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 | 9 | ... | 15

1283 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 476

Trusted

#1043207 13-May-2014 20:01

jeffnz:
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.

Can you tell us what some of those questions you consider to be "rather pointed" are?

(edit) Also, some pointed questions really do need to be asked. I'd love to see the results of a telephone poll of religious conservatives in the USA, asking if they supported abortion (no! the sanctity of life!) and then asking them if they supported the death penalty (of course! that's not the same thing at all!)...

Social conscience and economics are linked. You can't separate them out and pretend they don't influence each other. Labour and National have for most[*] of the last 20 or 30 years been in agreement on the general parameters and lines along which the economy, and country, should be run. So it's not surprising that a party which is credibly different is enjoying some popularity with voters who think we're going in the wrong direction.

[*] Perhaps a bit less recently. But the last Labour government floated the idea of partial asset sales too, and we can't forget Roger Douglas...

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1043209 13-May-2014 20:11

deadlyllama:
Can you tell us what some of those questions you consider to be "rather pointed" are?

Social conscience and economics are linked. You can't separate them out and pretend they don't influence each other. Labour and National have for most[*] of the last 20 or 30 years been in agreement on the general parameters and lines along which the economy, and country, should be run. So it's not surprising that a party which is credibly different is enjoying some popularity with voters who think we're going in the wrong direction.

[*] Perhaps a bit less recently. But the last Labour government floated the idea of partial asset sales too, and we can't forget Roger Douglas...

If you follow the link you will see some of them listed the rest are fairly obvious to most that are open to seeing it.

"some popularity" is correct but the majority don't think so given Labour and Nationals support, either that or they don't know what they want and just follow historical voting or vote for who they like best. My point is that the majority of those that have traditionally supported the Greens 'maybe' supporting them for what they perceive they are not what the direction in which they are heading to full steam.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1043224 13-May-2014 20:25

People refer to the greens as watermelons, green on the outside, red on the inside.

deadlyllama

1283 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 476

Trusted

#1043226 13-May-2014 20:33

jeffnz:
deadlyllama:
Can you tell us what some of those questions you consider to be "rather pointed" are?

Social conscience and economics are linked. You can't separate them out and pretend they don't influence each other. Labour and National have for most[*] of the last 20 or 30 years been in agreement on the general parameters and lines along which the economy, and country, should be run. So it's not surprising that a party which is credibly different is enjoying some popularity with voters who think we're going in the wrong direction.

[*] Perhaps a bit less recently. But the last Labour government floated the idea of partial asset sales too, and we can't forget Roger Douglas...

If you follow the link you will see some of them listed the rest are fairly obvious to most that are open to seeing it.

"some popularity" is correct but the majority don't think so given Labour and Nationals support, either that or they don't know what they want and just follow historical voting or vote for who they like best. My point is that the majority of those that have traditionally supported the Greens 'maybe' supporting them for what they perceive they are not what the direction in which they are heading to full steam.

"most that are open to seeing it" I'd still like an actual example. For example, would you consider "It is regrettable that many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society" or "Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of medical care" to be pushing a barrow?

I'd say, if you want to say "Strongly agree" or "Strongly disagree" to either of those, but you don't like what it feels like that implies, then maybe you need to have a good sit down and think and ask yourself why your answer seems to disagree with what you consider your values to be.

I realise it's anecdata but most of the people I know who actually care enough about politics to stay informed about the various parties, their policies and their track records, and whose political persuasions I know of, vote Green, at least with their party vote. They're certainly not going "I like trees! I'll vote Green." That may say more about the people I have as friends than anything else, though.

And the Greens as a party that people actually vote for haven't been around for that long -- since the late 90s? They don't have anything like the "My Daddy voted (labour/national) therefore I do too" intertia that the big two have.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1043228 13-May-2014 20:38

deadlyllama:
jeffnz:
deadlyllama:
Can you tell us what some of those questions you consider to be "rather pointed" are?

Social conscience and economics are linked. You can't separate them out and pretend they don't influence each other. Labour and National have for most[*] of the last 20 or 30 years been in agreement on the general parameters and lines along which the economy, and country, should be run. So it's not surprising that a party which is credibly different is enjoying some popularity with voters who think we're going in the wrong direction.

[*] Perhaps a bit less recently. But the last Labour government floated the idea of partial asset sales too, and we can't forget Roger Douglas...

If you follow the link you will see some of them listed the rest are fairly obvious to most that are open to seeing it.

"some popularity" is correct but the majority don't think so given Labour and Nationals support, either that or they don't know what they want and just follow historical voting or vote for who they like best. My point is that the majority of those that have traditionally supported the Greens 'maybe' supporting them for what they perceive they are not what the direction in which they are heading to full steam.

"most that are open to seeing it" I'd still like an actual example. For example, would you consider "It is regrettable that many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society" or "Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of medical care" to be pushing a barrow?

I'd say, if you want to say "Strongly agree" or "Strongly disagree" to either of those, but you don't like what it feels like that implies, then maybe you need to have a good sit down and think and ask yourself why your answer seems to disagree with what you consider your values to be.

I realise it's anecdata but most of the people I know who actually care enough about politics to stay informed about the various parties, their policies and their track records, and whose political persuasions I know of, vote Green, at least with their party vote. They're certainly not going "I like trees! I'll vote Green." That may say more about the people I have as friends than anything else, though.

And the Greens as a party that people actually vote for haven't been around for that long -- since the late 90s? They don't have anything like the "My Daddy voted (labour/national) therefore I do too" intertia that the big two have.

I had a quick look and decided, waste of time, I note there is no neutral position that is "neither agree nor disagree" which is a valid position

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

macuser

2120 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 506

#1043232 13-May-2014 20:53

And here by ends Geekzones great period of non political threads (2014-2014). Go on, shoo.

Lenovo

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

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1043236 13-May-2014 20:56

deadlyllama:
jeffnz:
deadlyllama:
Can you tell us what some of those questions you consider to be "rather pointed" are?

Social conscience and economics are linked. You can't separate them out and pretend they don't influence each other. Labour and National have for most[*] of the last 20 or 30 years been in agreement on the general parameters and lines along which the economy, and country, should be run. So it's not surprising that a party which is credibly different is enjoying some popularity with voters who think we're going in the wrong direction.

[*] Perhaps a bit less recently. But the last Labour government floated the idea of partial asset sales too, and we can't forget Roger Douglas...

If you follow the link you will see some of them listed the rest are fairly obvious to most that are open to seeing it.

"some popularity" is correct but the majority don't think so given Labour and Nationals support, either that or they don't know what they want and just follow historical voting or vote for who they like best. My point is that the majority of those that have traditionally supported the Greens 'maybe' supporting them for what they perceive they are not what the direction in which they are heading to full steam.

"most that are open to seeing it" I'd still like an actual example. For example, would you consider "It is regrettable that many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society" or "Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of medical care" to be pushing a barrow?

I'd say, if you want to say "Strongly agree" or "Strongly disagree" to either of those, but you don't like what it feels like that implies, then maybe you need to have a good sit down and think and ask yourself why your answer seems to disagree with what you consider your values to be.

I realise it's anecdata but most of the people I know who actually care enough about politics to stay informed about the various parties, their policies and their track records, and whose political persuasions I know of, vote Green, at least with their party vote. They're certainly not going "I like trees! I'll vote Green." That may say more about the people I have as friends than anything else, though.

And the Greens as a party that people actually vote for haven't been around for that long -- since the late 90s? They don't have anything like the "My Daddy voted (labour/national) therefore I do too" intertia that the big two have.

why not answer to the examples given they put it far better than I am capable. As Kiwinz said, there is no neutral position or somewhere in the middle which is where I would think the majority would sit, instead you are faced with one extreme or the other which I think pushes one in a certain direction, by design.

Most people seem to think they understand politics but very few actually do or want to understand another opinion or option. Then there are those that are articulate and strongly believe they know the right answer and push that onto others or guide them in a direction that may not fit them but they bow down to greater knowledge but in reality it is only their side of it.

I agree it hasn't been around in its current form that long but long enough that it would have more of a following if they were to be seen as a viable option to lead the country. Given their economic policies I would agree with the majority but that's my opinion and I acknowledge other differ and thats fine I'm not trying to change them.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

alasta

6891 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3365

Trusted

Subscriber

#1043242 13-May-2014 21:01

People I know who support the Green Party are mostly young people who feel hard done by and would otherwise be disillusioned with politics. I think they see an opportunity to even the score with their employers or their elders, but they don't entirely understand the implications of what they're voting for.

eXDee

4033 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1070

Trusted

#1043265 13-May-2014 21:20

Theres an interesting mix of good level headed comments and very ignorant generalisations in this thread. The latter is quite concerning, considering i would have hoped geekzone's audience to be a bit more educated than that.

code15

201 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 43

#1043279 13-May-2014 21:49

alasta: People I know who support the Green Party are mostly young people who feel hard done by and would otherwise be disillusioned with politics. I think they see an opportunity to even the score with their employers or their elders, but they don't entirely understand the implications of what they're voting for.

A lot of my friends are young professionals and have business/economics degrees. Some were lucky enough to go straight into the highest tax bracket, yet vote left because they believe in creating a more equal society. The rich keep getting richer under nats, no one can try argue otherwise.

code15

201 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 43

#1043283 13-May-2014 21:57

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

I think the Political Compass is pretty useless for New Zealanders. I imagine most people would end up on the left with the type of questions its asking.

Would need to be calibrated before using it to decide whether they were left or right wing in NZ politics.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

matisyahu

1640 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 355

Trusted

#1043286 13-May-2014 22:05

D1023319: Is Green the new Red

It occurred to me, most of the Green Party policies are very communist in nature.
They promote:
- Community transport, e.g. buses over fuel efficient private vehicles
- Community vege gardens
- No anti state asset sales
- Funny money policies, remember their print money scheme
- High density living = faceless uniform apartments
- State subsidies of all kinds

https://www.greens.org.nz/policy/full

What do you think?

I'd prefer they focused on policies such as:
- reduced packaging for goods
- encourage holidays in NZ and not overseas, etc

I guess I must be 'communist' because I don't see anything wrong with those ideas. The horror that we don't use our houses as a giant edifice to show off to others of our apparent success? the confusion it seems by the OP that dense housing apparently equals Stalinist brutalist architecture (dense housing doesn't have to be ugly), the idea of having community gardens so that people have a relationship between what they eat and where it comes from is apparently evil? the idea of having an ego trip on four wheels is superior than a well run bus or train service? are there that many people who are in love with their cars in NZ?

"When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called 'the People's Stick'"

MikeAqua

8031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3820

#1043287 13-May-2014 22:08

I wouldn't call the greens communists. They were probably in danger
Off being communist when Keith Locke and similar crackpots were running show. I would now call them socialists who are anti business, or at least anti some business. Unfortunately the sectors they publicly oppose (farming, fishing, forestry)are sectors where NZ has a lot of investment and employment. Also sectors with big iwi investment.

They crap on about an economy based on clean tech. This is a pipe dream. We lack critical mass to be competitive this field, NZ history is that sell off tech companies to overseas buyers. The tech that seems to stay here is primary sector technology..

Mike

blakamin

4431 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1306
Inactive user

#1043289 13-May-2014 22:10

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.

I'll give you Melbourne's trams... they go to more than one place. But not Adelaide's tram (singular). :)

In fact Adelaide's public transport is a joke unless you're in Glenelg (with the tram) or the northern area that has the o-bahn.
Just last week, they opened a train line that has been unavailable for 2 years... Other train lines were closed for 8-12 months.
And if I caught a bus to work, it'd take 1h45... so I don't. It's a 23 minute drive.

driller2000

936 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 374

ID Verified

#1043291 13-May-2014 22:11

re the political compass - the lack of a neutral option is deliberate and often used in surveys as it forces you to take a position and i think it is an entirely valid method at teasing out preferences

and as to the op - re greens being communist? - i thought they were taking the pi$$ - but apparently not :/

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 15