Is A Trump-Style Revolution Coming to NZ?

House of Cards

Some time back, a 1Law4All blog post showed that one or two in the media had awoken from their torpor and were seeing things more clearly.

Although now several months old, the piece below from across the Tasman shows that enlightenment is slowly spreading through a hitherto moribund media. It matters not what you think of Donald Trump. He is just one manifestation of widespread voter unease. The same unease that led to Brexit and other political shifts which scare the (we-know-best) two-sides-of-the-same-coin, political elite.

As an example, will NZ voters see for what they are, the charade of tax cuts being dangled in front of them as an election bribe? While National have been in power, government debt has ballooned to 58 billion dollars from 18 billion. The “brighter future” jingle is in reality  blatant propaganda. Like the light at the end of the tunnel, that “brighter future” is a gold-plated debt trap for all New Zealanders

In the months and weeks before the election, will anyone ask the National Party hopefuls how there can be a surplus that might give tax cuts, while the government’s debt has increased to such an enormous figure? A government debt that you and me – ordinary New Zealand tax-payers – will have to repay.

Come election day, what really matters is whether or not New Zealand voters have – or will – let the scales fall from their eyes.


Rise of the outsiders — Trump-style revolution is coming here

Mark Latham
January 30, 2017

MALCOLM Turnbull’s floundering leadership aside, Australian politics faces a single irresistible issue. Will a Trump/Brexit-style revolution, a rebellion of the outsiders, torpedo the stability of the two-party system in Australia? I think it will. I think the age of political disruption is upon us.

One’s Nation’s resurgence and the extraordinary result in November’s Orange by-election point to the possibilities of electoral realignment. Unless they promptly transform themselves, the Labor, Liberal and National parties face further structural decline in their support base. In too many areas, the old oligopoly — the arrogant, self-entitled manipulators of machine politics — have formed a policy consensus that runs counter to outsider interests and beliefs.

I call it COLAGIN: the Coalition-Labor-Green-Insider agreement to support a national platform of high immigration, high personal taxation, big government, heavy business regulation, social engineering programs and divisive identity politics, while also lining their pockets with a parliamentary entitlements system brazenly open to abuse.

Through their petty squabbling in the media, Coalition, Labor and Green MPs try to pretend they are debating big policy differences. But in reality, they are all locked into a system of cross-party compromise, practising a timid, suffocating brand of political correctness. When the NSW National Party is willing to do the work of the Greens in trying to ban greyhound racing, traditional notions of ideology have gone out the window.

The Left/Right spectrum has been replaced by a new Insiders/Outsiders divide. With good reason, the public has grown to despise party politics. Large parts of the electorate are looking for someone to turn the system upside down, to create a new social movement that puts the quaint but powerful notion of public interest back into our democracy.

It’s a battle between entrenched power and the will of the people.

It’s a struggle between unpopular insiders like Turnbull and Bill Shorten and the near-certain emergence of electoral insurgents. In its policy substance, what might this movement look like? What ideas does it need to champion to bust the Canberra Club wipe open? Here’s my best effort at a 10-point Outsiders’ Manifesto for Australia’s future:

1 Big cuts to the Federal Government’s annual 200,000-plus immigration and refugee program, ending the major-party consensus for a Big Australia. Slower population growth would take the pressure off local employment, urban congestion, housing prices and environmental sustainability — a massive win-win-win-win in public policy.

2 An end to social engineering programs, with the abolition of Safe Schools, Respectful Relationships, university safe spaces, Section 18C and man-bashing government agencies such as Our Watch and the Australian National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS).

3 Democratising the ABC, making it a clearinghouse for citizen-based broadcasting. Any Australian should be able to post their blogged, podcast or webcast material on its platforms. The most popular contributors would then be promoted to appear on the ABC’s radio and television programs — breaking the longstanding Leftist monopoly.

4 Reforming the Human Rights Commission so that it serves the public, not political correctness. The Commission’s charter should be recast to promote community building, Australian values and the virtues of Western civilisation. It has an important role to play in pushing back against the spread of radical Islam — the greatest human rights threat to our society.

5 Ending the era of big government. To reboot economic growth and international competitiveness, Australia’s top marginal tax rate should be cut from 49 per cent to 35, with other income brackets also receiving tax relief. To increase the disposable earnings of hardworking Australians, the Federal Government needs to make us a low-tax regime.

6 Big cuts to wasteful Federal spending, especially in transport, higher education, energy subsidies, corporate welfare, Canberra’s defence and foreign policy establishment, arts funding, public broadcasting and mental health rorts. Entire departments and agencies need to be abolished, bringing the size of government back to pre-2000 levels. The profligacy of the past 17 years has given Australia the worst of both worlds: bloated bureaucracies and stagnant economic growth.

7 Slashing regulation on business, especially when it holds back the development of new industries. For instance, Australia should be a global energy superpower with a dynamic mix of coal, renewable, CSG and nuclear energy. But the dead hand of government has knocked out the latter two. With the recent weakening of the economy, we can no longer afford to turn away new sources of jobs and investment.

8 Urgent school education reform, fundamentally changing the face of Australian teaching. On the international league table of academic achievement, we have fallen behind Kazakhstan — a national embarrassment. The top performer, Singapore, has based its success on a highly selective process for teacher recruitment. We need to do the same, increasing salaries for high-quality teachers and weeding out under-performers.

9 A new war on poverty, creating economic opportunity for all Australians. Non-viable indigenous settlements and public housing estates need to be closed down, with residents moving to areas where they can access jobs and services. The intergenerational poverty cycle also needs to be broken through improved teaching and learning programs in disadvantaged schools.

10 Genuine reform of parliamentary entitlements to make rorting impossible. The Turnbull Government’s recent proposals are no more than window-dressing. Entitlement amounts should be bundled together and capped, with travel funding released only after MPs have demonstrated the primacy of parliamentary work in their itineraries. An Anti-Corruption Commission is also needed to guard against the corrosive influence of machine politics and paid lobbyists.

Outsider politics aims not only to shake up the old-party system at the ballot box. It also has serious policy intent, ending the COLAGIN consensus in favour of outer-suburban and regional interests.

The electorate is willing. The time is right.

We have every reason to expect the tumultuous march of the outsiders to continue in 2017.

A Two Fingers to a Politically Correct Elite

A Two Fingers to a Politically Correct Elite

Ian O’Doherty

13/11/2016

Tuesday, November 8, 2016 – either a day that will live in infamy, or the moment when America was made great again? The truth, as usual, will lie somewhere in the middle. After all, contrary to what both his supporters and detractors believe, Trump won’t be able to come into office and spend his first 100 days gleefully ripping up all the bits of the Constitution he doesn’t like.

But even if the American election’s seismic shock-wave doesn’t signal either the sky falling or the start of a bright new American era, the result was, to use one of The Donald’s favourite phrases, huge. It is, in fact, a total game changer.

In decades to come, historians will still bicker about the most poisonous, toxic and stupid election in living memory. They will also be bickering over the same vexed question – how did a man who was already unpopular with the public and who boasted precisely zero political experience beat a seasoned Washington insider who was married to one extremely popular president and who had worked closely with another? The answer, ultimately, is in the question.

History will record this as a Trump victory, which of course it is. But it was also more than that, because this was the most stunning self-inflicted defeat in the history of Western democracy.

Hillary Clinton has damned her party to irrelevance for at least the next four years. She has also ensured that Obama’s legacy will now be a footnote rather than a chapter. Because the Affordable Care Act is now doomed under a Trump presidency and that was always meant to be Obama’s gift, of sorts, to America.

How did a candidate who had virtually all of the media, all of Hollywood, every celebrity you could think of, a couple of former presidents and apparently, the hopes of an entire gender resting on her shoulders, blow up her own campaign?

I rather suspect that neither Donald nor Hillary know how they got to this point.

Where she seemed to expect the position to become available to her by right – the phrase “she deserves it” was used early in the campaign and then quickly dropped when her team remembered that Americans don’t like inherited power – his first steps into the campaign were those of someone chancing their arm. If Trump wasn’t such a stoic teetotaler, many observers would have accused him of only doing it as a drunken bet.

But the more the campaign wore on, something truly astonishing began to happen – the people began to speak. And they began to speak in a voice which, for the first time in years in the American heartland, would not be ignored.

Few of the people who voted for Trump seriously believe that he is going to personally improve their fortunes. Contrary to the smug, middle-class media narrative, Trump voters aren’t all barely educated idiots.

They know what he is; of course they do. It’s what he is not that appeals to them.

Clinton, on the other hand, had come to represent the apex of smug privilege. Whether it was boasting about her desire to shut down the remaining coal industry in Virginia, or calling half the electorate a “basket of deplorables,” she seemed to operate in the perfumed air of the elite, more obsessed with coddling idiots and pandering to identity and feelings than improving the hardscrabble life that is the lot of millions of Americans.

Also, nobody who voted for Trump did so because they wanted him as a spiritual guru or life coach.

But plenty of people invested an irrational amount of emotional energy into a woman who was patently undeserving of that level of adoration.

That’s why we’ve witnessed such fury from her supporters – they had wrapped themselves so tightly in the Hillary flag that a rejection of her felt like a rejection of them. And when you consider that many American colleges gave their students Wednesday off class because they were too ‘upset’ to study, you can see that this wasn’t a battle for the White House – this became a genuine battle for America’s future direction. And, indeed, for the West.

We have been going through a cultural paroxysm for the last 10 years – the rise of identity politics has created a Balkanised society where the content of someone’s mind is less important than their skin colour, gender, sexuality or whatever other attention-seeking label they wish to bestow upon themselves. In fact, where once it looked like racism and sexism might be becoming archaic remnants of a darker time, a whole new generation has popped up which wants to re-litigate all those arguments all over again.

In fact, while many of us are too young to recall the Vietnam War and the social upheaval of the 1960s, plenty of older observers say they haven’t seen an America more at war with itself than it is today.

One perfect example of this new America has been the renewed calls for segregation on campuses. Even a few years ago, such a move would have been greeted with understandable horror by civil rights activists – but this time it’s the black students demanding segregation and “safe spaces” from whites. If young people calling for racial segregation from each other isn’t the sign of a very, very sick society, nothing is.

The irony and hypocrisy of Clinton calling Trump and his followers racist while she was courting Black Lives Matter was telling. After all, no rational white person would defend the KKK, yet here was a white women defending both BLM and the New Black Panthers – explicitly racist organisations with the NBP, in particularly, openly espousing a race war if they don’t get what they want.

Fundamentally, Trump was attractive because he represents a repudiation of the nonsense that has been slowly strangling the West. He represents – rightly or wrongly – a scorn and contempt for these new rules. He won’t be a president worried about micro-aggression, or listening to the views of patently insane people just because they come from a fashionably protected group. He also represents a glorious two fingers to everyone who has become sick of being called a racist or a bigot or a homophobe – particularly by Hillary supporters who are too dense to realise that she has always actually been more conservative on social issues than Trump.

That it might take a madman to restore some sanity to America is, I suppose, a quirk that is typical to that great nation – land of the free and home to more contradictions than anyone can imagine.

Trump’s victory also signals just how out of step the media has been with the people. Not just American media, either. In fact, the Irish media has continued its desperate drive to make a show of itself with a seemingly endless parade of emotionally incontinent gibberish that, ironically, has increased in ferocity and hysterical spite in the last few days.

The fact that Hillary’s main cheerleaders in the Irish and UK media still haven’t realised where they went wrong is instructive and amusing in equal measure. They still don’t seem to understand that by constantly insulting his supporters, they’re just making asses of themselves.

One female contributor to this newspaper said Trump’s victory was a “sad day for women.” Well, not for the women who voted for him it wasn’t.

But that really is the nub of the matter – the ‘wrong’ kind of women obviously voted for Trump. The ‘right’ kind went with Hillary. And lost.

The Irish media are not alone in being filled largely with dinner-party liberals who have never had an original or socially awkward thought in their lives. They simply assume that everyone lives in the same bubble and thinks the same thoughts – and if they don’t, they should.

Of the many things that have changed with Trump’s victory, the bubble has burst. Never in American history have the polls, the media and the chin-stroking moral arbiters of the liberal agenda been so spectacularly, wonderfully wrong.

It was exactly that condescending, obnoxious sneer towards the working class that brought them out in such numbers, and that is the great irony of Election 2016 – the Left spent years creating identity politics to the extent that the only group left without protection or a celebrity sponsor was the white American male. That it was the white American male who swung it for Trump is a timely reminder that while black lives matter, all votes count –
even the ones of people you despise.

You don’t have to be a supporter of Trump to take great delight in the sheer, apoplectic rage that has greeted his victory. If Clinton had won and Trump supporters had gone on a rampage through a dozen American cities the next night, there would have been outrage – and rightly so.

But in a morally and linguistically inverted society, the wrong-doers are portrayed as the victims. We saw that at numerous Trump rallies – protesters would disrupt the event, claiming their right to free speech (a heckler’s veto is not free speech) and provoking people until they got a dig before running to the media and claiming victim-hood.

Yet none of Clinton’s rallies were shut down by her opponents (unlike Trump’s aborted Chicago meeting) and the great mistake the anti-Trump zealots should have learned was that just thinking you’re right isn’t enough – you need to convince others as well.

But, ultimately, this election was about people saying “enough with the bullshit.” This is a country in crisis, and most Americans don’t care about transgender bathrooms, or “safe” spaces, or government speech laws. This was about people taking some control back for themselves.

It was about them saying that they won’t be hectored and bullied by the toddler tantrums thrown by pissy and spoiled millennials, and they certainly won’t put up with being told they’re deplorable, stupid and wicked just because they have a difference of opinion.

But, really, this election is about hope for a better America; an America which isn’t obsessed with identity and perceived ‘privilege’; an America where being a victim isn’t a virtue and where you don’t have to apologise for not being up to date with the latest list of socially acceptable phrases.

Trump’s victory was a two fingers to the politically correct. It was a brutal rejection of the nonsense narrative which says Muslims who kill Americans are somehow victims. It took the ludicrous Green agenda and threw it out. It was a return, on some level, to a time when people weren’t afraid to speak their own mind without some self-elected language cop shouting at them. Who knows, we may even see Trump kicking the UN out of New York.

Frankly, if you’re one of those who gets their politics from Jon Stewart, CNN and Twitter, look away for the next four years, because you’re not going to like what you see. The rest of us, however, will be delighted.

This might go terribly, terribly wrong. Nobody knows – and if we have learned anything this week, it’s that, “nobody knows nuthin.” But just as the people of the UK took control back with Brexit, the people of America did likewise with their choice for president.

It’s called democracy.

Deal with it.

Ian O’Doherty is a columnist who works for the Irish Independent.

English Not An Official NZ Language

English Not an Official Language in NZ Legislation

Did you know that New Zealand has two official languages and English is not one of them? The two official languages are Sign Language – made official in 2006, and the Maori Language in 1987.

MP Simon Bridges confirmed that there is no law that enshrines English as a NZ official language. To correct this, he suggested a petition saying that he will present such a petition to Parliament. The wording has been approved by the Clerk of the House. English is our common language and we must ensure it becomes an official language of our country.

Each petition sheet is quite easy to fill in, for family, friends, neighbours, workmates etc. So far, very few people have declined to sign it. If you have a business, (or know of one you could ask), it could go on the counter. Your local RSA is likely a good option.

The Petition was launched in Tauranga and it will be running for a few more months. Contact the petitioner (Robin) on 27-2331595, or by e-mail or download/print petition forms from here  – use the printer icon to print. Once a petition page is full of signatures, the address to post it to is on the bottom of the form.

– Robin Bishop (abridged)

“I’m guilty of gross violation of equality of opportunity, racism and possibly sexism.”

Fabulous article by Peter Cresswell on the Not PC website today. Here is an excerpt and a link to the article:

 

 

 

Western values are superior to all others. Why? The greatest achievement of the West was the concept of individual rights. The Western transition from barbarism to civility didn’t happen overnight. It emerged feebly — mainly in England, starting with the Magna Carta of 1215 — and took centuries to get where it is today.
One need not be a Westerner to hold Western values. A person can be Chinese, Japanese, Jewish, African or Arab and hold Western values. It’s no accident that Western values of reason and individual rights have produced unprecedented health, life expectancy, wealth and comfort for the ordinary person.

Read more here


To comment on this article, please click the button

Discussion Forum

Education and the Racist Road to Barbarism

Education and the Racist Road to Barbarism

by – George Reisman

Major changes are taking place in the philosophy of American education, changes which are potentially capable of having enormous impact on all aspects of American life. The changes are inspired by what The New York Times refers to as the “Eurocentrism critique.” According to the Times, “Eurocentrism” is a pejorative term supposed to describe “a provincial outlook that focuses overwhelmingly on European and Western culture while giving short shrift to Asia, Africa, and Latin America.”

A typical manifestation of “Eurocentrism,” according to its critics, is the statement that Columbus discovered America. This statement, which most children in America may have learned as their very first fact of history, is now regarded as controversial. Indeed, it is held to be positively offensive because it implies that “there had been no other people on the continent” before Columbus arrived. Traditional American education in general is denounced for seeing non-Western civilization and the rest of the world “only through a Western lens.” Only through that “lens,” it is held, can, for example, African art be regarded as primitive.

In an effort to eliminate such alleged Western and European “bias,” schools are altering the way in which history, literature, and the arts are being taught. Recent changes at Stanford University, where a course on Western civilization was replaced by one in which non-Western ideas had to be included, are only one case in point. The revisions in the history curriculum in California’s public school system, to emphasize Indian and African cultures, are another. Curricula and textbooks are being widely rewritten, and, as evidence of the depth of the changes, the Times reports that efforts are underway “to reconstruct the history of African tribes, going beyond relying on accounts of Western travelers to examining indigenous sources, often oral, and adapting anthropological approaches.”

The implications of these changes are enormous. The acceptance of the “Eurocentrism” critique and its denial of such propositions as Columbus discovered America speaks volumes about the state of the educational establishment in the United States and the intellectual establishment in general.

Read the rest of the essay here

%d bloggers like this: