter Dunne said last week with what he apparently said and thought back in December 2012?
Let’s canvas the possibilities.
1. The Sunday Star Times misreported.
2. Peter Dunne misspoke.
3. Peter Dunne is in denial about what he said.
4. Peter Dunne is trying to rewrite history.
Politicians lie. We know this because their lips move. Peter Dunne is a consummate politician. So I’m rooting for option (4). Otherwise, it’s hard to explain why Dunne is so specific about the date. “I ruled dogs out as long ago as November 2012.” Except that he didn’t.
Here’s what I think really happened. I think Peter Dunne lacks empathy. Otherwise, how to explain this? And he simply forgot to remember that normal people consider the gratuitous poisoning and killing of household pets to be morally unacceptable.
But there is no U-turn. It’s a full 360°. Here‘s what Peter Dunne’s now saying.
Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne has announced today that when parliament resumes the government will introduce and pass under urgency legislation removing from sale all remaining so called ‘legal highs’.
But here‘s what the Associate Minister of Health, Peter Dunne, said in March last year.
Last month, the New Zealand Government introduced new legislation into our Parliament …
We are going to reverse the onus of proof so the manufacturers of these products have to prove they are safe before they can bring them on to the market.
Currently, the onus is on the Government to identify the substances that are being sold, test them and prove that they warrant sufficient harm to be prohibited.
That approach has undermined our best efforts to keep our young people safe, and left the rather tawdry legal highs industry constantly one step ahead, despite our best efforts.
Instead of reversing the onus of proof like Peter Dunne said the government would, Peter Dunne allowed the sale of 15 novel, untested research chemicals to the general public. The safety profiles of these 15 chemicals was, and still is, unknown.
This approach, asking the industry to identify the substances that are being sold, but then not testing them and not proving that they warrant sufficient harm to be prohibited, for the entirety of a nine month “interim” period, undermined the government’s best efforts to keep our young people safe, and left the rather tawdry legal highs industry constantly one step ahead, despite their best efforts.
But now Peter Dunne’s reversed his U-turn and followed through on his original promise.
So, why are my fellow drug law reformers now complaining?
This Government is trying to hold back the rising tide of global drug law reform by any means necessary.
Once this massive wave of change has crashed down on their heads, they’ll all emerge from the backwash claiming that ending drug prohibition was their plan all along.
Holding back the rising tide of global drug law reform? I thought the Pychoactive Substances Act, now to be implemented as originally intended, was supposed to be world leading legislation? The government has made good on its promise, albeit nine months late, and is now making its best efforts to keep our young people safe. Isn’t reversing the onus of proof so the manufacturers of designer drugs have to prove they are safe before they can bring them on to the market exactly what you wanted? If not, why on earth are you supporting the Psychoactive Substances Act?
This subject is a political Hot potato at the moment because of the absolute spineless flip flop of the National party and Peter Dunne in regards to Legal Highs, and the Psychoactive Substances Act in the wake of Labour David Cunliffes desperate and dirty Election year tactics to ride the wave of mindless phobia, media sensationalism, and non-scientific condemnation of synthetic cannabis use.
We have witnessed a full revival of the Witch Craze… “Synthetic Reefer Madness” .
No. What we’re witnessing is the National government deciding not to be criminally insane and instead making good on Peter Dunne’s original prohibitionist promise. Again, I ask, why on earth are you supporting the Psychoactive Substances Act? In a couple of weeks, once the blanket ban on soon-to-be-not “legal highs” comes into force, we’ll back to peak prohibition. Peak prohibition was always the intent of the Psychoactive Substances Act. For heaven’s sake, it was masterminded by Peter Dunne! What else did you expect?! The testing regime, whereby only psychoactive substances proven to be “low-risk” (at the sole expense of the would-be distributor) are allowed to be sold, isn’t even in sight. That light you think you see at the end of the tunnel? It’s a train wreck in slow motion coming for you!
As I’ve always maintained, the Psychoactive Substances Act is pure evil.
What can drug law reformers do now? Two things.
First, join the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party. This September 20, tick the leaf. Vote for sensible cannabis law reform! 🙂
Second, give credit where credit’s due. Right now credit’s due to the Labour Party and, in particular, to Hutt South MP Trevor Mallard. Sign the petition now!
Are you against animal testing for synthetic drugs? We are.
The government hasn’t ruled out animal testing in the changes to the legal high laws yet. Labour’s suggested a change that’ll protect animals – but it’ll only be successful if enough of us put pressure on the government to do the right thing. So we’ve started a petition to put the pressure on.
The nationwide rally against the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is today. Details here.
I don’t know much about the TPPA. It’s a free trade agreement—and free trade, of course, is a good thing—but it’s more than just a free trade agreement. How much more than just a free trade agreement? Apart from John Key’s National government, no one knows.
Why won’t the government release the full text of the agreement?
Labour MPs recognise there are potential risks as well as potential benefits in the TPPA, but we do not know what is in the text. That’s why the Government must release the text before it is signed, so Kiwis have a chance to decide for themselves what is in our people’s interests.
And so that each individual Kiwi has a chance to decide for him/herself what is in his/her individual interest. (Never mind our people’s bogus collectivism.)
Labour’s charity spokeswoman, coat-of-many-colours Louisa Wall, and a member of the Australian Charity Law Association (ACLA), Dr. Michael Gousmett, are complaining that the current law is creating “inequality in our tax system”.
Today’s regulations give tax relief to private schools, fee-charging hospitals, Ngai Tahu’s 38 limited liability companies (including Shotover Jet and Whale Watch Kaikoura) and food giant Sanitarium with no public benefit test holding them to account.
Notwithstanding that Kiwi kids are Weetbix kids, why on earth does a breakfast cereal manufacturer have charitable status? And Ngai Tahu’s tourist attractions? I’m gobsmacked. The other day, I asked a member of the iwi, “How’s Ngai Tahu?”. He replied, “Rich!” No wonder.
As for private schools and private hospitals, it seems that the government concedes charitable status (i.e., tax relief) to private institutions that are still performing those charitable roles that the government, with its state schools and public health system, has long-since tried to usurp.
Merely operating as a hospital or school meets the criteria of charitability as it relieves pressure on the public system, even if the charity is charging fees largely unaffordable to most people.
Wall said charitable trusts that benefit only the wealthy were “creating divisions between the haves and the have-nots”.
“Those who least need charity are benefiting the most. It is helping those who can afford to pay to go to private hospitals and private schools, not those who actually need the help.
“We as a country are giving these organisations up to $600m worth of tax relief under the assumption that $600m should be reinvested back into the community, and if that is not happening we desperately need to change the law.”
Note the standard socialist newspeak. Thieving is now “reinvesting back into the community,” and not thieving is now “giving tax relief.” And the thieves are now “out of pocket.” Poor government! If only there were 54 weeks in the year, then they could just keep borrowing at their current rate of $300 million per week and they wouldn’t be “out of pocket.” Meanwhile, the charities sector is “swallowing” $600 million of its own money every year! Into the giant, gaping maw of charity! The horror!
The Government is $600 million out of pocket each year as the charities sector swallows $400m through income tax exemption and $200m in tax credit refunds, yet Cabinet decided against reviewing charity law last year through “fiscal cost” fears.
Recent calls to urgently review the sector were once again quashed by Community and Voluntary Sector Minister Jo Goodhew yesterday.
Charitable purpose relates to the relief of poverty, the advancement of education or religion or any other matter beneficial to the community, she said.
The Charities Registration Board determines whether or not an organisation fits within the Charities Act 2005 and the DIA Charities Services monitors charities to ensure they operate for exclusively charitable purposes.
“Irrespective of what a charity looks like, as long as they are operating within the law, that is what we should be assuring ourselves on,” she said.
The Government decided against reviewing the law relating to charities last year through fears more organisations may have expected to be eligible for charitable status which could have “increased fiscal costs”, an Inland Revenue spokeswoman said.
So, the truth outs. It’s the government being uncharitable, not the charities. Allowing people to give their own money directly to those in need is an “increased fiscal cost” to the government? Well, no. It’s actually an “increased fiscal cost” to those doing the giving. That’s how charity works.
Inland Revenue was aware of “the public concerns relating to charities” and would be monitoring them to ensure they were operating exclusively for charitable purposes, she said.
To my horror I have just discovered that Hamilton City Council has just voted to become the First City council to be a ‘Living wage employer’!!!!
Thus all the things I have said about this Socialist threat to Wellington (below) now also applies to my home town the Tron!
The HCC intend to roll this out within the next two years.
I will be standing for City Council with the express purpose of making sure this Ruling is overturned before it gets implemented.
Tim Wikiriwhi for Hamilton Mayor!
twikiriwhi@yahoo.co.nz
0276630331
07-8498323
Read about this new threat to Hamilton here…
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1305/S00446/lowest-paid-need-living-wage-most-of-all.htm
Beautiful Mermaids of ‘Living Wage Aotearoa New Zealand’… Heed my warnings my shipmates!
Doom awaits all who fall under the Siren’s spell!
The following appeared on my face book feed…
**********
Living Wage Aotearoa New Zealand.
Wellington leaders are currently before the Wellington City Council asking for their support for the Living Wage and for them to become a Living Wage employer. A huge turn out of support from the community. The room is absolutely packed. The Wellington Deputy Mayor says it’s the most packed the room has been in a very, very long time. — with Paul Eagle.
Living wage Aotearoa facebook page here: https://www.facebook.com/#!/LivingWageAotearoaNewZealand
******************
^^^ Notice the strategy of the Communists in targeting Government to adopt their Economic insanity!
Appreciate how easily City Councilors can be duped into signing off on this sort of ‘feel good’ socialism, considering Councilors personal income will not be effected… and they have no investors who can remove their investments, and they can simply increase their rates extortion to pay for it.
And once Government departments have embraced this madness it is a very short step to making it compulsory for everyone!
Inflation anyone?
In the meantime if City councils and government departments embrace this socialist doctrine, it will make working for the Beast a far more attractive proposition than working in the private sector, and to the simple minded this discrepancy between wages paid by the state from those offered in the private sector will appear to vindicate the notion that things work much better when done by the Government!
Most of these simpletons will never appreciate the reasons why their rents and the cost of essentials keeps rising with leaps and bounds.
Yet what these City councilors wont tell their workers is that all these types of spending increases actually threatens their Job security and that Layoffs will result when these Councils and government departments sooner or later are inevitably forced to look to cost cutting as a result of have yet again pushed up debts, rates and taxes way past bearable limits for their tax slaves to endure.
And the same thing will happen in the private sector if this doctrine becomes compulsory there too.
For the record when I stood for Mayor of Hamilton I explained to the city workers the dangers of voting for grand schemers and big spenders, and that Hamilton was facing a Debt crisis that would result in Job losses, while all the other candidates pretended all was well and promised them the moon.
I tried to communicate my Libertarian plan of privatisation… reducing Councils size and spheres of operation in such a way that would transfer employment to the private sector and reduce councils expenses and responsibilities.
Yet trying to communicate the economic benefits which would follow from such reform to Unionised workers whom are indoctrinated into believing their Job security is better protected by remaining employees of the State… is like trying to sell flies!
They were beyond reach.
No Surprise… I was not elected
Nek Minnut The City Debt Crisis hits… Rates went up, and redundancies followed.
And it’s not over yet.
And if you read my earlier post on this subject … ‘Ship of Union Fools. The Living wage.’ … you will see that I point out among other things that because of the inevitable inflation… what they deem a ‘living wage’ to be Today will not be ‘sufficient’ tomorrow!
This exposes what a crock this Socialist Idea is!
It is an open ended recipe for inflation and bankruptcy… and a threat to the incomes of those low wage earners whom it pretends to be championing!
And as another critic of this ideology rightly points out… what is a sufficient income for a single person, is completely different for what is sufficient for a person with a family of 6!
So this exposes this Socialist plot as a purely arbitrary extortion racket.
Tim Wikiriwhi
Libertarian Independent.
Wikiriwhi for Mayor! Read about my various Campaigns here:
Read how my prophecies have all come to pass Here:
I ask why the Media has not reported the truthfulness of my campaigns vs the lies of those whom got elected?
Update:
Affordible City shared a link to an excellent Scoop article from their ‘Affordible Wellington’ candidate Reagan Cutting….
“The Living Wage campaign group has also called on Wellington City Council to publically endorse the Living Wage Campaign and support local businesses in becoming Living Wage employers.
“While I do not think the Wellington City Council should become a union advocacy group, I can see a few fantastic ways the Council can help local businesses increase wages to their staff,” says Reagan Cutting. “They can start by cutting rates, reducing compliance costs, streamlining regulations and eliminating the hoops companies have to jump through whenever they deal with the Council. This impacts on business profitability and reduce the amount of funds available to spend on wages..”
^^^These are Excellent points… which go to prove the wisdom and benevolence of Libertarian Ecconomics vs the Folly and destructive and millitant mentality of socialism.
If only workers of NZ would liberate themselves from Socialist Unionism, and form Libertarian worker associations instead!
Read about The absurdity of the Socialist ‘Left vs Right Employment War’ Here:
I have been asked what my opinion is on how we should endeavour to End Treaty separatism, and racist law and government.
What follows are my first thoughts on this matter.
I present them for discussion.
With the Separatists working to expand the separatist electoral system and Seats, and the National and Maori Party working to establish a Racist constitution this issue is reaching Diabolical heights!
This single issue is perhaps the most virulent political evil undermining justice and order in our nation today.
It is serious enough to focus all energy into fighting this single issue.
It will take the greatest Statesmanship to win the battle against this racist tyranny.
Do we possess enough Enlightened and skilled Individuals to lead the way?
******************************************
One of the biggest problems which must be overcome if we are to end Treaty Separatism and establish Racial equality in Law and Government, is finding means to unify all the disparate ‘types’ of New Zealanders who hold many various and confliction political Ideals, yet share the singular common desire to establish racial equality before the Law.
This problem is in my view the greatest hurdle we face.
It is greater than the resistance of the Separatists themselves, because unless we come up with a formula for unity we wont even get a movement off the ground.
Unity is essential!
I can think of nothing worse than a splintered Factional resistance to treaty separatism in which energy is wasted attacking each other, and destroying each others efforts out of a desire to monopolize and dominate rather than doing the more wise thing of subordinating our differences for the sake of the Higher Cause and taking the fight to the real enemy… who by the way are not *All Maori* but that minority of vested interests whom seek to maintain the political advantages they enjoy from Apartheid government.
This problem of Disunity is very acute.
It has already destroyed Identical movements in the not too distant past.
And it is rearing it’s ugly head yet again.
To End Treaty Separatism, it is essential we work to win over the hearts and minds of the average Maori as well as the average non-Maori , and this will take great diplomacy and skill. Great honesty, and a clear demonstration that we really care about their well being, and that we speak with sincerity when we say that Maori have nothing to fear… in the sense of real justice… form the establishment of a system of racial equality, and the surrender of the apartheid electoral system.
We need to show them how this apartheid system has indeed worked against them as much as everyone else.
We need to get them to appreciate that the separatists… though they pretend to have the average Maori’s interest at heart, that in reality their politics has negative consequences for the Maori people, and is a blight upon their Mana.
Furthermore though we must be forthright about how this situation arose, and how the Labour and National parties have bent over backwards to appease the separatists holding the Maori seats… none the less we need to take care not to absolutely alienate Labour or National voters from our cause.
We need to do the opposite!
We need to orchestrate things so that Labour and National actually start bending over backwards …attempting to out do each other in *refusing to pander to the separatists…* and attempt to outdo each other in forming strategies and policies to get rid of treaty separatism, get rid of the race based electoral system, and establish Equality before the Law.
This reversal can be achieved via wise activism.
Those of us ‘in the know’ must be prepared to go and speak at Labour and National party meetings, and publish articles etc which encourage these parties to make clear non-negotiable policy statements before elections that they will no longer form coalitions with Racist parties.
They will do this like clockwork…when they tally the numbers and appreciate their election chances are better from make such pre-election statements than from hedging their bets… and keeping the door open to further sell our country to the separatists.
We can rely on this because this is their primary modus opperandi!
And history vindicates my assertion as this situation actually happened when Don Brash challenged Helen Clark after his Orewa 1 speech, Helen Clark only winning by election fraud Re: The Pledgecard, and by the injured vanity and pride of Winston Peters at having been ousted from his Tauranga seat by National… and him choosing to accept the Baubles of Power… from Helen Clark… despite having stood himself on and anti separatism ticket!
These factors robbed Don Brash of his shot at being PM and took away his opportunity to make good on his promises to shut the door on the bogus Treaty reparations…get rid of the Separate Electoral roll and seats in parliament, and establish One Law for all.
2005 was one of the Blackest elections in the History of our Nation!
We came so close to having the opportunity to begin undoing The Grievance industry, and End Treaty separatism, and Racist Law and government.
I have much more to say on what happened at this time.
Why Don Brash decided it was a good time for National to make such a policy.
What effect that had on Hellen Clark and her scramble to recover from being left exposed as the Party of separatist appeasement… why she abandoned her ‘Closing the gaps’ Flagship, why she angered the separatists in her midst, Tariana Turia and co over the seabed and foreshore bill enough to jettison them from Labour… etc.
The dynamics of this period are rich with gems as to how our corrupt race based democracy functions, and what we must do to make the pragmatists of National and Labour again struggle to out do each other … for the sake of winning a majority in the elections…and again synthesize speeches like Orewa 1.
One of the Biggest problems for the Cause of Equality, is that we who seek to End Waitangi apartheid are divided upon what is the actual solution!
Many are adverse to the institution of a constitution which out laws Parliament from making race based laws.
I think that is a grave error…. one which exposes fundamental flaws in their Political outlook… none the less to keep the peace with such ‘Anti-constitutionalist’ democrats, I have come up with an idea which may work.
It is the promotion of the Independent Constitutional review panel’s
‘Declaration of Racial Equality’, coupled to a demand to abolish the race based electoral system.
These two propositions can be the points of unification.
They can be promoted independently, and via the creation of a united lobby group, which can try and sell the idea to all parties including Labour and National voters, and the cause could also be helped via the creation of a single issue party whose single policy is to win seats in parliament and gain the balance of power, and to give agreement to confidence and supply upon either National or Labour… depending upon which one better resolves to get rid of the separatist seats and electoral rolls and enshrine the Declaration of Racial equality as Law, nullifying all race based laws and government institutions, and forbidding any new race based government innovations.
All other issues either being matters of conscience for the Party Mps in the house, or completely abstained from.
This being essential to maintain the unity of the party and avoid the divisions which such issues of a written constitution, or binding referendums cause.
And this approach would also need to be the general position of the Lobby group too.
It ought not to singularly endorse any party, but all Parties and individuals standing for election whom express their stand on ending State racism.
The Lobby ought to analyze every candidate, and quiz them on their position, and inform the electorates of whom stands for what…. which candidate the voters who want equality ought to support, and who they ought to vocally condemn.
The Lobby group would need to make this point clear to all members… that it is not a party political vehicle, and that any endorsements for any party or individual is strictly based upon that party’s determination to enact the Lobby groups objectives.
It ought to allow any Party materials to be displayed which promote Racial equality before the law. The primary purposes of the Lobby being to unite New Zealanders and inform them of who represents Racial equality, and who does not.
This actually means that even if that shyster Winston Peters actually stands of election on the ticket of ending Waitangi apartheid the lobby group ought to recognise the fact… and tell his supporters to make sure he doe’s not reneg on that policy… and insist that he makes it a not negotiable condition of any NZ First coalition.
It is that sort of Pre- election policy statement that the Lobby group ought to be trying to solicit from every party.
Should they not be prepared to make such clear statements, the Lobby group should encourage their members to forsake these parties and join one which has more Backbone.
The Lobby could Rank parties by both their policy, and the commitment they display before the election to ending Racist government… what priority they themselves place upon this issue.
This ranking should be in a prominent place on any website or printed materials.
Tim Wikiriwhi
From my perspective, I think these things are essential.
Anything less will result in infighting and fragmentation.
From personal observation I have seen how deeply divided the activists for Racial equality are on other issues…the depth of acrimony is acute in the extreme… and unless we separate these differences and focus on our few unifying ideas, the Separatists have little to fear from us who seek to end their Political advantage.
We will be too busy fighting ourselves and destroying ourselves… and the people of New Zealand will see this and never support any of us!
We must take extreme care to ‘Endeavour to maintain the unity of the spirit’…and guard against the petty minded whom will insist upon creating unnecessary divisions because of their pig headed demand to have everything their own way.
The above recipe is far from being a full exposition of what I would personally like to see achieved (which includes the institution of a proper constitution), thus this strategy demonstrates the reality that I am ‘practicing what I preach,’ in submitting to the notion of the Declaration and abolishment of the Racist electoral system as being two giant steps in the right direction, and putting my constitutional desires on the back burner… at least while I am wearing my ‘Lobby group hat’.
In private I understand we are all free to speak our minds and to support whatever political party we desire!
Right now, I could walk about with my undies all bunched up… cursing all those whom now say they want equality that they did not support the Libertarianz Party ten years ago!
I could react to their derogatory remarks I hear against the Libertarianz party… from people whom bleat about taxes, and about Treaty separatism, yet in the past have supported the Parties responsible for these very evils!
Yet I am determined to resist such urges for the sake of this essential cause and to conduct myself by example…
While it is true to say that the Libertarianz Party is blameless in respect to treaty separatism and socialism in general… none the less when any such designs to steer the lobby group away from supporting any particular party which has a policy of ending separatism… cannot be tolerated… from representatives of the Lobby when they are wearing their Lobby Hats.
That must be reserved for either their private communications or their personal party activism.
I despair at the thought of how few people will be capable of maintaining such a high Ideal… of subordinating their personal prejudices for the sake of this most important of values and essential principles of Justice!
Will we be able to create these vehicles which can become the locus for change, and win over the hearts and minds of our country?
Pipe dreams?
A running joke amongst the separatists?
When enacted the Declaration of Racial Equality will become ‘a mini-constitution’ which will in fact restore the true principle of the treaty of Waitangi! *Equality… and oneness!*
We will need Big money to fund events and buy regular spots in the Papers for our articles.
This will mean soliciting regular donations from members of the Lobby… $10, $20,… per week per person.
These are my thoughts on how we ought to approach the task of Ending Waitangi apartheid.
The only question is do we have Individuals of the requisite caliber, and a team work ethic… a spirit of fraternity strong enough to summit this peak?
I myself am awaiting what develops before I commit to any particular aspect of this movement, and thus will continue to function as an Independent Libertarian until such time that for the sake of the cause I dedicate myself to some other roll.
And like many of my Libertarian comrades whom have so bravely stood against Waitangi separatism for years, I am more concerned about my Political principles making it into Parliament than phyisically getting a seat there myself.
If I need to carry the flag all the way… I will endeavor to do so.
I will be most happy indeed if Ending treaty separatism again becomes the ‘Flagship’ of the National
Party… or even of the Labour party… and even of such contemptible Oligochaeta as Winston First!
😀
^^^Important Caveat:
Hey dont get confused!
This is my personal blogpost and I am speaking as a Private citizen… not as a spokesperson for this theoretical Lobby group I have proposed above, and Winston has never apologised for his despicable sell out… which kept us enslaved under apartheid!
He deserves to be called out on this and held accountable!
This is still a Radical Christian Libertarian Blog… not a impartial ‘single issue’ lobby group webpage.
Comprendo????
Such a website…such a Lobby are only hypothetical at present.
Update: 19-5-13
It really is a Gigantic task which sends trembles down the spine.
I am thinking we need to start at the start… and that may be quite different to how we end up operating once we gain our stride, for example I think we would at first need to attract a hardcore group of desperados and first go on the offensive against Labour…against the Nats, Greens, etc,… to get that base of resolute Stalwarts, but then be wise enough to hold out the olive branch to these big parties and attempt to win them over to our way of thinking, and to the degree that they move in the right direction is the degree by which we ought to become more conciliatory to them… I cannot help but think that the only way we will succeed is if we win over at least one of the Big parties to our cause… and they could be aided by the coalition of a minor single issue Racial equality party.
This ‘juggling act’ will take extreme skill in leadership to pull off as some of the supporters of One Law for all will not want to deal with National… others will not wish to deal with Labour, and others will not wish to deal with either.
^^^^Rubbish!
The Economies of the West were bankrupted by Nanny State Social Democracy… You Sheeple are to blame! Because you voted for Labour/ National… Reps/ Dems… and their equivalent shyster parties in every Western Social Democratic Nation whom promised to mother you and keep ‘Evil free enterprise’ in check.
You yourselves voted for the Bankruptcy!
You wanted all their promises.
You wanted all their taxes.
You wanted them to keep spending and keep borrowing.
Don’t cry about them bailing out the Mega Rich!
That too was all part of the socialist package you voted for… the idea that the government is responsible for the economy and can manipulate the players as it sees fit.
Don’t now pretend it is all the wealthy fascists fault!
Your continued self denial of your own guilt makes me sick!
We Libertarians knew your socialist scam would end in ruin!
We warned you for years this Zombie Apocalypse was approaching!.
We stood for parliament preaching an end to spending, an end to big government…yet you chose instead to burry your heads in the sand and kid yourselves that the socialist madness could go on and on…at least until *You* were gone… and then the problem would be someone else’s problem to fix!
Well your chickens have come home to roost!
When you see growing poverty, and children in rags…blame your selves!
Take ownership of what *You voted for!*
Know that it was your own selfish lusts for Nanny State socialism which has brought Great nations to ruin!
The day of Reckoning is here!
Will you humble yourselves and admit your errors?
No. Like most criminals you will never admit the truth…You will go the Hell screaming you are innocent.
Your politics created the Filthy Rich and the super powerful, and having learned nothing… having feed your growing Envy and Malice with even greater lies… you will soon elect an even more terrible Beast!
It is *you sheeple* whom will allow a new Totalitarian system to be installed!
You will vote for Full control of the worlds resources via a political elite… in the name of saving the world from ‘Capitalist exploitation’.
You will vote for a global Dictator under the delusion that this will end war.
And you will all receive the Mark of the Beast, and cry out against those arrogant ‘Libertarians’…who refuse to bow down… calling them ‘Enemies of the State.’
Yes you will have your Socialist ‘Utopia’!
My heart breaks for the Death of Liberty and prosperity…. And for your Slave Children.
