New centrist green party?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › New centrist green party?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19064 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16304

Lifetime subscriber

#245285 27-Jan-2019 17:05

This is a very interesting development. Although I probably wouldn't vote for them I think it is important to see more parties reflecting more points of view in our political system. I also agree with the proposition that people who do not support left politics should be able to vote for an environmental party. This can only be a good thing, very healthy for our democracy. I would not mind seeing TOP again and a few others on both the right and left. A contest of ideas is always better than voting by habit.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 11

1205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1236

#2168922 28-Jan-2019 13:37

Sounds interesting in principle. I would want to know more about their policies and whether a so-called environmental party can stick to the environment with straying into other areas. I would also want to know if any of the candidates are raving nutcases, which can happen with these small startup parties.

bunker

35 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 7

#2169348 28-Jan-2019 22:46

I'm curious to know what all these National voters envisage when they complain about the Greens and talk about a "true environmental party." Are they actually supportive of addressing climate change and reducing emissions. Do they want New Zealand to be a global leader as opposed to a fast follower? Because that's the biggest environmental challenge at the moment.

I get the feeling a lot of these people saying they would have supported a "teal" coalition after the last election think that environmental just means conservation therefore a bit of extra money to help out the Kakapo.

Maybe I'm wrong though

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 7
Inactive user

#2169621 29-Jan-2019 13:58

bunker:

I'm curious to know what all these National voters envisage when they complain about the Greens and talk about a "true environmental party." Are they actually supportive of addressing climate change and reducing emissions. Do they want New Zealand to be a global leader as opposed to a fast follower? Because that's the biggest environmental challenge at the moment.

I get the feeling a lot of these people saying they would have supported a "teal" coalition after the last election think that environmental just means conservation therefore a bit of extra money to help out the Kakapo.

Maybe I'm wrong though

No those right National facists are just cunning a plan to cahoot the next election. It will backfire as this new green party will just pull votes from the already national supporters.

Journeyman

1205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1236

#2169663 29-Jan-2019 15:15

Darude34:

No those right National facists are just cunning a plan to cahoot the next election.

I'm not sure if you're serious, so I don't know how to respond to that.

Darude34:

It will backfire as this new green party will just pull votes from the already national supporters.

Seems to have worked ok for the Green Party and Labour, no?

GV27

5977 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2170027 30-Jan-2019 08:06

Might work for the urban Green voters whose idea of going green is swapping the Q7 for an iPace or a Tesla.

I suspect there's probably more of those than the Greens would care to admit. It would certainly help explain how they can keep floating regressive policies despite apparently having a social justice bent.

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 7
Inactive user

#2170104 30-Jan-2019 11:55

Capitalism and green politics cannot go together in my opinion. I believe in eco-socialism and that means dismantling capitalism completely, while focusing on common ownership of production, and the equal distribution of wealth between everyone. Capitlism has no place in a green society or modern day New Zealand. This whole thing with National (A capitalist party for the rich) will never work with green policies.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#2170295 30-Jan-2019 16:50

Darude34:

Capitalism and green politics cannot go together in my opinion. I believe in eco-socialism and that means dismantling capitalism completely, while focusing on common ownership of production, and the equal distribution of wealth between everyone. Capitlism has no place in a green society or modern day New Zealand. This whole thing with National (A capitalist party for the rich) will never work with green policies.

So as a 'watermelon green' your natural home is with the existing NZ Green Party. (No surprise there going by your previous post). It's interesting that the high profile name linked with the new party is a previous Green Party Member (Tava) who became disillusioned with the SJ direction of his party.

But for those people who care about environmental issues but don't want to destroy their way of life, a centrist environmentally based option may appeal.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2170468 30-Jan-2019 21:36

Dingbatt:

But for those people who care about environmental issues but don't want to destroy their way of life, a centrist environmentally based option may appeal.

I tend to agree with @Darude34 that (unbridled) capitalism isn't compatible with environmentalism.

I've highlighted "destroy" - perhaps that's fearmongering - "radically change" is less dramatic.

The truth is that people don't want to change their goals and aspirations at all - even if they acknowledge the problem (and there is one) they want someone else to change in order to solve it.

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#2170658 31-Jan-2019 11:49

Fred99:
Dingbatt:

But for those people who care about environmental issues but don't want to destroy their way of life, a centrist environmentally based option may appeal.

I tend to agree with @Darude34 that (unbridled) capitalism isn't compatible with environmentalism.

I've highlighted "destroy" - perhaps that's fearmongering - "radically change" is less dramatic.

The truth is that people don't want to change their goals and aspirations at all - even if they acknowledge the problem (and there is one) they want someone else to change in order to solve it.

I bolded "acknowledge the problem" because I was referring to the 'pot-smoking, everybody is equal (but some more equal than others), property is theft, the world's flotsam are welcome, side of the NZ Green party. Not the environmental bit.
So there will be people who are uncomfortable with the socialist part of the NZ Greens but care about the environment, that might vote for a centrist environmental party.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19064 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16304

Lifetime subscriber

#2170688 31-Jan-2019 12:38

I think you might get further communicating your ideas if you could leave out the unhelpful digs like pot-smoking, some more equal than others, property is theft, welcoming the world's flotsam. You may not like Green policies, and that is your good right, but the silly name-calling is neither reasonable nor fair and it just turns people off the rest of your message.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 7
Inactive user

#2170702 31-Jan-2019 13:03

Dingbatt:

I bolded "acknowledge the problem" because I was referring to the 'pot-smoking, everybody is equal (but some more equal than others), property is theft, the world's flotsam are welcome, side of the NZ Green party. Not the environmental bit.

Pot smoking is something even I do every evening. It helps me with my anxiety disorder. It keeps me sane as I am unable to work as I cannot cope with the stress of work life.

All humans are equal, or at least born equal. Therefore wealth should be shared equally too.

On the property side of things please dont get me started. Property here is mostly stolen. Land was taken, and should be returned.

Your post is offensive.

Geekzone

Want to support Geekzone and browse the site without the ads? Subscribe to Geekzone now (monthly, annual and lifetime options).

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 7
Inactive user

#2170708 31-Jan-2019 13:12

Journeyman:

Darude34:

It will backfire as this new green party will just pull votes from the already national supporters.

Seems to have worked ok for the Green Party and Labour, no?

I don't recall any other parties creating or cohooting a new party to win votes from the opposition. So no, it did not work for them, and was never tried.

This new party would need to get more than 5% of votes for it to work with the MMP threshold. Thats a big ask considering that the current green party got 6.3% in 2017.

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#2170877 31-Jan-2019 15:53

Darude34:
Dingbatt:

I bolded "acknowledge the problem" because I was referring to the 'pot-smoking, everybody is equal (but some more equal than others), property is theft, the world's flotsam are welcome, side of the NZ Green party. Not the environmental bit.

Pot smoking is something even I do every evening. It helps me with my anxiety disorder. It keeps me sane as I am unable to work as I cannot cope with the stress of work life.

All humans are equal, or at least born equal. Therefore wealth should be shared equally too.

On the property side of things please dont get me started. Property here is mostly stolen. Land was taken, and should be returned.

Your post is offensive.

Please tell me which part of my paraphrasing is not NZ Green Party policy?
As I said before the NZ Green Party is your natural home. I apologise if you were offended.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19064 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16304

Lifetime subscriber

#2170903 31-Jan-2019 16:21

Pot-smoking is not Green party policy. They don't advocate it at all. They don't care if people smoke it or not. The policy is drug reform. Mixing one with the other to score a point is being disingenuous.

The Greens don't believe everyone is equal. Where did they say that? Most Greens probably believe everyone should have equal opportunity, but that is another matter.

As most Greens are property-owners, I doubt they think property is theft. Where do you get that from?

I'm not sure what you mean by 'the world's flotsam', but if you are referring to refugees or immigrants, that is not only offensive (and racist), but simply incorrect. Immigrants of all kinds contribute a lot more to our economy than they take away.

One definition of flotsam is something discarded or derelict. I don't think we get a lot of that here but it is still pretty insulting to people risking their lives and those of their families in a desperate attempt to improve their circumstances. You really need to examine your prejudices. It is fine to be opposed to 'socialism', but understand what it is you are opposed to.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#2170940 31-Jan-2019 17:29

So point by point
Part of the support agreement with Labour is a binding referendum on the recreational use of cannabis.

Socialists believe everyone should be made to be equal. The reference is from Animal Farm.

Darude34 proves my point on this one (property). Socialist ideal.

The flotsam comment is to do with giving a free pass to people that are effectively jumping the refugee queue. Nothing to do with race. And I find your insinuation offensive.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 11