CORBYN’S DEFEAT, and the defeat of the Labour Party his leadership made possible, is a defeat for the Left everywhere. All over the western world social-democrats are pointing to the British Labour Party’s electoral catastrophe and saying: “See? This is what happens when you try to sell “Democratic-Socialism” to those not already convinced that it’s a good idea.” What happened to Labour’s “Red Wall” will be used to undermine AOC; batter Bernie Sanders; and demoralise Elizabeth Warren. Closer to home, it will be used as a prophylactic against the merest hint of Corbyn-style thinking inside the New Zealand Labour Party.
The question is: What lessons should democratic-socialists, themselves, draw from the Corbyn Labour Party’s historic defeat? Because the UK General Election has more lessons to teach us than Dominic Cummings has wickedly clever ideas. Not the least of which is that you receive fewer scratches when you pat a cat from its head to its tail, rather than from its tail to its head.
It is one of the great paradoxes of radical left-wing politics: that the people who rail most uncompromisingly against the evils of capitalism are genuinely shocked and horrified when capitalism unleashes a fair old swag of those evils against them.
Jeremy Corbyn was unfairly pilloried in the media, they complain. Every major media outlet was against him. The guy couldn’t get a break – not even from The Guardian and the BBC!
Well, duh! What the hell did they expect? That the leader of a party promising to restore the trade unions’ right to engage in “secondary picketing” was going to be given a fair shake by newspapers owned by billionaires? That Rupert Murdoch, the man who broke the power of the print unions in the 1980s, was going to say: “Come on in, Jezza! Sit down and tell me how I can help you devise the sort of inheritance tax that will break the power of families like my own forever.”
If you accept the proposition that we are all living in a capitalist society, then, surely, you must also accept that anyone posing a genuine threat to that society will be subjected to unrelenting political attack? And, doesn’t that oblige you, as the democratic-socialist leader of a serious electoral party, to offer the capitalist press the smallest possible target? In fact, wouldn’t the smart move be to convince the mainstream media bosses that you weren’t any kind of democratic-socialist at all?
Come to think of it, wouldn’t it mean doing exactly what Tony Blair did? Making the pilgrimage to Rupert Murdoch’s corporate lair and convincing him that from you and your “sensible” Labour Party he had absolutely nothing to fear? That way, when the election campaign got rolling, The Sun could come out and endorse you, and urge its readers to vote Labour.
Obviously, I’m not saying that Tony Blair was any kind of democratic-socialist. What I am suggesting, however, is that if you are a Labour leader who genuinely subscribes to the principles of democratic-socialism, then it would probably help a lot to keep your true ideological colours under wraps. Tactically, at least, it would make more sense for the powers-that-be to see you as a reasonable moderate – not a scary radical. Impress the electorate with your economic wisdom; demonstrate your deep understanding of, and sympathy for, the hopes and aspirations of your core working-class supporters. Speak with pride and passion about the contribution their party has made to the nation’s history. Whatever you do, don’t refuse to sing God Save The Queen. It would also probably help if you refrained from meeting with representatives of terrorist organisations – especially those hostile to the State of Israel!
A democratic-socialist leader possessed of a sophisticated strategic sense would understand that election manifestos are best restricted to promoting policies that the electorate actually wants – not policies his (or her) comrades believe the electorate should want. Let the drift of events – economically and socially – propel the party in directions which the capitalists may not like, but which they no longer feel able to redirect. Most importantly, identify the one reform most likely to undermine the institutions upon which their opponents’ rely most heavily for protection. Implement it early, fast, and without compromise.
Think of Jim Bolger, Bill Birch and the Employment Contracts Act. Radically reducing the reach and power of the trade unions – the working class’s most effective defence against exploitation and declining living standards – was the one reform most likely to enhance and entrench the power of capital. The moment it became law, everything else National and its backers wanted to do was made ten times easier.
It is worth recalling that the unprecedented scope and radicalism of the Employment Contracts Act had not been signalled to the electorate prior to National racking-up a massive majority in the 1990 General Election. Bill Birch had reassured New Zealand workers that their hard-won industrial rights – guaranteed hours and penal rates – would not be affected by the changes National was proposing. By the time the draconian provisions of the bill became clear, the leaders of the trade unions had lost all confidence in their ability to prevent its passage. This loss of confidence was crucial to the National Government’s success. A successful democratic-socialist government should be similarly positioned to demoralise their capitalist opponents.
Perhaps, then, that is the exercise democratic-socialists around the world should now be undertaking. Quietly identifying the single reform that would effectively disarm the capitalists and fundamentally diminish their ability to effectively resist the introduction of further progressive economic, social and environmental reforms.
As Varys in Game of Thrones so wisely tells Tyrion: “Power resides where men believe it resides. It’s a trick. A shadow on the wall. And a very small man can cast a very large shadow.”
It’s high time the Left learned the trick of winning power under capitalism: positioning a very big man in such a way that he casts a very small and non-threatening shadow – until he doesn’t.
Jezza, old son, they saw you coming!
Steve Maharey, on the Pundit website, has been running a series of blogs on ‘third way’ political economics. He argues that the third way is not a fixed set of doctrines, but largely a response to changing economic conditions; in other words, the third way is whatever philosophy would be appropriate in those changed circumstances. However, the overriding idea is that the keynesian welfare state that we are familiar with has had its day, and needs to be reinvented.
Incidentally, the reference to Game of Thrones has a parallel in The Wizard of Oz, which is thought to have been an allegory of the monetary system in the US at the end of the nineteenth century. In that novel the wizard apparently represents the banking fraternity, being all ‘smoke and mirrors’, and having very little substance.
A good post Mr Trotter. I hope all members of the current coalition government read it and digest.
But may I suggest that social-democrat is a more acceptable and more accurate term than democratic- socialist. I think Bernie Sanders has made a mistake describing himself as the latter.
People are influenced more by the noun at the end of a title than by the adjective at the front.
(Think, capitalistic-democrat vs democratic-capitalist).
Yes , I prefer social democrat than democratic socialist… for those same reasons you mention.
The election produced exactly the average of all the poles leading up to it. The Torys increased their vote by 1.2% from the last election. Ignoring Brexit in this election is perverse.
It was not the disaster that the establishment is delightedly turning it into .
If “democratic” socialism is to come into existence it can only do so democratically. look at the UK labour membership explosion that Corbyn.s leadership precipitated. There was at last a genuine alternative to the neoliberal settlement. And more and more people were recognising it. That is the only way a change can come about.But a likely pending collapse of the system will give it the focus it probably needs to really change.
But the MSM and internal despicable attacks on Corbyn as if he was an antisemite were so contrary to the obvious truth about him that they had to be counter productive. Anyone taking an interest and not already committed to apposing everything he stood for has to reject the charges and eschew those making the charge.
Jezza always knew they saw him coming. He has been in the middle of this battle all his adult life. He chose to continue to be up front with his beliefs and state the truth whatever the short tern effect on popularity . He could not possibly after all this time do anything else, and neither should he.
D J S
Hmmm. Thus says Phil Wilson, who lost the northern seat of Sedgefield (Tony Blair’s former seat, a mining town, and solidly Labour since 1935) to the Conservatives: “If you are on the doorstep and one person mentions Brexit, but five people mention the leader of the Labour party for being the reason they are not going to vote for you, then things need to change. I believe that the leader of the Labour party should not be resigning today, he should have resigned a long time ago.” And one of Wilson’s team: “Brexit was obviously a factor, but the main issue again and again here was the leadership. It didn’t matter what the message was, they didn’t like the messenger.”
See: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/15/blair-old-seat-sedgefield-rejected-corbyn-perceived-unpatriotic
If this is true of the whole of Britain then democracy can never work. If the sentiment of the vast majority can be so influenced by a partisan media as to devise the first champion they have had in a decade there is no hope of the majority voting in their own best interests. This is probably true. People are by and large not interested enough to look after themselves, perhaps not cleaver enough, but I think not interested enough and more concerned with agreeing with the popular narrative than thinking for themselves.
But Phil Wilson might be a Blaire who is not telling the truth . Also if he is known as such the doorstep response will on the one hand be influenced by which doors he chose to knock on, and by those who agree with the anti Corbyn narrative , and knowing he holds the same view will have enthusiastically spoken their mind whereas those who know they disagree with his position may well have kept quiet.
D J S
I just looked Wilson up on Wikipedia and share enough .
No other comment could be expected of him.
D J S
More from the Guardian:
“Former minister Pat McFadden said the new leader must represent a break from the Corbyn era.
“The greatest mistake the Labour Party could make now would be to trot out the excuses that we have heard over recent days, that it’s all Brexit’s fault or the media’s fault or – worst of all – that we won the argument,” Mr McFadden told Sky News.
“None of those things will wash.
“Unless we learn the fundamental depth of our defeat and have a big change of direction, all we will do is keep handing power to the Conservatives and that is not why the Labour Party exists. We exist to win power, not to come second in a two-horse race.”
He warned: “If the next leader is ‘continuity Corbyn’, that would be the greatest mistake the Labour Party could make. The strategy of rejecting every lesson we learnt in order to win in the 1990s and 2000s has been tested and tested to destruction.””
That will certainly be the push from the Blairites; seize the opportunity to reverse the trend toward social democracy inspired by Corbyn’s election as leader, and go back to out Torying the Torys.
Trouble is the 500 000 + membership inspired by Corbyn making it the biggest political party in Europe will now evaporate . And they will not succeed in out Torying the Torys.
It will depend a bit on who the next leader is . I would expect Keir Starmer to come through for the Blairites.
I must say though that winning this election and taking responsibility for Brexit would probably have done for Corbyn anyway. There is no way of winning on that issue except from the spectator’s seat. A half pie Brexit as he proposed would rile both leavers and remainers and a referendum on “remain or leave in name only would infuriate leavers and irk remainers. It was better to lose this election than to be in that position but not by so much, and he should resign but stand for selection alongside whoever else wants to try.
D J S
Apparently people loved Corbyn in 2017 when he almost unseated the May government, but they now, in 2019, hate him. So what’s going on? Has he suddenly grown horns and a tail, or is it just the Guardian’s prejudice speaking.The main difference between the an now is that Labour, under him, changed its stance on brexit, and this seems to have been brought about by dissidents within the party rather than by Corbyn himself.
The Guardian, with live commentary from the Labour Party meeting, has these scrolling Corbyn comments, and others, for which the word “excoriation” comes to mind:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/dec/17/brexit-labour-cabinet-plp-commons-starmer-says-johnsons-decision-to-rule-out-transition-extension-reckless-and-irresponsible–live-news
“Member of PLP tells me: Jeremy Corbyn is being cut to ribbons. The anger is so strong you feel as if MPs are about to storm his area. Claudia Webbe only MP to support him”
“Margaret Beckett tells the #PLP that the next leader should be someone the country wants rather than just the party (as with John Smith after Neil Kinnock)”
“Labour MP Clive Efford is shouting at leadership, saying it’d be a disaster to “do the same thing all over again” with another hard left manifesto:
“When the boxes opened in my working class areas, council estates in my constituency, it was 50/50 with the Tories. Unacceptable!””
“”I have had no phone calls or messages from Jeremy Corbyn’s office, which shows he is a man of no honour … and a kind of preening narcissism that thinks he still has something to offer Labour voters” @MaryCreaghMP tells @mattfrei #C4News”
Of course voters in electorates held by Labour MP’s critical of Corbyn are going to say they do not like the Labour leader. It’s more polite than saying your disunity is the problem and you are part of that. Own it.
Then there are the pro Remain MP’s and Labour’s policy on a new referendum on an half Brexit (staying in the customs union and single market) and 2017 Labour voters who voted for Brexit in 2016 and UKIP in 2015 and who wanted this matter sorted before another general election – expecting that would be assisted by the Labour Party they voted for in 2017, not obstructed. Corbyn seems to have been blamed for this, but it was the majority position of the caucus.
Sure voters could have said, not voting for you this time because of your own Brexit position but maybe if you win re-election or stand again after losing I’ll vote for you in the future, once Brexit is sorted. But this person is someone they know and might remain their MP, easier to blame it all on someone they have never met and only know through media coverage.
In the Durham area they voted for Blair the war criminal/supporter of the PNAC, justified as security first – anyone else on the left seems weak on security after that.
According to your analysis the people most averse to real left wing leadership, and vulnerable to media attack on it, were people from the working class heartland regions of the Labour Party.
So it reminds me of this article by the BBC correspondent to the USA who calls it a warning to the Democrat Party to pick someone more like Clinton, Biden, than Warren or Sanders.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50785442
I would reject the argument that Sanders and Warren would be less attractive than Clinton or Biden to the working class Democrats who voted for Trump.
And the idea that the political left needs to be led by moderates, so the media will give them a fair go, is to abandon their parties to the Blairites. Because once the left accepts advocacy for their cause by those who will not advocate for it, then their cause has no mandate to be implemented by government.
Correct me if I am wrong Chris but you seem to be saying that the best way to engage with a corrupt system is to become corrupt.
It could be said that rooting out corruption is more the case in the UK and here in NZ. One does not combat a raging predator by offering it small tidbits, as when those tidbits run out ?… that predator then turns its gaze to you.
I think he’s saying that it’s important to *appear* to be corrupt.
Whether that works or not is another story, the first rule of getting to be part of the establishment is that you must work to defend the establishment – it must be a reflex and I’m not sure if it’s possible to be that deceptive. I suspect Bill Clinton tried but got gradually converted in the end – not that he would admit it
Ruthlessly punishing corruption and bullying very harshly has to start from the top. Helen Clark was okay at it I guess I just don’t think she was radical enough.
Give that man a cigar! But only in the sense that the French Huguenot (Protestant) Henry of Navarre converted to Catholicism in order to become one of France’s greatest kings with the immortal observation: “Paris is worth a mass.”
Good article, Chris,…
I liken politics to war. Indeed wars can and ARE often a direct result of politics.
Corbyn and his supporters broke a fundamental principle in both war and politics. This , from Sun Tzu :
——————————
“Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.”
——————————
And this is exactly what the David Lange / Roger Douglas and Jim Bolger / Ruth Richardson govt’s did to the NZ public , they operated in stealth , barely giving much away until they had formulated their plans , – and when they implemented them , they ” fell like a thunderbolt” and never relented once in the most odious form of anti democratic and dictatorial display of contempt for the public that voted them , … that we have possibly ever seen in this country.
Its good you dragged in the scurrilous Murdoch media empire as well. They have a colossal amount to answer for. They are , in spirit and in deed , similar to any fascist organization in capturing the narrative and molding public opinion. Its called ‘propaganda’ by the ‘good guys’ about their enemy’s, – but ‘truth’ if told by those same ‘good guys’…
Neo liberalism had many such slogans for its propaganda, – from ‘choices’ to ‘efficiency’, to ‘govt waste’ – the ‘choices’ for example to not join a trade union and thus forgo the protections it gave one , the ‘efficiency’ to justify selling off public assets, sacking a majority of wage earners ( downsizing ) asset stripping to maximize personal profits with the direct aim for private enterprise to purchase those former public assets , hike up prices and deliver an inferior product that costs far more. ‘Govt waste’was used to justify these bogus claims in order to leverage away those assets from the public that had been carefully built up and developed by the taxpayer for generations… floating the dollar and dismantling trade tariffs were implemented easily , – trade tariffs that once protected smaller NZ industry’s and its workers , their wages and their good standards of living.
And so indeed, working in stealth , knocking out a fundamental piece of legislation or institution that underpins neo liberal capitalism is a foundation for success in any counterattack. And just like the neo liberals did to us in an act of politically anti democratic ‘violence’ against us and the vote , economic war and and deceit,… so should those same tactics be gifted back to them.
Recall the lies of the Bolger led govt who promised to overturn and end the destructive policy’s of Labour’s Finance Minister, Roger Douglas,… yet , when in power they simply carried on those policy’s and worse, – implemented one of the most socially and economically destructive pieces of legislation aimed squarely at the working peoples of this country this nation had ever seen : the Employment Contracts Act 1991.
That Act alone was one of the cornerstones of the neo liberal takeover, as was the Reserve Bank Act. And despite mass nationwide demonstrations , went against the will of their electorates and slammed through their unpopular legislation at breakneck speed. Knowing also that it would mean political suicide for that particular govt who implemented them , they were unconcerned. Most had gold plated positions pre organized after their political careers ended. They considered their jobs done.
Tactically , a manifesto should contain socially acceptable and current issue policy’s with an aim towards popular appeal. Strategically , – plans for dismantling the neo liberal agenda need to be kept under wraps with the tightest of security,.. in other words,… only shared among those with like minds and common goals. Along with that , – as they did to us, – placing key people in key positions that are aligned with the downfall of neo liberalism. During and after an election. These form the rear guard to protect against a rebellion by a defeated political foe.
You do NOT conduct a war by placing your enemy’s in positions where they hold a tactical advantage and can obstruct your people and the fulfillment of your end goals. And that means replacing individuals in govt depts that are hostile to your objectives.
All war is based on deceit, so also is propaganda. The neo liberals fired the first shots in this war. Thus the Left is and has been for a very long time on a war footing. This is how we should be dealing with them .
Deceitfully , ruthlessly and with no quarter given.
Just as they were to us.
Such things are done under first past the post, since we adopted MMP, all parties have been more circumspect.
Sure National still uses the ACT Party, with its more extremist polices – then chooses which one/ones to adopt when forming a coalition. Their strategy is to be dependent on this one seat as a cover for that deceit.
Which is why they do not really want a centrist coalition partner, just stalking horses to take votes off their rivals.
The point is it matters not what system you have in place.
Here is another spectacular way to dismantle neo liberalism. Contributed in yet another great post by Mr Trotter,… a way to re-nationalize what was deceitfully taken from us and then sold off for a song…
——————————–
What the new communist government of China did, in the early 1950s, was to pass a law requiring all existing capitalist businesses above a certain size to make the Chinese state a 25 percent shareholder in the enterprise. Naturally, such a large shareholding would also entitle the state to be represented on the enterprise’s board of directors. As the years passed and the new regime consolidated itself, the legislation was amended constantly. Year by year, the state’s shareholding in the enterprise was increased – along with the number of its directors.
Unsurprisingly, the value of these enterprises’ shares plummeted. Seeing which way the wind was blowing, all those Chinese capitalists with a lick of sense offered-up their business’s remaining shares to the state. The latter generously agreed to take these off their hands – albeit for a handful of cents on the dollar. In this way, China’s largest capitalist enterprises were legally, peacefully – and cheaply – acquired by the state. As an added bonus, most of the by-now-former capitalists took what was left of their money and ran – to Taiwan, Singapore and the United States.
So, that was how you did it. By deploying the state’s legislative and administrative powers against the entrenched economic power of private enterprise. Far from sending in the revolutionary guards to seize, in the name of the people – and without compensation – the banks, insurance companies, department stores and factories, a democratic-socialist government would send in … its lawyer.
——————————–
Adrian Orr – The Reserve Bank’s Revolutionary Governor …
https://thedailyblog.co.nz › Bloggers › Chris Trotter
Absolute brilliance.
I think the Left/Right narrative is done.
AO/NZ Red flag waving socialists weathering the Brain farts of the Neo-Right blue bloods, who’s blood’s not so much blue as black, stopped being a thing when roger douglas was excreted out the anus of the labour party along with the other little worms who fucked us.
People are two kinds of people.
Kind #1
Like fucking around with hobbies, having kids, growing vegetable gardens, mowing the lawns, drinking beer with friends while making a hell of a racket and generally living ‘life’ because, as we all know, money can buy anything except that divine ability to be able to relish the truly priceless things in ‘life’ which are, of course, free.
For example; how much money would you pay to no longer be terminally ill with, say, cancer? My guess would be every penny you have.
And yet? When we’re healthy and content? We barely notice how lucky we are while we pray to all the Gods for a lotto win.
Kind#2
Kind 2 don’t comprehend hobbies unless they turn good coin, they’ll only have one kid as a status symbol and any more than one will impede wealth acquisition, they have zero interest in growing vegetables because they can buy them at a super market, they employ Kind #1 people to do their gardening and lawn mowing and will only have beersies with those whom they can intellectually and emotionally exploit to further their financial portfolios.
[It’s] no longer a Right versus Left thing. It’s a psychiatric pathology thing.
The very Right are, in fact, barking fucking mad and they have us gaslighted into believing that it is, indeed us Left-overs who’re in fact the fruity ones.
What you @ CT might refer to as the Left must come to terms with fighting for survival and wrest our lives back from the tyranny of the freakish once-were right wing lunatics.
That means we must purge AO/NZ of the Right Wingers foot soldiers of choice, the banksters first and foremost. We then need a government run retail bank by us, for us
Basically, we need to wipe AO/NZ clean of those things which cause us anxiety and depression and chip those whom sold us into that madness and that has NOTHING to do with political Right and Left. I truly don’t think a political Right and Left ever actually existed at all. They’re really simply terms which enable us to differentiate between those whom exploit and those whom are exploited. Have I just redefined the concept of capitalism?
And when good people fail to act? AO/NZ is a good example of what happens next.
Labour’s Labour wherever you find them: patronising and infantilising. Clueless appeasers putting 10c in the Poor Box.
They never seem to understand that they aren’t actually taking people with them. Too busy playing at Good Fairies – ‘we’ll do this for you’, instead of levelling the playing field for all the players.
For example: it would be ‘nice’ to have more housing that’s affordable either to rent or buy. To convince the landlords/Dad and Mum investors that it would be financial foolishness to keep hiking the price because people have other options than being squeezed for every dollar. But the system that allows that is still in place. Corporate welfare is still running – and Labour’s okay with that? Seemingly. Putting a better system in place seems to be beyond them. Tinker at the edges and run if the jackals growl.
Once upon a time working people had the vote (sort of) and no voice in law-making.
That changed.
The system didn’t. It’s nothing but a sop to cannon fodder and slave labour.
‘Advocates for’ (such as Federated Farmers, trade unions, manufacturers and employers) are not suitable for governing the country. Far too partisan. They’re important, though. For feedback, opinion and fact. Inevitably biased. Which is okay.
By the time we get to the laws and governing level we actually want NO ‘party politics’. That’s so nineteenth century. And most of the parties are still ‘way back then.
UK Labour seemed to have been about yet another lolly scramble and not about making a better system for enterprise and workers that took into account the massive changes we have underway. People voted to see an expression of their will – Brexit – and no one was going to rob them of that.
Labour, as usual, was about ‘Nanny knows best’ and the kids revolted.
Good.
But will our lot, and Australia’s, get the message? Not ‘do it for us’ – ‘do it with us and LISTEN!’
Today’s left, and by that I don’t mean the current crop of 3rd way enthusiasts, seem wedded to keynesian economics. Keynesianism arose between the wars and seemed mainly appropriate to a situation of high unemployment and a deflationary monetary economy. However such an economic philosophy seems no relevant , having been unable to handle the stagflation of the seventies or the current situation of precarity with respect to employment. The left is very much in need of a new paradigm. An incipient paradigm seems to be in the making, however, with talk of a UBI and free services such as public transport, broadband, and the like. Also knowledge of the fact that banks create money is becoming more widely disseminated, with the corollary that we should do something about it. And to cap it all, the realization that our lifestyles may not be sustainable for much longer is starting to sink in.
We seem to be getting there, but we haven’t quite got there yet.
Nailed it Wild Katipo
See today john boy,has sold his house for 23 million,took two years according,was that according Brona,persil rinsing him.Should a large lump of that home sell be given back to our kiwi government,for our property build for our johns protection squad.
My freinds and us always suspected,john boy and Brona,irish BROHONA,was long gone past the pig tail pulling.
Ho Ho Merry Xmas folks.
Bad news here.
Yes Labour is being ‘blackend already’ by the altra conservative mad media today.
To win they will need to build that promised “free to air puublic service channel” another type of TV7 channel that they can use to get their own policies presented to the electorate before the next election.
If they fail and only expect a ‘fair hearing’ from the current hollowed out media they are goig to fail us all; – by loosing the next election.
I agree with the idea from some comments here that L/R is not really a relevant distinction any more. A significant proportion of the working class are fairly socially conservative, and first and foremost want security for their lives and families. They are often not particularly concerned about the ‘woke’ issues, and often are not wanting to radically decrease their income and economic viability in pursuit of leading the world in climate change mitigation. The Zero Carbon Bill fully implemented could reduce average household income by $20,000pa which massively disproportionately impacts working class people… anyone expecting struggling working class people to flock to this idea is totally out of touch with the reality of working class life, and misses the point of the political swing away from the woke/left(ish)/climate-driven agenda of the losers in recent international elections.
I understand where you are coming from Chris. But tactics tend to ebb into your soul. I’m agin backfoot batting. I understand British Labour will be taken over by the great Corbyn’s followers. The whole point of these oldies.
And when have we had a great talker in our premier pulpit? Wilier politics you say. Wilier than 35 fucken years? The people’s interest is straightforward or nothing. Unlike rich fucks.
The Left need to talk to make up for the institutionalised power of the strong. Where focus group , politics graduate Helen Clark guided Labour fall down.
Another issue seems that Greens and Labour failed on the environment in preference to big business.
EPA grants drilling and discharge consent for Otago coast to oil and gas company OMV
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/118277477/epa-grants-drilling-and-discharge-consent-for-otago-coast-to-oil-and-gas-company-omv
A lot of talk, little action on the environment and stopping big polluters, from Greens and Labour. Instead they seem more interested in going after easy targets like someone’s lifestyle block while big polluters are polluting big time as usual, with government allowing it! The government could have changed the RMA to stop big polluters, instead they did nothing and big business open pollution and species and biodiversity destruction, continuing in NZ.
Who are OMV, just one of the 100 global companies responsible for 71% of carbon admissions.
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change
Many environmentalists are gutted by this and also the amount of rapidly declining animals like Maui dolphins less than 100 left in the world, and government doesn’t even protect their habitat from more pollution and disruption that could be stopped with legal action.
Guess Neve and the Greens brood ain’t gonna be seeing a live Maui dolphin very soon, as their parents let them go extinct under their watch.
Likewise the climate implications by OMV and their mining using non notified consents under our pathetic environment rules!
You’ve always got my ear, savenz,.. none more so than the plight of our dolphins…I like to think,…as I go to bed at night,… that our wee dolphins at sea are going about their business,… just simply living…. but the truth remains,… they are victims of govt’s that’s far removed from 1970’s activism,…
When I was a child ,… a Hector’s dolphin beached itself on Huia Bay,… the locals and Park rangers gathered around , the glorious hippies came down from the hills, it was a truly social event, the adults advised and the children pitched in with help… we covered the poor wee thing with buckets of water,… it appeared to me as an 11 year old that we should dig a trench to facilitate a way out…but such was the flat mudbeds of Huia bay… I will never forget the community of Huia and their concerted attempts…with their gumboots and buckets….
The wee Hectors died as I heard from my Park / Dam ranger father, I was deflated… and the scientists moved in to take bodily samples…
Yet I canny forget that , and all those out at sea in the dark of the night, and the wild life we dearly need to protect,…our politics need to be all encompassing,… from our humanity to our wildlife,… we are a people, charged with guardianship, and that we should view ourselves as stewards.
We are stewards and nothing more nor less.
In all things.
Again do we really have a Green / Labour government or are they up to their eyeballs into giving away NZ resource sand shitting over local people just like the Natz?
Appeals against Chinese water bottling plant dismissed
“In a split decision, the Environment Court has dismissed iwi and residents’ appeals against the proposed expansion of the water bottling plant at Otakiri, in the Bay of Plenty.
The expansion has been vehemently opposed by both iwi and community groups since consent was granted by the Bay of Plenty Regional Council and the Whakatāne District Council.
Opposition has focused on the bottling and offshore shipping of water for “little royalties” as well as the perceived industrialisation of the rural Otakiri neighbourhood and the adverse environmental effects of 3.7 million plastic bottles being made on-site each day, which equates to 1.35 billion bottles per year for the next 25 years.
In 2018, commissioners granted Creswell NZ, a subsidiary of Chinese company Nongfu Spring, the right to increase the amount of groundwater taken by the Otakiri bottling plant for commercial purposes to an annual allocation of 1.1 million cubic metres.”
How sad it is that in our dumbed-down society the word “Socialism” is now so disparaged in the minds of those to whom it promises most, it has to have the word “Democratic” precede it lest they get the wrong idea.
That’s because countries that like to use “democratic socialist” as part of their description are usually anything but democratic or socialist. I doubt the “Democratic Peoples Republic of Aotearoa” Party would get many votes no matter how good their policies may be!
from the website https://www.korea-dpr.com/
“The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a genuine workers’ state in which all the people are completely liberated from exploitation and oppression. The workers, peasants, soldiers and intellectuals are the true masters of their destiny and are in a unique position to defend their interests.”
Yet most of us in NZ are not flocking to go live their, I wonder why? Yeah names are powerful, these names are not winners.
I agree. It is sad but egged on by the right wing PR crowd and billionaire owned media, its a fact that ‘socialism’ is perceived as bad by many, even those who would benefit (no pun intended). A bit like ‘the police’ who are often disparaged until you really need their help.
Funny how firefighters seem to be universally admired.Is there a lesson there?
The Pacific is in danger of becoming a semi-narco region
Caught in the middle of a drug trafficking route, island countries are in danger of falling under the control of drug cartels
https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2019/jun/26/the-pacific-is-in-danger-of-becoming-a-semi-narco-region
Started in 2010 with the Asian gangs, then the South American’s have joined in, followed by the Aussie crims being deported here.
Asian drug links reach south with meth deals
https://www.scmp.com/article/724511/asian-drug-links-reach-south-meth-deals
Inside the Comanchero gang: Meth and coke and money laundering
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12221455
Both Natz and COL have ignored the P epidemic, Natz pretending it didn’t exist and letting it flood in from Asia, using Meth epidemic to sell off state houses and Labour, Greens and NZ First are no better, thinking that a few $$$ on drug rehab is gonna be enough, while granting more and more residency to drug smugglers and rewarding criminals behaviour https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/384041/sroubek-double-antolik-likely-to-have-visited-new-zealand and not taking money laundering seriously in the courts. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12260326 https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11905478
One of the many reasons we have a housing crisis and people are falling into poverty more and more, is that successive governments have created conditions conducive to massive drugs exports here and laundering the money while getting residency. Our government has encouraged more international criminal connections by immigration and politicians and our courts.
‘Does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the minutes into hours’,…’The wreck of the Edmond Fitzgerald’,… in response to savenz’s and others posts…
“The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald” – Gordon Lightfoot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vST6hVRj2A
I do hope you post this, Martyn, means much to me being brought up on the coasts of the Manukau, the ‘masculine ‘ harbor, scene of the biggest maritime disasters in NZ’s history,…the Orpheus.
That Hectors dolphin, country style living,…stewardship… respect for all living things…it has an impact. It shapes your sense of fair play for all . The egalitarian way of living.
All I ever wanted was to see people happy and secure.
Brings real joy to me.
While I can see merit in your small target idea, which is nonetheless difficult to achieve if large parts of your party are hellbent on undermining you, your Blair and Bolger examples are not of people gaining power through cunning, but of corporate power that had already been gained getting established through them. Blair and Bolger were not winning a battle, they were implementing the winners’ program in ways that they hoped voters would accept. Look what happened to Bolger when he tried to pull back into old-school conservative territory through a coalition with Peters – no amount of cunning was going to save him then.
The political left still lacks the power base to bring about conditions that would weaken the neoliberal grip, but it can prepare to take advantage should that grip weaken. Jeremy Corbyn has contributed to this possibility, both by reigniting hope and engagement among working class people and by writing a manifesto that could well serve as a future blue print.
Smedley Butler got it right, he just didn’t go far enough with his verbage ” War, Politic’s and Capitalism is a Racket”..
I think if we see it as a defeat for the left everywhere, we’re not framing the situation accurately. The UK election was strongly influenced by Brexit, and by the personalities of the two leaders. Corbyn looks and sounds like a dour Puritan, and doesn’t come across well on TV – whereas Boris is very comfortable in front of the cameras, in fact he LOVES being in front of the cameras. And then Corbyn looked shifty about Brexit, whereas Boris’s position was very clear (well, his stated position). As an aside, I’m not sure why so many people on the left see “remain” as the only defensible position for left-wing parties, or why they seem to think Britain needs European oversight to avoid sliding into a hyper-capitalist nightmare. Let’s remember Britain has a long history of effective social activists and reformers like Elizabeth Fry and William Wilberforce – why do they need oversight by Brussels?
Centre-left parties can win elections if they have an electable leader, and focused, intelligent, evidence-based, credible policies. Of course they can win under other circumstances too e.g. if the incumbent government is grossly dysfunctional and has an unpopular leader.
Good positive ending note, this is whats needed. Solutions not bemoaning and wailing about a future we cant predict . And yes, … do the British need to have Brussels to hold their hand? I think NOT !!!
I would add that any political struggle is about CLASS STRUGGLE.
Not Identity Politics.
Always has been . Not who wears a red war bonnet against who wears a yellow one . Identity politics is a distraction. Here’s an extrapolated example : More than one mesoamerican / South American empire was brought down not because those who just happened to be lesbian or gay rebelled but by the WHOLE working / manual labouring classes rebelling against their bloodthirsty priesthood class !!!
I liked Corbyns quieter demeanor, I’m sure many others did as well. He was articulate and precise. The manifesto he held in his hand during interviews was sound.
In fact , … in essence it was a lot like the consensus NZ had before 1984.
But the Left is now splintered , almost by design and almost as if the fifth column has been working overtime to achieve that state. And one could point to who’s funding those pushing the irrelevant and often radical identity politics bandwagons. Therefore any further progression rests upon the global Left going back to the future to win and influence mass approval. And that means making it exclusively a class struggle because that is what we are dealing with under global neo liberalism. If you constantly make promises and then follow through
with large restorations for wage earners , you will get their votes. And that means money in pocket and better conditions. Only after that and you have gained a critical mass in support , can you say you have broken through.
But you have to be cunning.
Avoiding side issues and temporary distractions.
And once in power, the purge then begins. Replacing civil servants hostile to your cause, putting pressure on hostile media editors by ‘encouraging’ accurate unbiased reporting. Weeding out the quislings and the like in your own movement. And finally , attacking and dismantling the very legislation and institutions that keep the neo liberal power-base intact.
Using a war time example , a literal political Tet offensive without the bombs and bullets or anyone having to die , appearing all over the political map , attacking weak areas, attacking where least expected, using diversions in order to take major political objectives, sacking the neo liberal strongholds by using new legislation, and doing so despite the wall of neo liberal objections you WILL encounter.
Because that’s how they operated to steal our democracy’s.
Using the tools of exposure of self interest and financial deals done, ridicule and constant mockery juxtaposed against the social decline caused by neo liberalism is a standard , yet only serves to collar a few individuals … but unless a centralized plan is followed tailored to each country’s needs, … any push against them will fail. And the way to get people onside is the same as it was 60 years ago.
Money in peoples pockets.
Which takes us right back to class struggle.
And back to the future.
Certainly, much needed reforms can be won under capitalism, and should generally be supported, people like them, even if they cannot admit it–Minimum Wage $18.90–watch the petit bourgeois wail…
But power? a fundamental shift in Class Power is required to achieve very much at all, and Capitalism needs to be retired for that to happen. With a global existential crisis and Climate Action new opportunities are presented beyond the previous rhetoric.
UK Labour stuffed up–and as we know in NZ, e.g. Labour/Backbone Club, New Labour/Alliance, inner party struggles can divert many from needed strategy and tactics. Corbyn should have supported implementing Brexit AND the manifesto. The EU bar useful features like common currency and easy travel, is essentially a neo liberal enabler.
I admire the North Vietnamese, they way they outfoxed the sheer power of the industrial / military complex of the USA, … they did something right.
They fought General Westmoreland and outsmarted him… why?,… because he was fighting a standing army hypothesis, born out of the experience of World War Two… whereas the enemy was fighting an asymmetrical war…it denied Westmoreland the strategic advantage the USA hoped to achieve through technology by fighting a war that relied on simple racist tactics… ie : hearts and minds ,- treating them all as an inferior intellect,…..yet tactically , the Vietcong and NVA relied on tactics designed to achieve strategic advantages…
And that is precisely what they did,… they knew their culture well and adapted to a foreign enemy occupying their lands.
They had the critical and popular mass advantage , and they knew it.
And thus the North Vietnamese ( VPA ) and the Chinese NVA capitalization on that, and hence the Tet Offensive.
Dividing the nation in half , and thus ultimately, … winning the war.
Just WHAT can we learn from this???
Can we not appropriate that to modern day politics?
I think we can.
Lets do this.
Unfortunately Chris “the wolf in sheep’s clothing” approach used in the 80s by the fish and chips brigade is unviable for the left now. Why? The inherent lack of democracy in FPP was exploited to the max resulted in a popular backlash to change our electoral system from FPP to MMP. It effectively locked in the status quo e.g. witness Peters taking great delight in pulling labour back to the centre with the capital gains debacle.
I think it will take major events before an opportunity for real change presents itself and when it does the left must be ready.
Erm ,… Jimi Hendrix…. this is how the far right wing deal with young idealists,… it is real , it is subversive , it is appalling,… but it is something you should know,… it is not something exclusive to this generation but is a time dishonored method that has been going on for decades… using operatives such as Howard E Hunt against Castro, to those at home who challenge the social order,… well worth a watch in all its crudity… these are the types of crude thugs you are dealing with….
Jimi Hendrix | The Last 24 Hours – YouTube
https://www.youtube.com
So, is Jacinda one of them? Or is she a ‘Sleeper?’
Comments are closed.