The Future Of Act: Climate Change Cannot Be Stopped, But It Can Be Ridden.


ACT HAS A PROBLEM: one which it shares with just about every other Western conservative party; Climate Change. William F. Buckley, who founded, and for many years edited, the thoughtfully right-wing magazine, The National Review, described a conservative as “someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.” All very well when the forces driving history are human; but not helpful at all when inhuman forces are driving events, and yelling “Stop!” will in no way slow them down.

At present, Act isn’t really addressing the Climate Change crisis seriously. Oh sure, it pays lip service to the reality of anthropogenic global warming, but its policies show scant evidence of serious thought about the problem that is going to dominate the economics and politics of the next fifty years.

Out in rural and provincial New Zealand, for example, the Act Leader, David Seymour, and his colleagues are attracting big audiences. Farmers, their families, and voters working in businesses associated with farming, are angry with the Labour Government, and disillusioned with their traditional electoral champions in the National Party.

Act understands that rural New Zealanders are feeling put upon and devalued by urban New Zealanders; that they are chafing under an ever-increasing number of government rules and regulations. Keen to draw these voters away from National, Seymour is not about to tell his audiences that life on the land is going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better.

Instead, he promises to abolish the Climate Change Commission and make a bonfire of the Government’s regulations and red-tape. The cockies, of course, applaud, and Act’s poll-numbers rise. For the moment, that’s all Seymour and his party care about. Their mission is to drag National’s numbers down to around 20 percent, and pump their own up into the hight teens. At that point (as Labour discovered vis-à-vis the Alliance) the whole equation on the Right could very easily unravel – leaving Act as the runaway favourite of conservative voters.

- Sponsor Promotion -

All very well, but if the ultimate balance of political forces leaves the Right sharing 40-45 percent of the Party Vote, and the Left in firm command with 55-60 percent, then Act will find itself all dressed up, but with nowhere to go.

What’s more, without a coherent and believable policy response to the unrelenting pressures of Climate Change, Act could easy end up becoming the top-dog in a conservative kennel that gets smaller and smaller with every passing year.

In ten years’ time, the big political and economic arguments will have moved well beyond the Neoliberal shibboleths that defined the period between 1979 and 2008. In ten years’ time, Capitalism itself will be struggling to retain the support of a majority of citizens – even in the West.

Parties like National and Act will find themselves in the same unenviable position as the reactionary political movements that advocated for the return of absolute monarchy in the early-to-mid nineteenth century. It won’t be a case of them having no supporters, merely of having too few to count any longer as a serious force. History will have rolled right over them. Their last, unheeded, words will be: “It’s not stopping!”

Regarding the politics of the future, the lines of division are already becoming clear. The battle will no longer be between capitalists and socialists: comprehensive state control of the economy will be taken for granted. How else could humanity have responded with any degree of effectiveness to devastating floods and droughts; heatwaves and cold-snaps; rising seas and advancing deserts? No, the political battles of the future will be between those who still believe that science can and will rescue humanity from the ravages of Climate Change; and those who offer a new “green” paradigm for the way in which human societies interact with the natural world.

In the elections of the future, the followers of Scientism will contend for power with the followers of Ecologism. A meritocratic technocracy will find itself opposed by an anarchistic collectivity of simple-lifers. The technocrats, based overwhelmingly in the cities, will be trapped in a frustratingly symbiotic relationship with the simple-lifers – for the very simple reason that, overwhelmingly, it will be the rural simple-lifers who grow the food. Dependent upon one another, and united in their struggle to survive in an overheated world, the parties of Scientism and Ecologism will be constantly re-defining and re-negotiating the terms of their co-existence, while contending jointly with an increasingly hostile planet. Parties determined to rehearse the arguments for and against capitalism/socialism will have become utterly irrelevant.

Ironically, it was the recent “Groundswell” protests that anticipated the fundamental political proposition of the Climate Change-driven future: those Tractors bearing placards declaring “No Farmers, No Food” spoke more truly than they knew.

For Act, that fundamental division between technocrat and simple-lifer offers a straightforward path to political survival. Ever since the father of modern conservatism, Edmund Burke, wrote “Reflections Upon the Revolution in France” conservatives have celebrated the slow rhythms of the seasons and the tiny, incremental changes that shape the world beyond the mad rush (and even madder ideas) of the city. A party that celebrated the stoic virtues of rural living and was content to be instructed by Mother Nature, would find many followers. Alternatively, as a party of libertarian individualists, an urban culture – based upon the unsentimental rigors of scientific expertise – might  offer Act’s followers a better fit. As they used to say in the Middle Ages: “City air makes you free.”

The world to come: the world shaped by Climate Change; will not be a neoliberal, or even a capitalist, world. The state will offer and organise whatever defence still avails humanity. It will hold the ring while the children of Climate Change weigh the relative merits of the “technological fix”versus the simple life of the ecologically-friendly farmer.

William F Buckley’s peremptory demand that History stop in its tracks is profoundly unrealistic. The key conservative insight has always been that, while History cannot be stopped, it can be ridden.

While National resigns itself to going “gentle into that good night”, Act just needs to learn how to hold on tight.



  1. We need to stop treating the laws of commerce like some sort of religion and start living by the laws of physics instead. Physics, you know, Life the universe and everything !

    • That’s that indigenous / Maori movement that that psychology professor from Auckland was talking about when he said Maori science, isn’t science.

    • Be careful with that. Every Physicist I’ve ever listened to have all stated that the human species had absolutely no chance of survival, from a million and one different catastrophic events. Climate change is just one more…so what?

      • As a Physicists, I’d say, we have some control over climate change, most of the other ‘human killers’ we have NON.
        Do what you can do and ‘ride’ what you can’t.
        Don’t Alcohol anonymous say something like, grant be the knowledge to know what I can change and change, and those that which I can’t……

        • God grant me the Serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
          The Courage to change the things I can,
          And the Wisdom to know the difference.

          All about coming out of Denial and admitting we have a problem, that we cannot fix ourselves.

  2. I see a far bleaker future where the state (as ruled by Wellington elite) no longer holds sway. Having collapsed due to lack of finance from a economy no longer functioning and their ability to field an effective army, to enforce their rules, is limited.

    Rule of the land will be by tribal feudalism. People will form loose tribal associations based on location and common purpose. The rise of the war lord will be here. Those tribes (and not just Maori tribes) strength will be based their ability to defend and conquer, resources and land, from and against their neighbour. This is how mankind originally ruled themselves and will do so again.

    Once the state has collapsed there will be a succession of feudal kingdoms constantly at war over resources and land. We will go through another “Dark Age” but it will be interesting if after 500 years some sort of civilization will reestablish itself.

    Capitalsm, Communism, and other societal constructs are only possible in peacetime and with cooperation between tribes. I don’t see those constructs coming back whilst the rule of the weapon reigns.

    • I’m afraid you are absolutely right.

      Throughout history, groups of humans have fought bitterly over resources, and attempted to annihilate the competition.

      What characterised the period approximately 1820 to 2021 has been the use of fossil fuels to facilitate severe population overshoot, and to fight wars for resources.

      Without access to fossil fuels and machinery that runs on fossil fuels, the humans that manage to get through the first bottlenecks will be reduced to fighting with stick and stones and bows and arrows….just as their distant ancestors did before fossil fuels facilitated elaborate machines for killing people and stealing resources.

      The big difference between the future and the pre-industrial past is that our ancestors had the benefit of easily-extracted resources, abundant wildlife and stable climate: they are all gone via the orgy of unrestrained consumption promoted by bankers, industrialists, economists and politicians.

      • Well put……so it’s about intelligent control of the ‘down slope’ rather than accelerating towards a collapse due to a ‘head in the sand’ mentally presently followed by 99.9% of the world.

      • I agree it is bleak, Chris.

        Unfortunately, all the evidence indicates our corrupt and inept (or wittingly ignorant and obstinately stupid -it makes no difference) political establishment will just keep doing what they have always done, which is to facilitate looting and polluting of the Earth.

        What characterises the current period of the burgeoning crisis is the promotion of non-solutions -such as electric cars and ‘Carbon Trading’- by governments and bureaucracies (even subsidies for that which does nothing to address emissions), and the ABSOLUTE REFUSAL to address any of the prime drivers of Planetary Meltdown, i.e. Ponzi finance -dependent on interest paid on debt- consumerism, overpopulation, tourism, corporatised sport etc.

        Indeed, the very idea of abandoning consumerism is entirely taboo for the political establishment…and so they will keep doing what they do (accompanied by ever bigger lies) until they can’t.

        Policy amounts to futile (and counter-productive) attempts to sustain that which is unsustainable, leading to even more squandering of resources and yet more pollution. I see at at all levels, from central government down to the local inept and in-denial council, and the do-nothing mayor.

        That is why there is no real hope for industrial humans in so-called democracies, in which the dollar determines everything, including the fate of humanity.

        Only a mass abandoning of consumerism by the masses and adoption of Permaculture has any hope of preserving the habitability of the Earth.

        Do you see any indication of a widescale abandonment of consumerism, Chris?

        I don’t.

        I am yet to see you or Martyn use the word Permaculture.

        • I think the reason why no one uses the word permaculture anymore is because the concepts have evolved a bit into things like backyard gardening, food forests, agroforestry, agroecology and and regernerative and organic farming. I lived in the area near Nimbin NSW for a while about 30 years ago, just after Bill Mollisons heyday but before Geoff Lawton really got things going at Zaytuna farm. There were heaps of small permaculture-style happenings going on, but already by then some of the basic assumptions of 1980’s permaculture were being dropped. To be quite blunt a lot of early permaculture was bloody hard work to achieve marginal rewards. This is why many of us in the wider organic community have moved on from some of the early assumptions and framed ideas differently.

          I’m not sure if I’m explaining what I mean clearly. The permaculture concepts are great, but the name permaculture has becomce associated with a specific style of natural farming that many people have moved past to more site-specific functioning ecosystems. There was even a move made to patent the word ‘permaculture’ for exclusive commercial use, which really sums up the problems.

  3. The laws of commerce aren,t laws at all. More some everchanging hodgepodge of hope driven by greed and consumerism.

  4. You are starting to sound religious which is a bit of a concern given the dark ages were about 500 years in the past. Given the tendency of history to repeat & the knowledge that the majority do not always make good decisions (although I still defend their right to make those decisions) along with the potential problems to come there would appear to be every chance that some form of religious power (especially if it could form some sort of unity between the major religions around the world) could arise.

    • Bonnie,
      Not much difference between the warlord or the church. Catholic church in the dark ages was as brutal as any warlord. Religion will not cut the mustard unless it takes up arms to defeat the infidels. Once it does that it becomes like any other warlord. It simply carries a cross or sickle on its banner.

      As is being witnessed currently in Afghanistan.

  5. My idea of how future voters will think is that labour’s inability to achieve will continue their demise and as our superficially good economy is found wanting voters will look too Act and National in increasing numbers. The vote for National will increase not because they deserve it, but because those from the right and some from the left will see National as a handbrake to Act, much in the same way left voters see NZF. National will do Ok by default. When the world’s economies fall apart as they likely will, it will be Chaos and anyone with the slightest idea about food and survival ( farmers) will be in hot demand.

    • I compare the present LINO party to a bridge (card game) expression I like; …….with points comes responsibilities, i.e. if you should make game/slam, as you have ‘so many points’ then you’d better make it by ‘making a plan and getting it done’, otherwise you’re showing (most of the time) how incompetent you really are.
      So this LINO is the first party to have a utter majority, so very few and limited excuses for NOT getting done what it should as a (supposed) Labour (ha…don’t make me laugh) party. i.e. help the 80% working class improve their daily grind. Housing, health, food, education….simple human rights stuff.
      History will see JacindaBlair as making the correct 50/50 call on closing the borders early, THANK GOD, but being a vapid smiling P.R politician not much better than the TraitorKey.

      • Indeed, LINO is a one-trick circus. And the circus is really not at entertaining anymore, as LINO cause far more damage to the future of NZ than any possible good they may have done via relatively early closure of the border and multiple lockdown-open-up policies.

        ‘a vapid smiling P.R politician not much better than the TraitorKey.’

        Surely, to orchestrate meltdown of society and cause general mayhem and death -which Adern is doing via her anti-environmental policies- makes her no better than Shonkey or TraitorKey, as you put it.

        • If we have any hope in hell of hitting the 2050 emissions target, the national motor pool will be electrified and you’ll fucken welcome it.

          • We will not welcome it Sam, because there will be no way to charge these EVs without massive energy generation and distribution infrastructure that no one is prepared to build. Labour are really good at banning things but they’re arse-about-face when it comes to getting things done. Incentivising EVs makes sense AFTER you’ve got the infrastructure to charge them, not before.

                  • nah mate, unless there is enough infrastructure built to generate and distribute enough electricity, EVs will not be going anywhere. We do not yet have the ability to run EVs right across the country. Even now without replacing ICEs with EVs we can’t keep the lights on on a cold night without using imported dirty Indonesian coal. $10/litre is still better than no driving at all. The problem will be no working people will be able to afford either option.

                    • I was just a boy when petrol hit $1 a litre and 20yrs later it hit $2.

                      The next dollar always hits quick.

                      Low ball 20yrs, my guess is NZ petrol price will hit $3 in 9yrs (2030) because if a number of factors.

                      At $3 is when we have to begin building a Petro chemical replacement simply because it’ll take a minimum 10yrs to build before petrol hits $4.

                      While petrol is at $2, and because people like Benefit Waimata lack the imagination to first the future. Ben just needs to shut the fuck up so central planning and design phase can be completed in preparation for peak oil.

                    • When I was a boy there was a huge amount of innovation put into our energy systems, and ethanol production was a tried and proven concept. All our existing ICEs could have been converted easily to run on ethanol. Our climate is perfect for producing the biomass feedstock for ethanol. Biomass production works on the Carbon cycle, all emissions are re-sequestered in the production of the crop. The only reason it wa snot implemented was it as at that time (1970’s) not cost effective vs oil imports. This technology is still sitting ready to be used as soon as any Govt shows a minimal amount of initiative, but instead they want to use EVs with batteries from the child-slave labour energy intensive lithium mines, and no existing energy generation/distribution system to allow us to use it. This is Mulddonist ‘think big’ thinking gone sick.

                      But local hero Sam just wants me to shut the fuck up rather than point out logical alternatives to the current EV pipedreams. Sam mate, I am not standing in the way of anyone who is trying to implement sustainable options to our existing oil-based technology. I’m not so sure about you though. Cantral planning with this Govt has so far proved to be a total disaster (housing, mental health, CO2 emissions, etc), not sure why you still trust them to achieve anything.

                    • NZDF and AirNZ can have ethanol based Petro chemicals but dif not the whole motor pool. Like I said, shut the fuck up you next hope of hitting even basic emissions targets by 2050.

                    • Sam is a funny man. Does he not realise his constent insistence that I “shut the fuck up” has no more effect on me than it would on him if I said the same thing? Sam I welcome your opinion, although I don’t quite understand it beyond your desire to cancel mine.

                    • Your position as far as I understand it is to at the very least maintain emission standards with a direct fuel replacement for the combustion engine.

                      I just disagree with that premise on any fucking metric you’d care to mention.

                      What I’m trying to achieve and no I don’t give to fucks if material science hasn’t caught up to my ideas yet but instead of spewing emissions out the arse end of a vehicle where carbon capture becomes economically unviable. We instead try and contain the harmful chemicals or what ever in aluminium lined batteries and solar cells. No emissions. Half way there. Nek on the list. Slaughter half of all the cows to the gods and have a dammed BBQ.

  6. Have you told the same to Labour/Greens? Cause they don’t seem to be on the ball either. But you can get an EV. That’ll fix it.
    Face it currently ACT is preferable ot the Greens. Who would’ave thunk? The Hologram is gonna be a winner, all thanks to the Labour Party and their handmaiden. Let’s write another hate bill, that’ll fix it all.

    • EV’s ONLY fix the problem of, ……if the people won’t change their lifestyles to one that is consistent with humanities survival on our ONLY planet, then EV’s will slow down the date of our collapse.
      The solution would be mass public transport, limit travelling to ‘needs only’ and a 90+% reduction in population, plus we all become vegetarians. And even then, we’ve screwed up our backyard SO BADLY, we still might not make it as a species that resembles anything we can think of today.

  7. Jesus Christ… This is where I feel ashamed of being a farmer.
    Farmer? Your eyes which need the sunglasses are BELOW your forehead. Just a little FYI there.
    seymour? I’m onto you, you fucking lizard. ( No disrespect to actual lizards. )

      • The snake that National made by fiddling with the electoral system.
        Plain and simple, Act are the Visigoths to the National parties Roman empire.

      • Bert; The solution for Judith and her colleagues is simple. Remove the head of the snake. Vote National in Epsom and leave the tail of the snake writhing. Key’s pet puppy has transformed into a snake biting the hand that fed them. But I suspect they are too mesmerised by the snake’s head (actually that’s an apt metaphor for David Seymour) to see the future waiting for them in the grass. But I doubt that any National MPs have the courage to state the obvious to their leader.


        e to see that.

  8. My take is that when people bemoan Labour, the 38% ers, the other 62% just don’t see ACT nor National as a credible alternative. I.have not seen one credible answer to what the opposition would do to correct all of today’s issues. All I here is yap, yap yap. So if Labour are useless, as many say, the alternative is less than useless.

    • Bert
      Yes, we’ll sadly I have to agree with you here. And I think we are all poorer for it. There is no pressure on govt whatsoever to perform in any of their policy areas.
      It’s hard being a supporter when your team plays like crap.

  9. You were doing well until you introduced the puerile and false dichotomy of scientism and ecologism.

    • I’d be delighted, Richard, if you could come up with better ones! Names that capture the dichotomy between solutions grounded in human technological hubris, and solutions based on a genuine respect for Nature’s limits. I’m the first to admit that “Scientism” and “Ecologism” are less than elegant nouns.

  10. I remember how for years now people have laughed and mocked survivalists and called them nut jobs

    But I wonder: who is going to have the last laugh?

    One thing I know for sure, under the thin surface of convivial societal cohesion lies a violent and primeval beast ready to unleash itself

  11. I’ll start by saying I agree climate damage (its not change any more than PTSD isn’t shell shock) is real and an existential problem.

    That said, lets be honest, the reality is none of the current parties are showing much interest in this problem. The Labour govt has been dragged kicking and screaming at the behest of negative public opinion and activism from groups like Greenpeace to do something, anything, such as promoting EV’s, but its nowhere near enough.

    The problem is in large part industrial farming but no ones making the move to compensate farmers and require farm sizes be reduced across the whole of the country to sustainable levels.

    To be fair Australia has done even worse than us but its cold or is that warm comfort, when the planet gets hotter and hotter and food stocks fall ever lower and bee numbers keep declining.

    In short, this is not a case of one side or another. Its problem that to date no political entity has shown many signs of wanting to fix but then maybe politicians and politics are no longer what’s needed. They worry about upsetting their conservative supporters so half measures is all we get.

    Maybe its up to us to demand those causing the damage change or stop buying what they are selling until they do.

    • “They worry about upsetting their conservative supporters so half measures is all we get.”
      Yes. Gutless, self serving politicians for sure. However, the problem is actually the supporters!
      Well said mate.

  12. ‘All very well when the forces driving history are human; but not helpful at all when inhuman forces are driving events, and yelling “Stop!” will in no way slow them down.’

    It was our responsibility [to the next generation] to stop driving overheating when it could have been stopped by radically reducing emissions.

    But the corporate liars and other saboteurs of the future (ACT, LINO, National, the Greeds etc.) were able to manipulate the masses into orchestrating their own demise in the pursuit of money and materialism.

    • Yep, Jimmy Carter tried to ‘make the change’ but the oil industries, plus the media, made sure the oil-God loving Regan got in.
      First thing Regan did was remove the solar panels on the white house roof that Carter put there, plus roll back the ‘mpg’ rules put in place during the USA’s oil crises’, such that the USA cars typically use twice as much petrol as European cars. JUST Insane.

  13. I’m sorry @ Chris Trotter. I can’t read your Post. Any comment I may make here and now will be at the mercy of assumption. It’s certainly not that your Post would have been written with careless malice or was born of ignorance.
    It’s just that, as a farmer, I can’t do it. I quite literally don’t have the emotional strength for it.
    That image above is a trigger image for me. Seeing that farmer, in no doubt dire need of comfort and security for himself and presumably his whanau sitting beside the enemy is deeply unsettling to me.
    And yet…? There he is. David Seymour. roger douglas’ finger puppet. roger douglas. Pig farmer and surely the very most vile, lazy and evil little human being to ever set foot on AO/NZ’s beautiful soils.
    My questions must be; where’s Labour? Where’s the Green Party?
    Labour should be there with seymour and the farmer because AO/NZ’s work force depends entirely on revenues derived from our farmer’s endeavours. Our farmers can feed 40 million people so it’s claimed. Well, where’s the money going from feeding those 40 million people? You’d think our farmers would be driving gold plated Hilux’s and with a his and hers helicopter to pop down to the dairy in?
    The Green Party? Where are they?
    I talked to Chloe Swarbrick once about how vital it would be for the Green Party to pair up with, then fall in step with, our agrarian communities…
    Nothing. Not a squeak. Bankster ball cupper and slick Mr Hair Oil; James Shaw, wouldn’t know a sheep sit from a falafel and yet our primary industry is agricultural and must collaborate with [nature]. ( Isn’t that about as Green a concern as it comes? ) and yet our agrarian infrastructure’s dominated by the voracious greed of largely foreign owned banks and their minions in waiting, the natzos and act. Has anyone else thought to ponder that the ACT/ National Party co-dependent bacteria are always the only the ones seen with our farmers ? Schmoozing man-spreaders in the hay shed!?
    Why is that…?
    Could it be that our entire politic is terminally corrupt? The national party are a colluding cadre of money lenders and bankers, an unholy union dating back to early last century. They were the ones who wiped out the Farmers Union and instated a Federation of Farmers who’re less than useless and these days are nothing much more than impotent and fucking ugly old men mumbling around the tea urn while eyeing that last packet of ginger nuts.
    Satan’s triangle of traitor farmers, political swindlers and banksters is a deeply institutionalised mafia-like collaboration of self-legitimised money laundering and fortune making and fuck the environment aye boys? .

    • ‘Could it be that our entire politic is terminally corrupt?’

      Of course!

      And you can add: cowardly, deceitful, mendacious, money-grubbing, bought-and-paid-for etc.

      Central government, regional government, local government are all the same; venal, incompetent and lazy, whilst promoting destructive, counter-productive policies that squander resources and ruin EVERYONE’S future.

    • Countryboy, that farmer in the picture with Seymour is ACT MP Mark Cameron. I had a good talk to him at central district fieldays and he knows more about regenerative farming than the entire Labour and Green Party caucuses combined, and what’s more, by complete contrast to the aforementioned parties, he not only actually gives a shit but cares deeply about rural life and environmental matters.

      Labour and Green are idealistic about farm life, but with a background nasty streak that makes us farmers fear all they really want to do is tax us out of existence. And it’s happening, the recent lift in carbon prices up to nearly $50/tonne means the carbon speculators have just lifted the offers for farms for sale by $3000/ha average across the country, which means no farmer can compete. It is not impossible that every farm sold from now on will go to carbon forests. Remember the IPCC saying they don’t want any climate change mitigation that effects food production? Labour and Greens can’t remember that either, and appear very happy with their policy settings that if left to run would mean the end of farming in NZ. ACT does remember. Does it make them evil that they want to retain food production instead of converting the entire country into one giant pine forest ready for a massive climate change induced carbon-emitting fire storm inferno?

      I’ve been centre/centre-left all my voting life, but voted ACT last year, and will do so again. Things like SNAs, 3 waters etc are just the icing on the cake. The only political party that stands up for provincial NZ is ACT. National knows we’re here but treats us like shit, but strangely many farmers vote for them for the same reason abused wives crawl back to their abusers. The other parties don’t seem to notice we even exist at all, except when they want someone to blame. ACT is n ot anti-environemnt, they are anti top-down useless buraecuracy that just employs more useless clipboard box-tickgin parasites that suck the life out of our productive sectors will costing us the money that should be spent on actual environmental work.

      And, rural NZ neeeds our guns back, the amount of ecological devastation from feral pests that has already occurred since the semi auto rifle ban is heartbreaking for anyone interested enough to look passed their latte and see it.

      • Rural pests like rabbits can be shot with semi auto .22s or semi-automatic shotguns that have a non-detachable, tubular magazine that holds 5 rounds or less.,,,,,, which are still legal ,,,

        Covid has nobbled overseas game hunters coming to NZ ,,,,, which will lessen the cull numbers recreational shooting achieves.

        Back in the day when our Govt employed deer cullers,,, who shot huge numbers from large herds,, they managed just fine with bolt action 303’s.

        brendon Tarrent purchased 7000 rounds of Ammunition on his way to rapid firing a couple of hundred of them in his mass murder crime.

        Fire-power is more relevant to capacity for violence than hunting ,,,

        ie From rural NZ ,,, “Four men who broke into the rural family home of a Kawhia man who sold drugs were warned he was likely to “shoot” anyone who would try to steal from him.

        And murder-accused Orren Scott Williams, 37, is alleged to have done exactly that, firing eight shots at four men after they “ran for their lives” from the Harbour Rd house early on June 6 last year.

        All of Williams’ shots – fired with a military-style semi-automatic rifle – either hit one of the four victims or the blue Toyota Harrier they were travelling in, ” ,,,,

  14. Dont worry about it!

    Gen Mel, Y&Z have got this!

    They know every-fuck’n-thing! About everything! How do I know this? They tell you on the internet! They tell you in the news influencer mainstream media! They tell you when they’re having tantrums in public!

    The little fucks have no interest in a grown-up discussion, where ideas and opinions are shared and discussed like mature adults.

    Fuck’em I say.

  15. What’s with all this ridiculous situation whereby Sam’s post are all in vertical single letters?

    Is this a way to shut people down? Pretty poor in my opinion.

  16. About as likely as an economist’s forecast, but hey-ho. Unbelievable to me. The middle period of chaos will devastate everywhere — the search for havens with the resources of high capitalism.

Comments are closed.