Not exactly the normal image of a neoNazi.
Far be it for me to suggest my woke identity politics comrades on the left are once again causing counter productive outcomes with their war on free speech, but the latest attempt to paint David Seymour out as a neoNazi because of the ‘threat’ to Golriz Ghahraman risks creating a Kavanaugh effect backlash.
It was interesting how this ‘threat’ went from around the clock police protection because of death threats to actually just being a parliamentary guard while on Parliament grounds. Even Russell Brown gasped at the difference between the original claims and the ‘clarification’…
…and the ‘threat’ that triggered this? Comments made in secret in a closed chat room forum that Newshub exposed.
All trying to paint Seymour out as a nazi because he said Golriz’s desire to curb free speech was a menace to freedom manages to do is push people away from hate speech reform, not towards it.
Most people think of Seymour twerking on DWTS , they don’t think of him as a fascist spreading death threats. During the Kavanaugh confirmation fiasco, voters stopped fearing their daughter would be raped & feared their sons would be falsely accused of rape.
By over egging Seymour’s responsibility for this ‘threat’, NZ voters will stop fearing hate speech and start fearing being accused of hate speech by micro aggression policing woke activists.
ACT are going to easily double their vote in 2020 if the woke keep gifting them these wins, which is incredibly annoying because David Seymour shouldn’t be allowed to become politically relevant again!
The Left should be championing free speech, not gifting it over to the right!
It seems Golritz and Marama are taking it in turns to grab the headlines! But not in a green party policy way but in personal politics. Marama trying to get the word c#nt normalised (I honestly believe she attended some feminist conference and someone mentioned that the word should be made non ‘sweary’ and decided to run with it…without the partys knowledge) The biggest threat to Golritz political career isn’t Seymour it’s her unfunny partner Guy Williams. If his ‘comedy’ and tweets were from the partner of a National MP, especially his hatred of Christians/Christianity, all you guys on here would be screaming blue murder!
Golriz Ghahraman and the Greens are a MENACE to themselves, I reckon.
She’s at least drinking her own Kool aid. I haven’t looked that hard but my gut says that she doesn’t receive any online digital communications that would be to much worse than say some one like Hone Harawira and he got a bullet and still didn’t freak out. I mean broadcasting that Golriz’s security had to be beefed up, the broadcasting bit isn’t something security personal would want known. I mean they’re just not taking this shit seriously.
And Marama. Their of hijacking the Auckland Muslim vigil for their own woe-is-me moment, and whites hate browns posturing, was culturally insensitive (to absolutely everybody) , bad manners, selfish, immature, and simply untrue.
If they want to tell lies about people like me, that’s their prerogative.
But expecting me to vote for a bunch of wackos when there are so many other wackos to chose from is unrealistic. We need ‘normal’ if poss.
Snow White: “Their of hijacking the Auckland Muslim vigil for their own woe-is-me moment, and whites hate browns posturing, was culturally insensitive (to absolutely everybody) , bad manners, selfish, immature, and simply untrue.”
I agree. Woe-is-me: heh! Very apt description.
Was it the Greens that did the painting or was it an over eager journalist ?
Ben: “…or was it an over eager journalist ?”
Looking back at Martyn’s earlier post on the topic, it seems to have been a combination of a bit of overstatement on the part of some of the Twitterati, and conflation of “white supremacist” and “neoNazi”, possibly by journos. Although that may also have been the said Twitterati.
I note that Morgan Godfery’s tweet is quoted, and he refers to white supremacists.
He claims that Gharahman is being pursued simply for having opinions. Which is paradoxical: isn’t she herself pursuing individuals with opinions which she characterises as hate speech?
re “He claims that Gharahman is being pursued simply for having opinions. Which is paradoxical: isn’t she herself pursuing individuals with opinions which she characterises as hate speech?”
( cough cough….she defended a bloke who incited genocide)
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99305306/green-mp-golriz-ghahraman-pictured-smiling-in-photograph-alongside-rwandan-convicted-for-inciting-genocide\
This article needs to be read in detail…the woman is a hypocrite
Red Buzzard: “she defended a bloke who incited genocide”
In fairness to Ghahraman: in the first place, even those charged with the most egregious crimes deserve to have legal representation in court.
In the second place, scepticism is advisable about the msm account of Rwanda. As with most signal events worldwide, We’ve been presented with a revisionist account of what happened in Rwanda. It’s an account that serves the purpose of the major powers; in my view, Bikindi is just the fall guy. See this:
https://consortiumnews.com/tag/rwandan-genocide/?print=print-search
The argument here seems to be that the Greens should careful about what they say so as not to give ACT votes – isn’t that an argument for censorship? No political party should be expected to tip toe around what it believes simply not to upset the electorate. People can decide for themselves who they want to vote for, and if more of them decide to vote for David Seymour, then more fool them.
I watched David and Lewissa on Jack Tame’s show. David made a lot of sense with regard to hate speech. Sadly I felt far more connection to his views and even thought I might vote for Act because of this and the fact Labour have not delivered. If Labour are no different economically to National then I might as well be strategic and switch to a moral/social issue so at least I have something worth voting for. Suppressing free speech is a recipe for disaster (Orwellian). I am starting to invisage Lewissa, Jacinda and Golriz being the gods of hate speech while sipping really good coffee in a very hipster café. Crickey this sounds very much like hate speech against people who talk crap in cafes and meetings and think they are working.
what a shallow comparison ORBITALPANDA are you one of the privileged ones from epsom?
Would you care to share with us examples of the “hate speech” from Ms Ghahraman, et al, Orbitalpanda?
Excuse my symbolism Frank- when I said “gods of hate speech” I meant that Golriz and co will sit like God on judgement day for everyone else who utters something they may not like. Who will be the Minister of thought? Those most righteous among men? Remember a lot of the classic posts on this blog could be classified as low level hate speech, even incitement. Country Boy’s best work is filled with hatred and bile.
Michelle -I voted to help those other than myself. How did that go?
Wise words, Orbitalpanda.
I also voted to help those other than myself, yet in power these people have window-dressed and governed in the interests of the wealthy in general and Auckland property owners particularly.
I was willing to be inclusive and pay CGT yet these NPCs in parliament are gutless and now have attacked my way of life and my civil liberties to suit their ideology. Nothing inclusive in that.
I feel betrayed by the left and would have no shame giving my vote to ACT which at least values personal freedom and doesn’t lie about its economic motives- if im given no better option.
The woke may yet lose the left the next election.
You don’t even have to go as far as the USA, I suggest a look across the Tasman at what happens to the left the further they move from their working class roots, the higher their Chardonnay consumption gets and the more elitist they become.
I can quite understand that line of thinking, if you agree with some of Bombers attack points
1. not different enough on the economic side
2. not enough done on global warming
3. not as pro free speech as the right
The fact is there is enough difference for the social democrat to want to prevent National’s return to power.
And his argument that there is more threat to free speech from the woke left than the right is contentious. The deep state is identifying, monitoring and targeting dissidents – based on their opinion and activism and he is someone who should know better.
There is a reason why those on the right go under the security radar, their extremist attack points serve the political interests of mainstream political right.
Orbital Panda: “…I might vote for Act because of this and the fact Labour have not delivered. If Labour are no different economically to National then I might as well be strategic and switch to a moral/social issue so at least I have something worth voting for.”
I’m coming round to this way of thinking as well. And at least the Natz are honest about supporting the rich. Labour’s pusillanimity really sticks in my craw: it’ll be a cold day in hell before I vote for them again.
As for the Greens, I stopped voting for them years ago. The more Gharahman and others shriek about hate speech, the surer I am that I made the right decision.
I’m an old lefty: it pains me greatly to be so disillusioned with Labour in particular as to be turning away from them after all these years.
Gimme an honest-to-goodness left-wing party, and I’ll vote for it!
+1 Pineapples
nah he’s not a nazi he just one of the many fucken idiots that shouldn’t be in parliament
Since when has any Green representative called Seymour a neonazi? Your false interpretations are more divisive than that which you are complaining about
what a shallow comparison ORBITALPANDA are you one of the privileged ones from epsom?
looks like he wants someone to give him a good kick in the buttocks
“but the latest attempt to paint David Seymour out as a neoNazi because of the ‘threat’ to Golriz Ghahraman risks creating a Kavanaugh effect backlash”
Who is calling Seymour a neo nazi?? Certainly not the Greens
He’s not
He’s just a fuckwit
Those very real neo nazis in closed chat rooms are the real threat. You do see that don’t you??
Or do we require another shooting to prove the point??
This isnt about free speech. Thats a smoke screen. Seymour is just exploiting the neo nazi thugs to win votes. In the process he is endangering one young woman’s life
How would *YOU* respond to his dog whistle politics??
How would I respond? Well I wouldn’t have responded. My response would have been to keep private personal security matters private.
There’s a number of things people can do to identify threats. It’s not enough that people raise there voices, they also have to be moving towards an intended target in a threatening manner, whether you are in your own home or the threat is in another city sitting behind a computer screen it doesn’t matter. As long as the threat is moving towards a target / victim in a threatening manner then the response would be violence with out prejudice.
Mjolnir: “Those very real neo nazis in closed chat rooms are the real threat. You do see that don’t you??
Or do we require another shooting to prove the point??”
Again: the fellow on trial for the ChCh shootings is AUSTRALIAN. And radicalised outside NZ. Probably outside Australia as well, in all likelihood.
And: a bunch of (no doubt mostly) blokes with weird ideas nutting off in a closed chat room is just that. In all honesty, we the citizens face more of a threat from the gangs than we do from these so-called neoNazis.
Speaking of neoNazis: if you want to see the real thing in action, go look at the Ukraine, since the US-backed putsch there in 2014. And while you’re at it, find out what these dreadful people did in Odessa not long after they came to power. Unspeakably foul.
It is bloody dangerous if you are just supporting Seymour just because you agree about his posturing on free speech.
If you vote for this guy you vote for his hideous policy mix and ideas at the same time.
When you get bitten by rats you get their disease.
Women began to fear that their sons would be accused of rape … if women felt more comfortable about coming forward with their abuse.
Sounds a lot like, those circumcised women who want their daughters circumcised like they were.
Or the advice not to fight back because then they get angry and mobilise their vote (those of the red state line who protect each other).
I’m afraid that on a Left wing ticket Golriz and pretty much all the Green team are middle class educated free loaders. No wonder the working classes don’t vote Green and increasingly don’t vote Labour.
Fundamentally the biggest issue is the lower socio economic classes are more interested in their money or lack thereof. Having the likes of Golriz demanding real idealist wokesterism from a privileged position is never going to be a vote catcher. Criticise ACT as much as you like, they are far more honest about being rich that’s, as opposed to faux working class Greens. And to those with little things like honesty go a long way.
PS to be able to make ACT sound credible takes genius, it’s such nonsense. Well done Golriz and crew.
As long as the Gweens die and not return to parliament, post 2020 election. I’m good with that! Woo Hoo!
I’d Still Keep Chloe and Shaw and Garreth and Jan Logie
Sam: “I’d Still Keep Chloe and Shaw.”
Hmm…. Chlöe maybe; definitely not Shaw. He comes across as fake, in my view.
NO, forget Chloe the little arrogant know it all brat, forget James the Bean Counter Shaw, Gareth may get a pass though, but Jan Logie is one of identity politics best friends, she and the others will hardly gain the Greens many votes, certainly not on the environmental front, which none of them really stand for all that much.
Marc: “….forget Chloe the little arrogant know it all brat…”
Yeah, you’re probably right. I was being too generous.
The view of this household is that – as we describe it – Gharahman has come to believe her own publicity. It happens sooner or later to almost all people who have a public profile. For some, it’s sooner; that seems to be the case with Gharahman and it sounds as if Swarbrick is the same.
Comments are closed.