Is the Green Party the Communist Party in disguise?

Forums › Off topic › Is the Green Party the Communist Party in disguise?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 15

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1043136 13-May-2014 16:49

ubergeeknz: So... who votes I should start a political party?

There is already one for you, it's called the Green Party :-)

I'm a centrist authoritarian, exactly where tends to vary a bit from day to day, but usually within 1-2 points of the left-right center line, and 3-5 up the authoritarian line

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup. Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

deadlyllama

1283 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 476

Trusted

#1043137 13-May-2014 16:56

Journeyman:
code15: Thinking long term here:

Vote labour/greens to end up like a Nordic country.

Vote national to end up like America.

How ridiculously simplistic.

Simple, yes, but I wouldn't say it was inaccurate. National/Act seems very keen on implementing ideas that have been trialled and failed in the USA and other countries. Like charter schools, "3 strikes", private prisons. Whatever the rhetoric, their actions show a disregard for the poor and vulnerable. And their attitude to the world outside the main centres appears to be that all we're good for is intensive dairying and resource extraction. Their use of parliamentary urgency to push through a bunch of ideological reforms is alarming.

And remember that ECan (the Canterbury regional council) is still run by a bunch of unelected bureaucrats. When a third world country cancels elections and does whatever they want, we're up in arms. When our government does it, we don't really seem to care.

allio

895 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 529

#1043139 13-May-2014 17:00

Lias: I've personally referred to the green party as communists, and see no reason to not continue that.

Well, the fact that you don't understand what communism actually is is probably a fairly good reason. The central tenets of communism are that the means of production are owned by the workers, and that private wealth and the free market do not exist. Where exactly in the Greens' policies do you see evidence of that?

I suspect you're getting confused with socialism - not an uncommon mistake, but a pretty big one. Every political party in New Zealand, including Act and National, have significant soclalist ideals at the heart of most of their major policies. Stuff like publicly funded healthcare, welfare, superannuation, and creation of infrastructure is all socialist. A purely capitalist country would have no taxation and no public sector at all - obviously this doesn't really exist anywhere in the real world (though some places in the Middle East come close), just as purely socialist countries don't exist. All successful first-world countries operate somewhere in the middle.

On the long line from communism to capitalism, all political parties in New Zealand occupy a pretty tightly-spaced little cluster. All of our political parties are to the left of the Democrats in America, for example. The Greens are on the left end of that little sub-spectrum, but they're an awful lot closer to National than they are to "socialism". They're not even the most socialist NZ party - that would be Mana, with its central policy of a universal income. Reducing their policies to "socialism" or especially to "communism" makes you sound very ignorant.

By the way, neither socialism or communism really say very much at all about environmental awareness, renewable energy or the like. They're called the Green party for a reason. Have a read of this policy release from today and compare to that definition of communism from my first paragraph.

Ragnor

8279 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 585

Trusted

#1043144 13-May-2014 17:10

Political Compass is only 2 axis, not much better than right v left generalisations... most people have multi faceted views.

coffeebaron

6304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3567

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1043151 13-May-2014 17:50

They will bring balance to the force

Rural IT and Broadband support.

Broadband troubleshooting and master filter installs.
Starlink installer - one month free: https://www.starlink.com/?referral=RC-32845-88860-71
Wi-Fi and networking
Cel-Fi supply and installer - boost your mobile phone coverage legally

Need help in Auckland, Waikato or BoP? Click my email button, or email me direct: [my user name] at geekzonemail dot com

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1043152 13-May-2014 17:50

Ragnor: Political Compass is only 2 axis, not much better than right v left generalisations... most people have multi faceted views.

I actually think it's reasonable and a much better general guide than left:right.
Of course there will be exceptions, "multi-faceted". I'm sure many of them lurk in churches for example - perhaps with very anti-authoritarian views based on the teachings of Jesus Christ, but strongly authoritarian views based on the preachings of their church.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1043158 13-May-2014 18:05

I wouldn't say they are outwardly communists but certainly Russell Norman has past ties with the Democratic Socialist Party of Australia whom have been said to have tried to infiltrate the Greens party. I realise this is from the internet so needs to be taken with a pinch of salt but it would make sense for them to do this as a way back into politics when their ideologies are generally supported (you could say misunderstood) certainly the Greens have made a clear change in their normal direction to one of Socialism, whether by design or natural progression.

If one was a cynic one could say that the current leadership and direction of the NZ Greens party is travelling in an extreme left direction and it would be silly of them to just come out communist.

Personally I find the current Greens party as being very dangerous and not what most would have thought they were voting for in the past and that maybe the "Green" side is just a vehicle to move even further left.

Edit, apologies forgot source about Russel Norman

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1043161 13-May-2014 18:23

NZtechfreak:
Fred99: People should take the test to see where they stand on the political compass.

+1 for this, I tend to post it to Facebook every election year.

Last time I did that one chap, a lifelong National voter "just because" actually realised his values were more or less entirely opposed to Nationals and decided to change his vote to something more idealogically aligned. I thought it was interesting that he had never ever examined policy before then, but the test producing a very different result than he expected prompted him to.

I found this interesting so started the test but thought it was pushing me in a direction that wasn't right for me. Subsequent search found this page which may explain why I was feeling like I was.

I'm not sure that is a good gauge and certainly would question someone that did it and then changed his/her political direction.

edit: grammar

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

sdav

846 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 193

#1043168 13-May-2014 18:41

I found the questions on that test were taking me a certain direction... on purpose.

SteveON

1916 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 105

#1043171 13-May-2014 18:47

Im not a green supporter but I'd love to see a Nat/greens coalition. NZ needs better housing and to grow, but sustainably grow. Farming is less than 10% of NZ's GDP yet it produces a lot of waste. Don't get me started on what the farmers have done to our waterways.

We produce more rubbish per population than the USA!

D1023319

527 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 90

ID Verified

#1043186 13-May-2014 19:13

dafman:

- Community transport, e.g. buses over fuel efficient private vehicles
The efficiency of Melbourne's or Adelaide's trams for example, or Auckland's motorway at peak. Know what I'd prefer.

- Community vege gardens
Fresh vegetables locally grown. What's the world coming to?

- No anti state asset sales
We wouldn't have a kiwi-owned bank if it wasn't for the state. Come to think of it, we wouldn't have a railway or airline either after the private sector trashed both of those.

- Funny money policies, remember their print money scheme
If it's the US, it's sensible fiscal management. If it's the Greens, it's wacky. Go figure.

- High density living = faceless uniform apartments
Hasn't this been tried before. Oh, yes, right, it's called Europe.

- State subsidies of all kinds
A terrible evil, unless of course you need it. A lot of 'red zone' householders in ChCh not previously considered 'communist' or 'green' demanded all manner of these from central government after the quakes.

I think the arguments you put forward here are overly simplistic

Re High density living
We dont live in Europe with millions of people everywhere. While high density may fit some parts of NZ, I don't believe in a one size fits all solution.
Plus look at Wellington. Our Green Mayor promotes high density living for the proletariat and she is anti urban sprawl but like Russia, she as one of the elite has purchased a weekend retreat in the countryside.
Thats two faced to me

Funny Money
If the green policy of printing money occurred our currency would devalue making imports more expensive.
Then just as in the 1970's under Muldoon, only the rich with overseas funds/earnings would have access to purchase fancy goods.
For the rest of us, imported goods would become more expensive so our standard of living will fall.

Re Public transport
I support a mix of PT and private cars.
Yet in Wellington where the greens have:
- been successful in opposing all new motorways since the terrace tunnel was opened in 1978, and
- promoted a public transport only policy,
our economy has stagnated while the center of industry has shifted to Auckland.
So I am very envious of Aucklands congestion as that represents jobs!
Also as the economy grows in the upper north island - how long will they be content to pay for the capital to remain in Wellington?
Without it we are stuffed!

State Assets
You cite railways but would you invest you own money in this venture? State ownership is as much a political decision as economic.
From my knowledge rail freight is most economic for longer distances but the greens want rail lines where it is uneconomic to do so.

Re Christchurch
while I have a lot of sympathy for red zone home owners, I think it is unfair for those that chose not to insure their houses to expect the rest of NZ to pay!

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 461

Trusted

#1043189 13-May-2014 19:33

jeffnz: I found this interesting so started the test but thought it was pushing me in a direction that wasn't right for me. Subsequent search found this page which may explain why I was feeling like I was.

I'm not sure that is a good gauge and certainly would question someone that did it and then changed his/her political direction.

edit: grammar

The point isn't that it is or isn't a good guide, the point is it made him think. This is a person who for a couple of decades reflexively voted National, and then when he actually thought about and read policy decided National didn't stand for his values at all. Personally, rather than call someone into question as you suggest, someone in more than their fourth decade of life significantly changing their world view on the basis of evidence is something to be lauded in my view. Most people aren't up to changing their mind by that age.

Can you qualify how the Greens are "very dangerous" in your view? I see this thought around, but it seems like fairly hysterical hyperbole to me. Curious as to why someone would feel this way about them.

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1043198 13-May-2014 19:46

NZtechfreak:
jeffnz: I found this interesting so started the test but thought it was pushing me in a direction that wasn't right for me. Subsequent search found this page which may explain why I was feeling like I was.

I'm not sure that is a good gauge and certainly would question someone that did it and then changed his/her political direction.

edit: grammar

The point isn't that it is or isn't a good guide, the point is it made him think. This is a person who for a couple of decades reflexively voted National, and then when he actually thought about and read policy decided National didn't stand for his values at all. Personally, rather than call someone into question as you suggest, someone in more than their fourth decade of life significantly changing their world view on the basis of evidence is something to be lauded in my view. Most people aren't up to changing their mind by that age.

Can you qualify how the Greens are "very dangerous" in your view?

I stand by what I said and by your own admission people at that age aren't up to changing their minds but after doing this test he did which makes me question firstly their understanding of their beliefs and secondly that the test gives you little option in rather pointed questions that most would be hard pushed to not agree with what society would say is right and just.

My view is that the greens stood for policies that were just that, Green, certainly the majority of people I know that vote Green do so for their Green social conscience not economic reasons. This has changed rapidly since Russell Norman took over and I believe that what the Greens used to stand for is being manipulated by the political agenda of those that care little of Green issues and most may not see that, such as the type of person you mention.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

JimmyH

2898 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1554

#1043201 13-May-2014 19:48

Although they seem big on big government, intervention in how people live, and state control I wouldn't say that they are even close communist in the ordinarily accepted sense of the word.

Personally, I would have said that they are more of a hybrid - as if they came from a weird interbreeding of the British Labour party circa the Jim Callaghan era and the NZ Social Credit Party of the 70s, with an environmental veneer slapped over the top.

Detailed regulation of the economy - check
State ownership of the "commanding heights" of the economy - check
Manipulation of the currency - check
Business protection - check
Funny money financing of expenditure - check
Micro-management of people's lives - check
Suspicion of private enterprise - check
Support for increased regulation over most facets of lives (food choices, transport, etc) - check
Belief that they know better than individuals about what we should spend our money on (vehicles, housing etc) - check
Support for much higher taxes - check

I could live with the environmentalism. I could even vote for it. It's the belief in big interventionist government, and the dopey hard-left-wing economics that I could never go for.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1043205 13-May-2014 19:55

I don't need to answer a dopey questionnaire to know where I stand. I decide my votes separately, I vote for the candidate I feel will do the best job for our electorate irrespective of political party. The party vote, I vote for the party that has the policies I like. The three elections has seen me vote for three different parties.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 15