Green on Green unfriendly fire: The Rainbow Parakeet who cried racist

50 Comments

1. Those 5 need to set up new Blue/ Green party that has policy s that can work with both Labour or National. Let the others go it alone. I doubt they would make 5%

   1. At first I agreed with you but then you look at the list and remember Genter was less than truthful about her dealings with Wellington council Goldriz was less than truthful about her defense of a dictator,Chloe would be another Jacinda good at speeches poor at delivering .I do not know the other 2 .
      At the end of the day the Greens are auntrustworthy group of self opinionated people with tunnel vision

      1. Trevor There you go again, you silly Pommie. It’s as plain as a pikestaff that Ricardo should be leading the Green Party to unification and electoral victory.
         He’s not one of the cisgender white males so hated on by Marama, nor is he old and flat as condemned by Genter; he’s an immigrant rep for the Greens who want immigration galore, and if he’s not as good a liar as most politicians are, then give the lad a chance. The young know everything, so he should be able to teach his ageing TIC Elizabeth a thing or two and give her an opportunity to flourish as a dedicated follower of something or other. Problem solved.

      2. And many other politicians are just the same and have things in their background that can be held against them.

      3. Golriz, didnt ‘defend a dictator’ She worked on the defence team. Highly likely she spent that time in the middle of the night going through documents. You and your National supporting mates make it sound like she was giving elequent courtroom speeches and cross examinations.

   2. I have said it before and I will say it again.

      NATIONAL. DO. NOT. SUPPORT. CLEAN. AIR. AND. WATER. LAWS.

2. Former “insider” here. Could not agree more, especially about Steve Abel, who is a quality human being. Personally I would put him at 3 and GG at 5.

   I warned people in the Greens about this literally years ago, and repeatedly since then. I told them:
   1) EK is going to be a problem
   2) Trans rights are human rights but the current model is wrong, and will result in LGB kids being hurt and women’s rights being trampled
   3) The non-progressive and fundamentally misognistic postmodernist wafflebobble that is gender identity theory is not good for anyone, not women, not LGB kids, not even trans people. It’s not a solid foundation for a sustainable model of trans rights. And it is particularly toxic to women because who wants to be told that as a woman, you’re nothing more than an idea in a man’s head? Or a set of regressive social stereotypes?

   I thought progressivism was telling girls and boys that they are not restricted to stupid social stereotypes, not that stupid social stereotypes are literally what it means to be a boy or a girl. How did it come to this? How is this progressive?

   Some people in the Greens responded and some of them get it. I’m not in any way an insider anymore, so I have no idea what’s going on, but I strongly suspect that the reasonable people in the Greens are in despair because they know that if they push back, the extremists will burn the party to the ground, just as they threatened to do with the Linda Gale affair in Victoria.

   The irony is that whenever the Greens talk about any other subject, I’m usually punching the air in total agreement.

   1. @That _guy
      Great comment, yes there is nothing progressive about the (modern) woke movement, a cuckoo in the progressive nest. It pretends to be a continuation of earlier activism but is typically in direct opposition. Rehabilitating racist ideas, misogyny and homophobia with clever rhetoric.

      1. Agree

      2. Tui. Yes. Kerekere’s area of expertise, the historic sex/gender practices of New Zealand Maori, isn’t relevant or applicable to justice or environmental issues, but seems to be a cause of her resentment towards white “ colonialists”, for allegedly curtailing their activities.

         The genderID ideology being forced upon young school children, is so self-evidently damaging that every politician who voted for it should have to explain why they did; the punitive aspect for concerned parents, and government usurping parents of would-be transgendering children, is horrendously Orwellian. All this has been led by a Green Party which has lost its way.

      3. Agree. I just cannot understand this strange lack of concern for the minds and bodies of LGB youth from the supposed Rainbow wing of the supposedly most Rainbow-friendly party. And don’t get me started on the rights of women. I want the Greens to succeed, but I don’t know how many more shit sandwiches I can stomach.

      4. @That_guy
         Understand what you mean by shit-sandwich. The gaslighting of lesbians a few years ago was my exit from other groups.

         From their ideological (religious) perspective they are exercising concern for the minds and bodies of LGB & T youth. The public resistance to modern trans activism (not the same as trans people) is taken evidence of how transphobic and anti-2SLGBTQIAA+ society because everything is seen through a cultural-conflict theory lens.

         I expect a doubling down on the ideology and authoritarianism to ‘protect’ vulnerable people (coincidentally affording the activists influence and status in their peer group). That is till the overwhelming evidence of the damage to LGBT people goes fully mainstream, a Solzhenitsyn-like moment.

         As Anker says, it’s horrendously Orwellian.

         1. Agree completely. And the prospects of the Greens basically depends on whether the Solzhenitsyn-like moment you mention happens before or after the election.

   2. Thanks that guy for your insiders perspective

3. The Greens – You think they can’t possibly become any more of a shitshow than they currently are and then Elizabeth Kerekere takes them up a few more notches.
   Calling anyone who disagrees with you a racist also seems to be standard operating procedure for many Maori so no surprises there.

   1. Bet she also calls people transphobic

   2. It’s not a Maori thing, it is a woke/power mechanism to accuse anybody who disagrees with them that they are racist.

      Laughably, white woke feel better about themselves by cancelling out others by thinking everyone is racist who don’t agree with their ‘special’ point of view which often is so far out that the are now banning the word “field” in the USA woke universities as it’s racist https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/university-cancels-use-of-the-word-field-because-of-racist-connotations/.

      Seriously how do you argue with stupidity and the cancellation of language and the inclusion of some language that the people they supposedly represent don’t actually use?

      This woke shit isn’t even about identity anymore it is a grab for individual/woke power and job opps for well paid grifters getting a lot of money for woke versions of history and language which often are appropriated and the pretence they represent a group they don’t represent at all.

      te reo
      Mana Wāhine Kōrero Response to (now deleted) Stuff article Vs. Sean Plunket
      https://plainsight.nz/mana-wahine-korero-response-to-now-deleted-stuff-article-vs-sean-plunket/

      Latinos’ rejection of Latinx rattles world of the woke.
      https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/dec/12/latinos-rejection-reference-term-latinx-rattles-wo/

      1. This seems to be why the police were happy to let women be bullied, intimidated, and terrorised at Albert Park, they didn’t want to be seen as transphobic. Women’s voices getting silenced was a handy plus, but every major offshore news outlet knows how we were all let down that day.

4. Any party that operates by consensus rather than by democratic voting will always be vulnerable to a hostile internal takeover – although democracy didn’t help Labour in the early 1980s.

5. I’m actually quite blown out the greenies poll as high as they do. I’m as cynical about the political scene in this country as anyone and despair a bit at the choices we’ll have in 6 months.

6. Have part voted Green all my adult life…..Not this time!
   The Greens have completely lost their way.
   First it was their gender discrimination around who can lead the party.
   Then it’s misandrist Marama showing her true colours, declaring war on white cis males.
   Now we have a faction of delusional gender indentitarians actively undermining the party for their petty personal ambition.
   Meanwhile the climate burns and the biosphere is in free fall.
   The Greens have become nothing more than a joke worthy of scorn.
   Can we please have a political party that actually stands for the environment,sustainability and true social and economic justice before the next election.
   ….and no Rednecks I won’t be voting Act.

   1. You do realise that cis white males beat and abuse women all the time do you?

7. Also, the Sun is racist. White people can produce more vitamin D from the same amount of sunlight.
   We should dox it, swat it, and cancel it immediately. Better frozen than fascist!

8. No particular insight into the Greens, but I thought Kerekere was a patronising bit of work when I saw her on Select C’ttee last year (can’t recall if this was before or after she went against Covid restrictions). Labour person I spoke to lately said EK was hard-working and smart, which I can well believe. But she’s coming across as nasty and too radical to attract voters. Hope Lawrence Xu-Nan (7 on the draft list) does well: knew him a bit in his student days, and he’s smart, not nasty, and presents well verbally.

9. I am hoping for a Kerekere/Riccardo victory

   1. Nope. A Ricardo / Kerekere victory. What have you got against Mexican music anyway? I rather fancy “ Estrellita” as our national anthem, or footie crowds singing “ La Golindrina” , and another flag referendum featuring unicorns and donkeys in vibrant colours and better weather and hats.

10. “… a Kerekere/Riccardo Co-leadership team would be a 3% Party.”

    Fuck! That’s optimistic!

    1. Less than 1% – pray they leave the greens and create their own special extreme rainbow party.

11. This entire blog entry reeks of bigotry and transphobia (not to mention unacceptable micro-agressions). Dr Elizabeth Kerekere and Ricardo are the future of “Green”, whereas you are still desperately clinging on to irrelevant past ideology. Let go of your hate! You need to do better Martyn.

    1. Please, share with us some more details about these unacceptable microagressions, so that we can do better and become more enlightened.

       1. What the fuck are micro-aggressions anyway . . I suppose there are now also macro-aggressions?

          1. I thought micro-agressions would be like calling passersby rude names or even looking like you could possibly do so. Maybe while standing behind big walls of racial privilege or up on the roofs of tall buildings of economic or social entitlement where they can’t get you to counsel you on your behaviour without causing a real scene. Like sitting in the front of the window of your Mum’s lounge making faces and giving the fingers to strangers as they walk past on rainy days. In both examples at this point sexist, classist or even transmorphic content could be a requirement. That sort of thing. I have real no idea however though as I haven’t been to a university lately.
             Macro aggression is maybe invading their personal space and scaring people and their pets and knocking over stuff. Again verbal insults of a escalated nature at the personal level are a key requirement for this category. Like the verbal/ physical assualt you inevitably get into leaving the pub or nudey bar at closing time. Sometimes you won’t have to be the starter for it all kicking off hence claims of victimhood and provocation as a legit defence. Such defence can be intergenerational. Again I’m no expert and only going off what I see on the internet and YouTube recommendations.
             Mega aggression, if there is such a thing is naturally an escalation of things and should only be seen as a last resort or when your Mum’s not at home and could feasibly involve stuff like, maybe up to the use of thermobaric and hypersonic weaponary by the big players or on a personal level playing loud, obnoxious music late at night and telling the neighbours to fuck off if they ask to have the racket turn down a bit.
             Or I could be totally wrong and merely leading everyone up a blind philosophical alley with my undereducated speculations but when has that stopped anyone before? I would however like to take this opportunity to thank everyone for reading this this far and apologise if I’m totally wrong.

             1. You’re wrong ? I’m wrong. I’ve been thinking that micro aggressions were those little bits of plastic inside sardines caught in octopuses gardens in the sea. Macro aggression is the bus driver who smiles like a maniac when he drives past without stopping. The cost of a cabbage used to be a micro aggression but half a cabbage is now a macro aggression, so anything is possible.

          2. OOH! OOH! I know this one.

             The concept of “microaggressions” is where people take the general principles of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (a very effective non-drug treatment for depression), do literally and exactly the opposite of what the principles of CBT suggest, and then wonder why there’s a youth mental health crisis.

             The thought patterns that CBT says you should avoid are:

             All-or-nothing thinking: This is the tendency to see things in black and white terms, with no shades of gray. For example, “If I don’t do this perfectly, I’m a complete failure.”
             Overgeneralization: This involves drawing broad conclusions from a single event or a limited set of experiences. For example, “I always mess things up.”
             Mental filter: This involves focusing exclusively on negative aspects of a situation while ignoring positive aspects. For example, “I got a good grade on my exam, but it doesn’t matter because I didn’t do well on one question.”
             Jumping to conclusions: This involves making negative assumptions without evidence to support them. For example, “He didn’t text me back, so he must be angry with me.”
             Catastrophizing: This involves exaggerating the negative consequences of a situation. For example, “If I don’t get this job, my life will be ruined.”
             Personalization: This involves taking responsibility for events that are outside of one’s control. For example, “It’s all my fault that my friend is upset.”

             So if someone sees someone doing a “microaggression” towards you, they are often overgeneralising, jumping to conclusions, catastrophising, and personalising. And also probably making themself depressed for no reason and for no gain.

    2. I genuinely can’t tell if this is parody

12. Elizabeths comments and behavior is rather mild compared to judeath gollins

13. But the slur “OK Boomer” was fine.
    Apparently.

    Seems the Gweens can’t handle what they dish out every single day.

Comments are closed.