Govt still 'colonising' individuals and their property

"Colonisation happened, but New Zealand is no longer a colony. Citizens [with too-few Maori ancestors] are not 'colonisers' but people with as much right to live in the country they are born in, or admitted as immigrants in as anyone else. Inferring anything else is racist, even if it doesn't meet the definition of the post-modernists.
    "Similarly, the idea that white supremacy is somehow endemic is ludicrous and deranged. However, the New Zealand state DOES erode tino rangatiratanga, for EVERYONE, by increasing its power and diminishing the freedom of citizens and residents to live their own lives peacefully....
    "There is a LOT that can be done to liberate Maori, such as decentralising education, ending the next to peppercorn leases enforced on some Maori land, granting Iwi (and indeed all) property owners real property rights to use their property as they see fit....
    "The report [from the ill-named Human Rights Commission] wants ... Maori to determine their own lives and make decisions over their own resources. This is libertarian, it is freedom and property rights. There remain two questions though...
    "Is giving Maori this power actually power as individuals with the choice to act together, or [as part of] purely collective entities? If it is the latter, it is just another form of government; I suspect it is the latter.
    "[And the other question:] Why can this not apply to EVERYONE in New Zealand? Why shouldn't we all be able to determine our own lives and make decisions over our own resources? ...
    "Colonisation saw many atrocities committed, but it is over. The non-Maori who live in New Zealand are not 'settlers.' Liberal democracy and rule of law are not invented to benefit Pakeha, and the only human rights are individual rights, for without the freedom of the individual, everyone is at risk of violence being initiated by the state, Iwi or any other collective that thinks it should govern you.
    "Set Maori free by setting us all free."

~ Liberty Scott, from his post 'Abolish the Human Rights Commission (but give everyone Tino Rangitiratanga)'

What is 'He Puapua'? [updated]

He Puapua is a report commissioned by the Ardern Government to carry out The Key Government's commitments after signing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), a "legally non-binding resolution passed by the UN in 2007" without New Zealand's vote -- which was withheld by the Clark Government. Among other rights and pseudo-rights asserted in the Declaration are said to be "the indigenous peoples' right to [their] own type of governance." That is almost specifically the aim of the He Puapua report, which 

sets out a timeline for ... transformational constitutional change which will divide the polity into "'three streams: the Rangiratanga stream (for Maori), the Kawanatanga stream (for the Crown) and the Rite Tahi stream (for all New Zealanders).'

In the words of Elizabeth Rata, the report's commissioning and conclusions make it "clear [that] New Zealanders are at a crossroads." 

We will have to decide whether we want our future to be that of an ethno-nationalist state or a democratic-nationalist one.

The report itself makes its own aim abundantly clear: it "describes our future as an ethno-nation."

Delivered to the Ardern Government last year, and only released because it was leaked to the Opposition, the words "He Puapua" themselves translate as "a break," or "a separation."

While it’s usually used in reference to the ocean and a break in waves, in this case the expression centres on a 'breaking of the usual political and societal norms and approaches.’

Such a sundering is not a trivial thing. It brings to mind another famous Declaration, which recognised that "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

Neither decency nor respect has impelled any such declaration in this case. Instead, as Rata says in an excellent take-down of the report:

Displaying an astonishing confidence, the authors claim that 'We consider Aotearoa has reached a maturity where it is ready to undertake the transformation to restructure governance to realise rangatiratanga Maori (self-determination).' I hope [says Rata] that this 'maturity' can accommodate the vigorous debate that is certainly needed if we are to abandon democracy - for what exactly? While each sentence of the Report deserves scrutiny I will confine myself to two points. The main one is the Report's premise of the political category as an ethnic one. The second concerns judicial activism in constitutional change.
    He Puapua envisages a system of constitutional categorisation based on ancestral membership criteria rather than the universal human who is democracy's foundational unit. Ancestral group membership is the key idea of 'ethnicity'.... The word entered common usage from the 1970s followed by 'indigenous' in the 1980s. 'Ethnicity' was an attempt to edit out the increasingly discredited 'race'. However changing a word does not change the idea. 

The report, in total, and the separate future it demands, is race-based. Explicitly. 

"When we politicise ethnicity by classifying, categorising and institutionalising people on the basis of ethnicity," warns Rata, "we establish the platform for ethno-nationalism. Contemporary and historical examples should make us very wary of a path that replaces the individual citizen with the ethnic person as the political subject." No such worries appear to occupy the report's authors.

"Interestingly," she continues, "those examples show the role of small well-educated elites in pushing through radical change." The report's authors are exactly as described. And as well-educated, well-heeled, and well-connected "culturalist intellectuals," their bios reveal them to be virtually all of one mind:

• Claire Charters, "(Ngāti Whakaue, Tainui, Ngāpuhi, Tūwharetoa) [and the Report's chair] gained her LLM from NYU in the US, and her PhD from Cambridge University. She is an associate professor at Auckland Law School, University of Auckland, and Director of the Aotearoa Centre for Indigenous Peoples and the Law. She has been an advisor to the UN President of the General Assembly on Indigenous Peoples’ participation at the UN (2016 – 2017); chair of the UN Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Peoples, Trustee (2014 -2020); chair of the cabinet-appointed working group to provide advice on the realisation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2019-2020); co-chair of the New Zealand Human Rights Commission Kaiwhakatara Advisory Group on human rights, Te Tiriti rights, and Covid-19; and worked on the negotiations for the adoption of the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (1998 – 2007)."
• Canadian Kayla Kingdon-Bebb is "the current Director of Policy at Te Papa Atawhai / Department of Conservation. Previously she served for three years as Principal Advisor (and earlier, Private Secretary) to two successive Ministers of Conservation. Kayla has extensive experience in the machinery of government, and has led programmes of cross-agency and collaborative work on policy issues relevant to indigenous rights and interests... Kayla has a PhD and MPhil from the University of Cambridge. Her doctoral and master’s theses focused on Treaty law, indigenous customary law and legal pluralism in the context of natural resource management."
• Tamati Olsen is the "Chief Advisor Maori at Housing New Zealand Corporation" and "Director (Acting), Wellbeing, Policy Partnerships. Te Puni Kōkiri – New Zealand Ministry of Māori Development" formerly "Manager Cultural Wealth" at Te Puni Kōkiri"
• The 26-year-old Waimirirangi Ormsby "is project manager at Ka Awatea Services Ltd, developing Ka Awatea strategic vision document base on Mātauranga Māori principles." "Of Waikato, Ngātiwai and Te Arawa descent, [she] has foraged deep into her whakapapa to help environmental sustainability resonate more with her people. But for her the key is to live it herself every single day.... Together with her husband she created Pipiri Ki A Papatūānuku or PKP, which encourages a month of passive environmental action every year. People agree to a period of minimising their waste, tūkino free eating where they try to avoid industrially-farmed produce, begin composting or recycling and minimising plastic waste, or anything else they feel they can commit to.... Longer term, she has much grander ambitions for the recognition of traditional ways. “Te pae tawhiti, my vision for the future is, to be honest, one or two generations from now to have indigenous people leading the way and having indigenous knowledge systems be implemented into constitution, into law and policy, into the way that we live our lives, for everybody.” 
• Previously at the Office of Treaty Settlements, Emily Owen is "General Manager Policy, Department of Corrections NZ. She holds a Masters in History from Massey University."
• "Passionate about Te Tiriti o Waitangi and human rights," Judith Pryor holds "a PhD in Critical and Cultural Theory from Cardiff University in the UK (2005)." Her "doctoral research in constitutions - examining law, history, policy and practice from a theoretical perspective - was published in 2008 as Constitutions: Writing Nations, Reading Difference." "Since returning to Aotearoa in 2006 from the UK, I have predominantly worked in Te Tiriti or human rights-related areas, including at Te Kāhui Tika Tangata, the Human Rights Commission; the Waitangi Tribunal, and the former Office of Treaty Settlements." She "can advise and support you and your agency to develop a capability plan as now required under the Public Service Act 2020. I can also devise a training programme for you, and can deliver Te Tiriti analysis training. Drawing on my previous experience in Policy, my workshop is particularly aimed at policy practitioners, and can be adapted for other audiences. The training covers:​ What the role of the Crown is in the Te Tiriti relationship; Why Te Tiriti analysis is critical for developing sound policy; How to embed Te Tiriti at each stage of the policy process (including engagement); How to practically work through a policy problem using a Te Tiriti framework."
• Jacinta Ruru "is co-Director of Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga [New Zealand's Māori Centre of Research Excellence], and Professor of Law at the University of Otago." Her "research interests focus on exploring Indigenous peoples' legal rights to own, manage and govern land and water. Jacinta's PhD thesis (University of Victoria, Canada, 2012) is titled "Settling Indigenous Place: Reconciling Legal Fictions in Governing Canada and Aotearoa New Zealand's National Parks."
• Naomi Solomon has an LLB from VUW. She is Ngati Toa's "General Manager, Treaty and Strategic Relationships."
• Gary Williams is a "Disability Sector Leader ... [whose] particular interests are issues for disabled people and especially disabled Maori, leadership development and training, the rights of disabled people and effective organisational governance and management. [Formerly] CEO of DPA [Disabled Persons Assembly], he has extensive sector networks, both nationally and internationally, and networks within government agencies."

Rata herself is explicit that what begins in ethno-nationalism often ends in bloodshed. "In Rwanda the ethnic doctrine 'the Mahutu Manifesto' of 1953 was written and promulgated by eleven highly educated individuals identifying politically as Hutu. The raw material of the ethnic ideologies that fuelled the violence in Bosnia and Serbia was supplied by intellectuals. Pol Pot began his killing campaigns immediately on his return from study in Paris." In all these cases, the bad philosophy preceded the horrific outcome. In Rata's 2006 speech to the NZ Skeptics she said: 

In New Zealand we are obviously not far down the track towards ethno-nationalism. However we need to recognise that the ideas which fuel ethnic politics are well-established and naturalised in this country and that the politicisation of ethnicity is underway". Fifteen years later the He Puapua Report shows the progress towards ethno-nationalism. Why has this racial ideology become so accepted in a nation which prides itself on identifying and rejecting racism?

The answer, of course, is what the report's authors call their philosophies. PhDs in subjects like Critical and Cultural Theory* have a real-world impact that appear in documents such as these. As Rata concludes:

'He Puapua' means a break. It is used in the Report to mean 'the breaking of the usual political and social norms and approaches.' The transformation of New Zealand proposed by He Puapua is indeed a complete break with the past. For this reason it is imperative that we all read the Report then freely and openly discuss what type of nation do we want - ethno-nationalism or democratic nationalism?

* * * * * 

* Quick reminder that Critical Race Theory and the like are not merely “Let’s teach the bad parts of history too” -- it's more like "Let's teach that history is all bad. And racist." Richard Delgado, for example, founder of the critical race theory school of legal scholarship, noted for his 'scholarship' on hate speech, and for introducing storytelling into legal scholarship baldly asserts:

Unlike traditional civil rights [e.g., Martin Luther King’s approach], which embraces incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.

Also, Critical, Cultural Theory etc, its not a theory. 
"The critical race theory (CRT) movement [says Delgado in Movement, Activists, Transform, Power] is a collection of activists and scholars interested in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power."

So it's a "theory" only in the same sense that AntiFa is an idea.

Don't say you haven't been told. 

[Hat tip Stephen Hicks, Peter Renzland]

Human Rights Commission: "Freedom of thought does not extend to being allowed to adopt thoughts or beliefs at a public event..." #PSA

Be careful what you wish for. Now that the case brought against Auckland Council by the Free Speech Coalition over the visit of Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux has come before the courts, the case so many of you called for, it seems to be playing out just as some of us feared it would.

When the Free Speech Coalition protested Auckland Council's withdrawal of the Town Hall for the visit of Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern, threatening legal action against the council's decision, a guest poster and I warned that a legal protest, as the Coalition had elected to pursue, comes with some very serious risks to free speech in New Zealand. [See 'Will the Coalition for Free Speech Instead Play a Part in its Muzzling?' and 'Molyneux & Southern V Goff: This was never about free speech']

The main risk warned about is this:

1. that the council's withdrawal of the hall was not done in its capacity as the territorial authority (which would have been censorship); instead
2. the withdrawal of the hall was done its capacity as the owner of the hall (it did not ban them speaking, it simply withdrew a taxpayer-funded microphone, which is a perfectly legitimate judgment call for any property owner); 
3. the risk with such a legal protest being that, if successful, the courts could then set a precedent in case law that may preclude all property owners from making such legitimate judgments in future, "bringing a ban on so-called 'hate speech' by the back door."

In other words, in order that the Coalition smack the council this time, its legal action threatened to have property owners smacked for all time.

As we commented at the time, that blurring of the boundaries between owner and territorial authority is one reason the council should be out of the business of renting halls. But as long as they are, then if the council follows the guidelines of the misnamed Human Rights Act in making such a call they can argue they are simply acting "neutrally" on the basis of settled law in order to "protect the community."

It seems to be playing out precisely as our guest poster feared. In court this morning, arguing the case, both the council's lawyers and those from the misnamed Human Right Commission argued precisely this point: 

• that council was acting as a commercial party and not in a “governance” role – and therefore the decision to cancel the event is not “judicially reviewable” by the Court; and
• the Coalition's argument about so-called "political discrimination" should be heard only by the Human Rights Review Tribunal and not the High Court (a jurisdictional argument).

It gets worse, according to David Cumin of the Coalition.

Believe it or not, the [misnamed] HRC argues that freedom to form an opinion is only applicable in private – that freedom of thought does not extend to being allowed to adopt thoughts or beliefs at a public event ...

That an organisation calling itself by the name of "human rights' would argue this (if reported correctly) is appalling. It is good that the trial has helped reveal the true nature of this organisation.

Sadly, what the trial also promises to do, however, is to set the very chilling twin precedent that:

• property owners are to be muzzled by the misnamed Human Rights Commission; and
• freedom of thought will not extend to being allowed to adopt thoughts or beliefs in public.

"So," as my guest poster warned, "instead of the interests of free speech being advanced by the Coalitions's challenge, I fear it may instead give the Act that muzzles free speech more teeth."

It was a risky call to take the case, based upon legs that didn't stand up. And as warned, the outcome of the blunder for free speech may be precisely the opposite for which Free Speech Coalition supporters signed up.

Friday Arvo Ramble, 18.11.16

 

“Geonet have been busy measuring how much the ground moved in this week’s earthquakes.”
Measuring the ground movement – YOUR NZ

“I hear folk who think it’s simple; who wonder why even in a “moderate” quake Wellington’s buildings seem to be falling apart. The thing is that designing to respond properly to every earthquake means designing to respond to every possible earthquake – and there’s no way of knowing what earthquake you are going to get when even The Moderate One comes.”
Earthquake engineering is harder than you think – NOT PC

No, people, the Supermoon didn’t do it.
Earthquake myths debunked – STUFF

“So Gerry Brownlee is not happy that the new mayor of Wellington, Justin Lester, did not declare a 'red zone' in the Wellington CBD after this week's earthquakes… Brownlee's dictatorial management of the aftermath of the Christchurch earthquake has more effectively destroyed that city than any damage done by the earthquake.”
Leave us alone, Gauleiter Brownlee – THOUGHTS FROM 40^o SOUTH

“New Zealand's Human Rights Commission says that property rights need to be protected in the Bill of Rights. I couldn't agree more enthusiastically. Their report is about what the government did to people in Christchurch's Red Zone.”
Property Rights are Human Rights – Eric Crampton, OFFSETTING BEHAVIOUR

“The Kaikoura railway destruction has an economic silver lining. There is now a possibility of less future waste on irrational and distorting transport subsidies.”
Could the earthquakes reduce Kiwirail distortions? – STEPHEN FRANKS

Bernard Darnton: “Large Hadron Collider detects a massive particle - the South Island.”
CERN boffins see strange ... oh, wait, that's just New Zealand moving 2m north – THE REGISTER

“Of the several thousand people I have interviewed in my broadcasting career, including forgers, prostitutes and train robbers, there is no-one I have held in greater contempt than Brian Tamaki.”
Brian Tamaki – Saint or Sinner? – BRIAN EDWARDS MEDIA
God deeply frustrated Auckland’s gay people live nowhere near a fault line – THE CIVILIAN

Core business or waste of ratepayers’ hard-earned?
Calm down. The new Auckland slogan search was fine – Simon Wilson, SPINOFF

“The government passed the Vulnerable Children Act in 2014.The new legislation required every person who works with children to be police vetted … This is already causing problems hiring EEC teachers…”
Laws that run out of control – LINDSAY MITCHELL

Have the Greens opened a Pandora's Box on immigration?
UK, USA... NZ? Why the Greens' surrender to the dark side should scare us all – Thomas Couhglan, SPINOFF

“’Maori Party Co-leader Te Ururoa Flavell said Labour's Maori MPs know in their heart of hearts, because they have family members actively involved in charter schools, that the schools are achieving results upwards of 10, 20, and 30 percent of the national average, particularly those in Te Tai Tokerau.’”
The reality about charter schools – LINDSAY MITCHELL

“The issue of assisted dying isn't going away - even if certain people in Government wish it would.”
Ministers 'undemocratic' on euthanasia – STUFF

 

“A civilisation won't flourish in a sea of lies and
excuses for them - no matter who's making them.”
~ Phil Oliver

 

“There is no innate truth to the liberal elite echo chamber in which we live. It’s just a bunch of smart people saying the same thing. Some of the things are true. But a lot them just aren’t…
”There is no rule that you have to agree w/ what you read. If you can’t figure out why a person would think that 'universal healthcare' is a bad idea without attributing malicious intent to them, then you have some work to do. If you have never heard a compelling argument for why Keynesian Economics is similar in validity to rain dances, then buy a book about the Austrian school of Economics. While you may not change your mind, hopefully you’ll realize that these issues are more complicated than 'people who think those things are dumb and evil.'”
A Closeted SF Conservative – MEDIUM.COM

At least, I think it was.
'Post-truth' named word of the year by Oxford Dictionaries – GUARDIAN
Why We’re Post-Fact – Peter Pomerantsev, GRANTA
Policing ‘Fake News’ Is Our Own Responsibility, Not Facebook’s – REASON

Betsy Speicher: “Once upon a time, the press reported the news. Then, when they didn't like what was happening, they ignored and refused to report the news. Now, when what they want doesn't happen, they FAKE the news.”
BUSTED: CNN Interviewed ‘Protester’ — No, Wait, It Was Cameraman – TRUTH REVOLT

Careful now.
Donald Trump appoints Lord Voldemort as Chief of Staff – NEWSTHUMP
Bullshit News – NOT PC

 

"The internal effects of a mutable policy are still more calamitous. It
poisons the blessings of liberty itself. It will be of little avail to the
people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the
laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent
that they cannot be understood: if they be repealed or revised before
they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes, that no man
who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow."
~ James Madison

 

“Donald Trump is a wild card. We don't know whether he was play-acting when he carried on like a juvenile lout or when he played the role of a mature adult. But he and the country could both benefit from some serious introspection on his part.”
What Now? – Thomas Sowell, TOWN HALL

“Not a rhetorical question - it's an established fact.”
Is Donald Trump already walking away from campaign promises? - CNN

“Capitalism to him is simply an engine of production that makes states and religion stronger. Producers put in yoke to drag forward the cart of (western) religion and (western) state power.
"This is what this senior strategist calls 'enlightened capitalism'.”
Who is Steve Bannon? – NOT PC

"There are two ways of letting political correctness control your mind. One is to reject viewpoints not because they are false but because they’re politically incorrect. The other is to embrace viewpoints, not because they’re true, but because they’re politically incorrect. We libertarians are seldom guilty of the first mistake. But we are often guilty of the second. Those who commit the second mistake are as much slaves of political correctness as those who commit the first."
To PC or Not to PC – Sharon Presley, LIBERTARIANISM.ORG

“American teachers union releases ‘anti-racist’ anti-Trump ‘lesson plan.’’ Tom Woods translates it from liberalism into English.
We Are Going to Teach Your Kids What to Think, and Intimidate the Dissenters – TOM WOODS

“Donald Trump's plans are set to add another $5 trillion to the national debt. Where does the GOP plan to find the money?”
GOP and Trump put deficit on back burner – POLITICO

And  they don’t mean ‘reducing the deficit’ either.
White nationalists see advocate in Steve Bannon who will hold Trump to his campaign promises – CNN

“When Whites are forced to think about race all the time by a culture that is obsessed with it, they're also forced to act and vote like a minority. Liberals and Democrats need to think harder about whether they really want to create a culture divided along lines of race and gender.”
How the Left's Racial Politics Backfired – Martin Cothran, FEE

“If Trump really wants to strike a blow against the Washington establishment, he'll pardon Edward Snowden.”
An "Anti-Establishment" Trump Would Pardon Edward Snowden - Brittany Hunter, MISES.ORG

“The left's reaction to Trump's election shows that voluntary charity can replace government funding.”
Progressives Show Why Planned Parenthood Doesn’t Need Government Funding – Tho Bishop, MISES.ORG

“In rugby parlance that's a double knock on.”
Sir David Attenborough sent death threats after saying ‘we could shoot’ Donald Trump – METRO (UK)

"Another leftist has won the White House. Yes, President-elect Donald Trump is a leftist. He advocates policies that violate individual rights. That’s what it means to be a leftist."
America’s Next Leftist President: Donald Trump - Craig Biddle, OBEJCTIVE STANDARD

“"Rather, I want to argue that Trump has much more in common with the demagogues of the earlier, lesser depression of the late nineteenth century...”
Populism as a Backlash against Globalisation - Historical Perspectives – Niall Ferguson, CIRSD

"Pence, like many advocates for creationism, is uninformed and uneducated as to what the term 'theory' means in a scientific context. For the record, the scientific definition of 'theory' is quite different from the everyday use of the word."
Mike Pence Wants Creationism Taught In Public Schools – PATHEOS

Horror or hyperbole?
One small step for dictatorship – Onkar Ghate, VOICES FOR REASON

“All this talk of how Donald Trump is a fascist … but what actually IS a fascist? ‘The difference between [socialism and fascism] is superficial and purely formal, but it is significant psychologically: it brings the authoritarian nature of a planned economy crudely into the open’.”
What IS a Fascist? (Ayn Rand) – Michael Hurd, LIVING RESOURCES CENTER
All democracies are Marching Like The Fascists – Anoop Verma, FOR THE NEW INTELLECTUAL

First, they came for the Muslims …
Reported Trump Immigration Advisor And Potential AG Is Drafting Plan For Muslim Registry – HUFFINGTON POST

“’Our nation’s Framers got a lot right,’ wrote Dana Nelson, Gertrude Conaway Vanderbilt chair of English and American studies at Vanderbilt University. ‘But they got something major wrong: they assumed that the three branches of our government would remain co-equal, maintaining the Constitution’s delicate balance.’”
Now Might Be a Great Time to Work on Reigning in the Executive – Cathy Reisenwitz, FEE

 

“For every complex problem there is an
answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” 
~ H. L. Mencken

 

“Had our prognosticators looked up from their graphs and charts and taken into account the philosophical principles that have been known for over two millennia, they might have been a little more accurate in their predictions.”
Aristotle Called the 2016 Election – Martin Cothran, FEE

Guess what got pushed through in Britain while everybody was jumping up and down about Brexit and Trump.
Snoopers' Charter 2.0: IP Bill passed by Parliament and will become law within weeks – THE INQUIRER

Well, that will confounds the popular narrative.
Thatcherite Group Says U.K. Should Keep Free Movement of People – BLOOMBERG

“No, the chart produced by globalisation critics does not vindicate Trump's rhetoric about free trade harming the white working class.”
Dead Wrong™ with Johan Norberg - The Elephant Graph [video] – YOU TUBE

Private property. Free speech.
Twitter suspends alt-right figureheads  - BBC NEWS

“Not only does government spend too much, but new data suggests that that spending is designed to cause maximum economic damage by discouraging the productive use and allocation of labour and capital.”
How Government Spending Kills Economic Growth - Dan Mitchell, FEE

 

“For the election, many people worked passionately to promote the
lesser evil. How many will work now to promote something positive.
Like honest money. Or a free market in education. Or anything else?
And how many will go back to sleep … ”
   ~ Keith Weiner

 

“What to do now that Donald Trump is going to be president? Skip the five stages of grief and go straight to the five stages of NeverTrump.”
NeverTrump Is Over. So What Does It Do Next? – Robert Tracinski, THE FEDERALIST

“A lot of people are eager to ‘do something’ to advance a culture of reason and a politics of individual rights, but they aren't sure how to start. I thought it would be helpful, as a starting point, to list the possibilities…”
Calling activists .... – ARI ARMSTRONG
“What Can One Do?” [Video] – VOICES FOR REASON

“The future of the party after Donald Trump’s victory…”
Libertarians Regroup – Yaron Brook, OPINION JOURNAL, WSJ

“Given the fact that books such as Rand’s The Fountainhead, We the Living, The Virtue of Selfishness and Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal are in wide circulation in Greece, not to mention Free Market Revolution: How Ayn Rand’s Ideas Can End Big Government (authored by Brook and ARI’s Don Watkins), awareness and understanding among this audience was much greater. The focus turned to how citizens of Greece, a country in turmoil, are beginning to rethink the prevailing values.”
A First Look into ARI’s Recent Successes in Europe – VOICES FOR REASON

 

 

“The Federal Reserve System officially began operation on this date in 1914. It went on to play a key role in producing the Great Depression, a dozen recessions, and a dollar now worth a nickel of the dollar's value in 1914.”
Toward Radical Monetary Reform – Lawrence Reed, FEE

“James Valliant  takes time out from writing his upcoming book on the historical Jesus to puncture another, not entirely unrelated myth: that civilisation is underpinned by Christianity.”
Gimme That Old Time Religion! – James Valliant, NOT PC

“Immigration controls were just one aspect of the transition from economic freedom to socialist protectionism. It was the rise of the democratic welfare states, with all their controls and permits, that created immigration controls in the first place.”
Immigration Controls Are Socialist – Jake Desyllas, FEE

“It would be nice to think that folk will turn off as he becomes more obviously unhinged. It would be nice to *think* that ...”
Stefan Molyneux Cites and Repeats Conspiracy Theories About Jews from a David Duke Acolyte – STU-TOPIA

Adam Mossoff: “The innovation economy driven by secure & effective property rights in technology & written works…”

 

Meanwhile, in India.
The Nightmare of Going to The Bank – ANOOP VERMA.COM
The Bizarre Consequences of Messing With The Financial System – ANOOP VERMA.COM

Dubai has everything. It also has this. In this century.
British woman 'gang raped' in Dubai faces jail for premarital sex – INDEPENDENT (UK)

But I do hope this is true.
An Italian town has installed a 24/7 free red wine fountain – LOST AT E MINOR

“If this technology lives up to the claims of the scientists who discovered it, the implications are huge.”
Scientists make 'holy grail' breakthrough in DNA editing that could cure incurable diseases – INDEPENDENT (UK)

“This new theory, seeming to agree with observations, claims Einstein was not quite right and that dark matter might not exist. At large scales, it seems, gravity just doesn't behave the way Einstein's theory predicts.”
New Theory of Gravity Could Explain Missing Matter - No Need for Dark Matter (TWIS) – WAKELET

Anybody still remember “peak oil”?
The largest oil deposit ever found in America was just discovered in Texas – YAHOO

“While the twitterverse is chirping with concern over Donald Trump’s handling of the global warming science, we offer a few realities that should be key parts of any transitional team’s synthesis.”
Some Climate Realities for the Incoming Administration to Consider – Patrick Michaels & Chip Knappenberger, CATO

“In the early 1990s I was visiting the White House Science Advisor, Sir Prof. Dr. Robert Watson, who was pontificating on how we had successfully regulated Freon to solve the ozone depletion problem, and now the next goal was to regulate carbon dioxide, which at that time was believed to be the sole cause of global warming.
    “I was a little amazed at this cart-before-the-horse approach. It really seemed to me that the policy goal was being set in stone, and now the newly-formed United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had the rather shady task of generating the science that would support the policy.
    “Now, 25 years later, public concern over global warming (aka climate change) is at an all-time low remains at the bottom of the list of environmental concerns.
    “Why is that?”
Global Warming: Policy Hoax versus Dodgy Science – ROY SPENCER PhD

 

“Machines buy us the time to think about making
better machines. It’s a virtuous circle.”
~ Alex Epstein

 

So that’s how a lock works!
15 Astonishing GIFs Showing How Things Really Work – A PLUS

So how do they do it? And what can we learn.
How Surgeons Stay Focused for Hours – WALL STREET JOURNAL

Now we’re talking!
You can now buy a gin advent advent calendar for Christmas – HER.IE

“You, the real expert, are overridden by the pretend experts in government who increasingly dictate the terms of your employment, the food choices you have, and the medical decisions you can make.”
Government Experts Can't Give You A Happy Life – Don Boudreaux, FEE

So it wasn’t the war wot dunnit.
After The Maltese Falcon: how film noir took flight – GUARDIAN

 

 

“Western civilisation then is underpinned not by our so-called ‘Judeo-Christian heritage’ which is mostly only barbarous, but by our Greek – more especially our Aristotelian. The greatest story of history is the 2300-year death-struggle between religion and Aristotelian reason… ‘The death struggle of reason versus anti-reason continues.’”
“So, How Come You Keep Bashing Religion?” – NOT PC
A Critique of Rodney Stark’s The Victory of Reason – Andrew Bernstein, OBJECTIVE STANDARD

What have the Romans ever done for us?
Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity – REASON V FAITH

“Contrary to conservatives, Ayn Rand supported the right to abortion; contrary to liberals, she opposed environmentalism; and contrary to libertarians (and others), she upheld a firm, assertive foreign policy. What unites these seemingly disparate positions? And what explains the moral fire with which she expressed her views on these issues?”
The Sacred Self: Ayn Rand On Abortion, Foreign Policy and Environmentalism [Video] – Keith Lockitch, VOICES FOR REASON

“It's all very simple. The initiation of force is always wrong. Once humankind gets this, [gets why it is wrong], we will soar to our almost unimaginable potential.”
The Nature of Government by Ayn Rand – FEE

And finally …

Hear Leonard Cohen’s Final Interview: Recorded by David Remnick of The New Yorker, while …

 

Long, for some, but perhaps just what this week (this year?) calls for …

 

 

… and this?

 

 

And yes, very much this:

 

.

Offended yet?

Oops.

Manurewa MP Louisa Wall and the South Auckland group Warriors of Change are offended. They’re offended by some year-old cartoons.

Cartoons by Al Nisbet about the Government's breakfast in schools programme ran in The Press and the Marlborough Express in May last year.
    One depicted a group of adults, dressed as children, eating breakfast and saying: "Psst ... If we can get away with this, the more cash left for booze, smokes and pokies."
    The other depicted a family sitting round a table littered with Lotto tickets, alcohol and cigarettes and saying: "Free school food is great! Eases our poverty and puts something in you kids' bellies."

Louisa and her made-up allies are so offended they’ve rolled out their feelings of offence before the Race Relations Commissioner, the Human Rights Commission, and now the Human Rights Review Tribunal, all in hope someone will stop laughing long enough to take her seriously.

Offended?

What sort of “warrior” picks a fight over a cartoon, for Galt’s sake?

You say you’re offended? I say so what.

Here’s Steve Hughes.

[Hat tip Ian J.]

ECONOMICS FOR REAL PEOPLE: “Freedom, the fundamental human right”

Our friends at the Auckland University Economics Group are all busy acing exams at the moment, but they’ve spotted a public event this Monday evening they reckon will be good.

Hi everyone,
    For those in Auckland after exams, a public presentation this coming Monday evening (30 June) at the University of Auckland Business School should interest you. 
    Tim Wilson, Australia’s Human Rights Commissioner, will be speaking on “Freedom, the fundamental human right.” Tim is a very controversial person in Australia so it promises to be very interesting. And maybe controversial.
    Who is Tim Wilson? According to his bio …

          He has extensive experience in public debate and has had many regular radio and television
     commitments, with both commercial and public broadcasters. The Australian newspaper recognised
    Tim as one of the ten emerging leaders of Australian society. He has written extensively for newspapers,
     journals and books....

For more information about this event and to register, please go to the event’s website. 
And check us out on the web, and join the debates, at our Facebook page.

“And Pontiff, pretty Pontiff, can anyone shake your hand?” [updated]

[UPDATE:  Since writing this post, the Guardian newspaper, on which the post relied, has redacted its story by Hugh O'Shaughnessy saying “This article was amended on 14 March 2013. The original article, published in 2011, wrongly suggested that Argentinian journalist Horacio Verbitsky claimed that Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio connived with the Argentinian navy to hide political prisoners on an island called El Silencio during an inspection by human rights monitors. Although Verbitsky makes other allegations about Bergoglio’s complicity in human rights abuses, he does not make this claim. The original article also wrongly described El Silencio as Bergoglio’s ‘holiday home’. This has been corrected.” 
    Chris Trotter’s post Mea Culpa – The Pope Is Not A Fascist explains. And like Trotter, I too offer my Mea Culpa.]

“And Pontiff, pretty Pontiff
can anyone shake your hand ?
Or is it just that you like uniforms
and someone kissing your hand…”
- Lou Reed, “Good Evening, Mr. Waldheim”

From one Pope with a seedy history behind him, to another.

The last, now retired, Pontiff was part of the team covering up his church’s flagrant child abuse, and he stepped down midst rumours that he could face arrest for it if he leaves the Holy See.

The new Pontiff, just appointed, was part of the Argentine clergy’s collaboration with the the Argentinian military regime—in which it “was complicit in dreadful crimes for which not one word of regret has been heard from any senior member of the Argentine clergy”—and it looks like Bergoglio himself, the new Pope Francis I, helped to hide the crimes.

It’s said that in taking the name Francis, “he is drawing connections to the 13th century St. Francis of Assisi, who saw his calling as trying to rebuild the church in a time of turmoil.” The turmoil is richly deserved.

Writing in the Guardian in January, Hugh O'Shaughnessy tells a story that after this new pope’s appointment looks even more grim for the church:

The extent of the church's [and the new pope’s] complicity in the dark deeds was excellently set out by Horacio Verbitsky, one of Argentina's most notable journalists, in his book El Silencio (Silence). He recounts how the Argentine navy with the connivance of Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, [then] the Jesuit archbishop of Buenos Aires [and now the pope], hid from a visiting delegation of the Inter-American Human Rights Commission the dictatorship's political prisoners. Bergoglio was hiding them in nothing less than his holiday home in an island called El Silencio in the River Plate. The most shaming thing for the church is that in such circumstances Bergoglio's name was allowed to go forward in the ballot to chose the successor of John Paul II. What scandal would not have ensued if the first pope ever to be elected from the continent of America had been revealed as an accessory to murder and false imprisonment…

What scandal will now?

Fact is, the more one sees of this church’s hierarchy, the more one realises they are barely human.

Bear in mind that this is a church that thinks itself fit to make judgement on what is and is not moral; to bestow upon others either shame or praise for acts it deems to be good; to hold itself up as a model—sorry, the model—of virtue and rectitude; to give moral guidance to you and I.

Moral guidance from moral pygmies. What could be more uplifting!

And every good catholic knows, or should know, that it doesn’t matter at all what you think on any moral issue: the whole point of the catholic church is to tell you what to think.  Perhaps it takes an atheist to point this out…

[Hat tip History News Network]

DOWN TO THE DOCTOR'S: Home brew, home invasion and home worship

Libertarianz leader Dr Richard McGrath ransacks the newspapers for headline and stories affecting our freedom.

This week: Home brew, home invasion and home worship

1. Sly-grogging ‘to pay for restoring car’ – An 80 year old man distills spirits in his garage and sells the products to willing adult customers for an agreed price. No-one is forced to buy, sell or drink the stuff. The free market at work.
       Does Nanny approve? Not on your life. You see, Edwin Wilson doesn’t have a permission slip from Nanny, called a licence, to sell his home brew. And Nanny gets very upset when people don’t tell them about their private fund-raising activities, because if Nanny doesn’t know about it, then it can’t set its enforcers to work collecting Nanny’s cut of the profits (taxes).
       The state can’t just leave people like Edwin alone, because it needs the money to spend bribing other people to vote for them. It’s all about keeping politicians in power.
       What would a Libertarianz government do? It would leave Edwin alone, provided he didn’t try to sell liquor to minors, and allow him the dignity of being self-reliant and able to earn an honest living. Giving him the freedom to operate his business unmolested might give him an opportunity to forego any claim on the taxpayer via the state-provided pension he no doubt currently receives.
   
2. Commissioner expects new firearms policy by Xmas – Following the shooting of two policemen in Christchurch, discussion of arming policemen has again emerged. Sadly however, the obvious way to circumvent future scenarios of this type is overlooked.
       The elephant in the room is this: The escalation of violence occurred because the two officers involved had decided to investigate a house that smelled of cannabis. And handling cannabis is currently illegal. If the house smelt of incense or fried chicken, there would have been no reason for the policemen to try and execute a search of the house, and no reason for the occupants to fear visitors. It was the smell of an illegal substance that set the whole sorry train of events in motion.
       The libertarian solution to what is essentially a non-problem (a house smelling of cannabis) is to legalise all acts of non-aggression—which includes adults making, selling and smoking dope. That is not to endorse the cannabis industry, but to remove it from the sphere of crime, where it simply does not belong. If cannabis handling was legal, talkback callers would not now be wringing their hands over bringing back the death penalty and allowing police officers to carry side-arms.
       For the record, a Libertarianz government would absolutely not restore the state-sanctioned killing of private citizens, and would allow both police officers and law-abiding New Zealanders to carry firearms for self-defence, including handguns.
   
3. Church forces ‘secular NZ’ retreat – Following their latest atrocious decision, the Human Rights Commission, along with Race Relations Conciliator and communist sympathiser Joris de Bres, should be tipped out on their arses and told to find honest work—should anyone be foolish enough to employ them.
       In a decision that betrays both complete ignorance and craven cowardice, the Human Rights Commission has accepted the Catholic Church’s objection to statements that New Zealand is a secular state and that religion is a private matter.
       Of course New Zealand is a secular state—unlike Iran, we do not have a state-sanctioned religion which inflicts Sharia law on its people and allows acts of barbarism including the rape, honour killings, floggings and stoning of women. Of course religion is a private matter—if people want to worship goblins and ghosts, that it their business. So what if people are ‘offended’ that others could even question their faith-based dogma?
       Any government worth its salt should separate state and religion, just as it should separate state and the economy, state and banking, state and sport, state and the health industry (the state and everything with the exception of the armed forces, police and justice systems). And just incidentally, on the basis of decisions like this, the state should look at separating itself and Joris de Bres.

When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government
fears the people, there is liberty.
- attrib. to Thomas Jefferson

GUEST POST: “No Blacks - No Dogs - No Mokos!”

Susan’s busy this week, so coming off the bench today as a replacement we have Suzuki Samurai with a little something to offend everyone.
Imagine the consternation, wailing, and gnashing of teeth a sign like this on the right would cause these days.
Geez, just look at the hullabaloo over the moko’d guy that was refused entry to a Christchurch bar. Have New Zealanders become more pathetic over the years? - so sensitive that adults, at the first sign of hurt feelings, run off to tell on each other to the media, or Fair Go . . . or their mums?
What’s happened  over the years is that, bit by bit, there’s been a corruption of what we understand by “individual rights.” At every turn we’ve seen a cultural shift towards becoming a nation of grizzlers demanding a “right” to everything from everyone else – towards an “entitlement” culture – towards the idea that everyone is owed a living at the expense of everyone else.  There is no such right. There is no such entitlement. This moko nothingness is all about the so-called right to not be offended, the so-called right to enter private property uninvited – regardless of the reasons you’ve been locked out. To make it easy for you (i.e. without having to go into a thesis on why no such rights exist), just think about the consequences of taking these rights to their natural conclusion – a place in which everyone is legally obliged to what every anyone else insists they do.
Is that the New Zealand you want to live in?
Now, no doubt you’ll be saying, “...but banning people from places, or not giving someone a job because of an aversion to someone’s race, age, religious persuasion, culture, gayness, choice of T-shirt is wrong, and should be illegal”. While I agree that most of these phobias are irrational, that doesn’t mean that holding these phobias should be illegal. Why not? – because phobias are ideas, not force; and therefore constitute nothing but a state of mind.
How do you make a state of mind illegal while holding to the values of the right to free expression & free speech? You can’t! While you may disapprove of someone else’s ideas – regardless of how awful those ideas are – that someone has a right to be wrong; your only right is to persuade them of their error or stay the hell away from them – that’s it, nothing else!
The point of law protecting free speech is simply to make the world safe for reason and rationality. It doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find it under rock you overturn.
Which leaves us with some pretty clear conclusions. That the property owner in Christchurch who’s been made the fall guy here is, as I said, quite rightly at liberty to decide who he serves in his bar.  That the moko’d one in question is quite at liberty to go somewhere else. That, in that way, everyone keeps their real rights intact. And that, if the Human Rights Commission were to penalise this bar owner, then that in itself would be a breach of free speech and free expression – and as such the only thing here that must be banned.
Freedom to be irrational. If you want to be free to be reasonable, then you have to expect some nonsense to be legal as well.  So get over it.

Cue Card Libertarianism - Liberalism

LIBERALISM: It ain’t what it used to be! It used to uphold the application of the principles of laissez-faire -- loosely translated as "Leave us alone!" -- not just to the economy but to all areas of life. Today's liberals however would be hard-pressed to leave anything alone.

In the very first issue of the The Free Radical David Kelly explained,

“Liberal has the same etymological root as liberty, and the original, or classical liberals, from John Locke to Thomas Jefferson, stood for liberty across the board. They fought for freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of values, against the icy grip of orthodoxy in politics and religion; and they defended economic freedom – the right to own property, to enter any line of work, to trade freely with willing buyers and sellers.” (David Kelley, 'May We Have The Word Liberal Back?' TFR, Issue No 1.)

Liberalism’s original concept of the proper relationship between citizen and government was formulated by John Stuart Mill thus:

The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community against his will, is to prevent harm to others.

Unfortunately, Mill himself retreated from this position in the name of equality and of something he called “cultivation” (“The uncultivated cannot be competent judges of cultivation”) which, along with the imprecision of the term “harm to others” helped pave the way for the hijacking of the word by its modern bastardisers – utterly illiberal imposters who are opposed to freedom of thought, speech and values (they are advocates instead of censorship, Political Correctness, compulsory sensitivity training, etc) and to freedom in the marketplace (which they insist must be shackled in support of their psychological and physical prop, the welfare state). The modern position my be conveniently summarised by Algernon Sidney, a contemporary of John Locke's. "Freedom is glorious," he said, "but requires moral supervision."

By such imprecisions is fredom destroyed.

While today's liberals ooze illiberality, the real inheritors of the classical liberal mantle are today's libertarians who, following Ayn Rand, replace the imprecision of Mill's notion of "harm" with the far more precise formulation of the non-initiation of force principle.

In New Zealand however, the bogus liberals still rule. They overrun the parliament and commentariat. They infest our universities. They are the most compelling single advertisement for their own mortal dread – the privatisation of education. From their taxpayer-funded ivory towers they have fought, and continue to fight, every measure of economic liberalisation tooth and nail.

For decades they were either indifferent to or explicitly supportive of the appalling violations of rights in communist countries. They are at heart totalitarians. They have twisted freedom of action to mean freedom to destroy freedom of action. They once stood on a rugby field in Hamilton and prevented the Springboks from playing, but were nowhere to be seen when, at the conclusion of the Springbok tour, the All Blacks set off for Ceaucescu’s Roumania. Opposing the Springboks then they opposed race-based laws; now those same former protestors rush race-based laws through parliament, and see no irony in dong so.

These modern-day state-worshippers have replaced Voltaire’s famous dictum with a newer more 'liberal' version: “I disagree with what you say, and will use any organ of the state (Human Rights Commission, Race Relations Office) to stop you saying it.”

The proper response of genuine freedom-lovers to these unspeakably contemptible usurpers of a noble word is to invoke the true liberal injunction, as above: "Laissez-nous faire" -- or in its best English translation: "Piss off!"

This is part of a continuing series explaining the concepts and terms used by New Zealand libertarians, originally published in The Free Radical in 1993. The 'Introduction' to the series is here. The series so far can be seen down on the right-hand sidebar.

Electoral Finance Act: "It's about the sweet scent of power, and the lust for control" (updated)

Crikey, Hone Harawira can get to the heart of an issue.  Here he is speaking yesterday on the Government's Incumbency Protection Act, (passed last night by 63 votes to 57):

Yes folks money talks, but nothing talks quite like the truth, and the truth about this Bill is that it's nothing but an arrogant dismissal by this Labour-led government to deny the citizens of Aotearoa / New Zealand the right to participate in one of the fundamental rights of any so-called "democratic society" – how you elect your government.

And no – we will not be fobbed off by any talk about how this is only about election finances, because it ain't.

If this was only about election finances, then why did this Labour government push through special legislation to validate their $800,000 over-spend at the last election, rather than let the legal process take its natural course?

If this was only about election finances, then why didn't this Labour government ask the Auditor General and the Electoral Commission, to present a range of options for public consideration, and presentation to the House?

If this was only about election finances, then how come the Human Rights Commission says this Bill is a dramatic assault on fundamental human rights – freedom of expression, and the right to participate in the election process?

If this was only about election finances, then how come the Human Rights Commission says that even this rewritten, flea-bitten, revised and patched-up version should still have been given back to the public for full discussion and debate?

I'll tell you why Madam Speaker, it's because this ain't just about election finances.

It's about the sweet scent of power, and the lust for control. It's about the decadence of corruption, the stench of deceit, and the refusal to accept the reality of impending defeat.

Yes, there have been amendments, hell we even voted for one of them, but given the constitutional importance of legislation that will play a critical role in determining how the next election will be fought – stitching up this deal behind closed doors, and then adding a veneer of democracy through a select committee process, is nothing but a sick joke.

Mind you, this government denying the people of Aotearoa the right to open and public debate on the process by which we manage the next election, is right up there, with their changing the law to bypass any serious questioning of their expenditure, at the last election.

Madam Speaker, the Maori Party will not be party to a bill which is clearly aimed at restricting freedom of speech.

We will not be party to this desperate attempt by Labour to stay in power at the expense of the fundamental human rights of the citizens of this country.

We will not be party to a bill designed to put fear into those who would speak their mind, by forcing them to run the gauntlet of registration, audit, notification, financial agency, monitoring, reporting, scrutiny, and penalty.

And we will not be party to a bill that slams the door on opposition spending, while allowing government to continue to spend millions on promoting its own policies and programmes.

Madam Speaker, the Maori Party was borne out of Maoridom's absolute rejection of this Labour government's arrogant denial of our basic human rights to the foreshore and seabed.

And we will reject this Bill to rewrite the law to allow that same government to stay in power - with the same vigour and determination.

Madam Speaker, money is not what drives people to vote, it is truth...

And I sincerely hope and pray, that those who have sacrificed the truth for the delusion of power, that overwhelms this decadent and depraved piece of legislation, will come to see the folly of their ways when the people reject this sham, come Election 2008.

UPDATE: The Free Speech Coalition sums up the impact of the Act, which will come into force in just two weeks!

The Act discourages individuals and groups from participating in the electoral process and spending their own money, while at the same time allows MPs and parliamentary parties to far more easily use taxpayer funds on their election campaigns and not even have it count towards their spending limits. It is the ultimate act in hypocrisy.

The MPs have

- Ignored the Law Society's advice that the Bill should be scrapped

- Ignored the Human Rights Commission opposition to the regulated period, and their request to allow the public to submit on the amended Bill

- Ignored the NZ Institute of Charted Accountant's advice that the Bill is unworkable

- Ignored the Electoral Commission's advice on spending limits

- Failed to provide legislative certainty around the exemptions for MPs

- Protected anonymous donations with massive loopholes which may result in less, not more, disclosure

- Continually misrepresented key clauses of the Bill

"New Zealand has no written constitution. At the end of the day 61 MPs in Parliament can pass any law they like, no matter how repugnant. Previously constitutional conventions have protected Acts like the Electoral Act, but the passage of the Electoral Finance Bill sees the demise of that convention." said spokesperson David Farrar.

"We hoped the parties supporting this Bill would listen to the near universal opposition from the media, from the legal profession, and from the public and do the right thing. Sadly they have chosen not to.

"We do not believe there should be no consequences for those parties which passed the Electoral Finance Act into law. The NZ Herald correctly labeled it as an "Attack on Democracy" and we believe it is time for Democracy to attack back.

PUBLIC NOTICE: Stop democracy rationing!

What you can do:

Protest March: Auckland this Saturday 17 November from the Auckland Town Hall at 10.30am (assemble from 10am) Protest: Wellington next Wednesday, 21 November, for a march on Parliament.

This is to invite you to stand up and be counted.

John Boscawen is organising marches in Auckland and Wellington to protest the Labour-led Government's attack on democracy.

The Electoral Finance Bill is designed to curb political activity.

With help from the Greens and United Future, Labour and NZ First are about to ram through a law to gag free speech. Political speech is about to be rationed.

This is over vociferous objection from the Human Rights Commission, the Law Society, Grey Power and concerned citizens from every sector of New Zealand society.

The plan is to give Labour freedom to say what it likes in election year, and to gag everyone else.

Once this Gagging Bill goes through - possibly as soon as next week - it will be against the law for me to send emails such as this.

That's why the Human Rights Commission talks about a "chilling" impact on democracy.

That's why this is a Gagging Bill by any other name and must be stopped. Join the marches

If you want to help contact John@boscawen.co.nz John@boscawen.co.nz

EFB: Drown it.

I'm told Libz just got quite a long mention in Newstalk ZB's 9 O'Clock News about their Electoral Finance Bill submission with Colin Cross quoted saying the bill doesn't need watering down - it needs drowning.

The perfect one-liner.

UPDATE: David Farrar says, "I am hearing whispers from Parliament that Labour is 100% determined to get the Electoral Finance Bill passed into law."

It's becoming increasingly clear why they're so determined: at the next election the Labour Party intends to use the taxpayer as their personal cash machine, and the departments of state as their personal publicity departments -- meanwhile using the Electoral Finance Bill to ban criticism, and to muzzle anyone else doing very much electioneering at all. This, for instance:

Leaked draft documents reveal the extent to which Labour plans to campaign on the public purse. This campaign includes a script for call-takers at an 0800 phone line who will sing the praises of Labour's health policies.

It's hard to overstate how disgustingly cynical this is, more cynical even than introducing retrospective 'Get Out of Jail Free' legislation last year to head off Bernard Darnton's legal action over the pledge card outrage.

Even the normally state-worshipping Human Rights Commission told the Select Committee is against this outrageous assault on democracy,

the Bill will infringe certain human rights - most obviously freedom of expression but also the right of all citizens to participate in the election process. ...It is difficult to conceive of a greater limitation on freedom of speech than this.

You didn't think the HRC had the balls, did you.

Gay genes or not gay genes - it's nobody's business but their own

Here's another example today of how state control of everything from conception to cremation leads to public involvement in everyone's private affairs -- sometimes intensely private affairs -- and to 'public debate' about things that is nobody else's business but those involved.

Today's story in brief involves sperm donors, fertility clinics, the Human Wrongs Commissariat (AKA the Human Rights Commission) and claims of a 'gay gene': Once upon a time, not so long ago, a private company, Fertility Associates, began to offer a service to parents unable to father children on their own. Many parents were very, very happy and began to avail themselves of the service offered, and for a while all was good. But such work cannot be done without the state's stern and controlling eye being cast thereon.

And so it was. The Human Wrongs Commissariat soon took it upon themselves to force Fertility Associates to use sperm from gay men, which they had previously avoided due to what they perceived as the added HIV risk involved. And with that the floodgates of meddling have seemed to open. Following hard on those state heels now comes an academic revelling in the name of Assoc. Professor Sin who demands that "potential recipients of sperm from gay donors to be told that a 'gay gene' could be passed on to the child." ( Picture if you can gay sperm donors phoning Prof Sin with the worrying complaint, "Forgive me Sin, for I have fathered!")

Now, Uncle Tom Cobley and all want a say, from the Gay Association of Professionals to "genetic experts," to molecular biologists and hospital endicronologists rung by newspapers for a quote, to talkback callers and Ian Wishart and, inexorably, Brian Bloody Tamaki. "There is no proof of a 'gay gene'," says one. "Is too," says another. "Don't care anyway," says yet another, "just don't tell anyone." "Do too care," says one more, "we're polluting our gene pool." Expect to see all these people and more bothered by TV crews all day. Sheesh. Talk about a furore in a field that's none of their damn businesss anyway.

Time to pull back and reflect. Just whose business is any of this? Not yours and mine, that's for sure. Not the business of sundry experts or comments-persons. Not the business of Prof Sin or the Human Wrongs Commissariat or the Gay Association of Professionals. Why does everyone always expect a say in stuff that's just none of their damn business?! Why do you? Is that why we have a government of bloody stickybeaks -- because most of you like nothing better than to meddle in your neighbours' affairs?

This is none of your damn business! The only people whose business this is is Fertility Associates, the sperm donors they choose to use and who choose to accept their conditions, and those who choose to avail themselves of the treatment Fertility Associates offers. That's all. What sperm to use, whether or not to use sperm from gay men, and what to tell, and whether there is or isn't a 'gay gene' is the concern only of those involved. The sober reflection and the choice on the issue is theirs' to make, not yours, and you and I and sundry experts and axe-grinders should be told politely to butt right out.

And the moral of the story then? Don't let the state anywhere near your bedrooms, your test-tubes or your fallopian tubes.

LINKS: 'Gay gene' row over sperm donations - Dominion Post

TAGS: Science, Ethics, Health, Politics-NZ