Sunday, May 19, 2019

Clive Bibby: For all the right reasons

Forgive me if l savour the moment.

Saturday's Australian Liberal Party's improbable election victory is a lesson for those who treat the common man with contempt. Yet unfortunately, l doubt that those who should learn from the experience have the capacity to do so.

On the other hand,  Prime Minister Tony Abbott, having endured one of the dirtiest battles of the  campaign fighting insurmountable odds in an unsuccessful effort to retain his own seat, showed what real character was about when he graciously accepted defeat.

He probably made the most incisive observation of the night when he stated that "there had been a political realignment!" He could not have spoken a truer word.

To political junkies like myself, the similarity between this election and the most recent US version could not have been more stark.

In both cases, the victor achieved a remarkable result against all predictions simply because they appealed to the forgotten people of the other side. Actually, that is an inept description of the voters who had been contemptuously dismissed as being of no consequence in a plan that ignored them. They are decent, intelligent, proud Australians who simply wanted a fair go! You can't be more Aussie than that.

In America, Hillary Clinton paid the price when her historically rock solid Democratic "brush belt" firewall went on mass for Trump who simply acknowledged their existence and promised to make their lives that much better then set about doing it.

Although, l'm not into predictions, my guess is that it may be generations before those betrayed, "taken for granted" voters in both countries return to their traditional roots - if they ever do! 

The Australian scene on Saturday seemed to be a re-run of the United States turn around and predictably, for the exact same reasons.

Barack Obama and Malcom Turnbull had many things in common but the striking similarity was their propensity for smooth talking on the world scene giving the appearance of being leaders of substance but when it came to the crunch, their favourite position was to be as far away from the action or the fallout of their inaction as possible.

Therein lay the seeds for the mistrust and the final evaporation of support that characterised an examination of their respective legacies. In the end they were both seen as hollow men, consumed by their own self importance and incapable of or unwilling to understand the daily battle in the lives of those expected to make the real sacrifices.

The main focus of the Labour campaign was to demonstrate a superior climate change policy - at least one that would appeal to the other delusional national and international groups who could personally afford the indulgence of their hysterical, irrational plans for mitigating the effects of often unproven theory.

In the process of implementing their plans, if they ever got the chance to do so, the burden of suffering would land squarely on those least able to survive this bizarre, unnecessary flight of fancy. 

So in the event, those who were expected to carry the can for the elite's dancing on a pin head literally told their political overlords to "piss off" and voted for the other side.

Simply really and totally understandable.

I suspect that there is also a lesson here for our own politicians if they continue on their merry way, hell bent on implementing their crazy, worthless, totally destructive zero carbon trip that will have absolutely no affect on the levels of CO2 in the planet's atmosphere.

You couldn't make this up if you were watching pre schoolers at play while waiting for inspiration.

Clive Bibby is a commentator, consultant, farmer and community leader, who lives in Tolaga Bay.


StevoC said...

Two questions, have National got the balls and brains to ride the wave? And, are Labour capable of seeing the wood through the trees, or is the agenda so set in concrete it will sink them?

Collin Bl said...

It is high time to escape the Labour/National cloak which the media always throws over our elections. Show me in the last decades how it has made any difference to us plebs choosing blue or red!
Once they gain the baubles of office all seem to bend over backwards to please the northerm hemisphere self styled masters. Time for einsteins saying - 'insanity' doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Anonymous said...

I think you'll find Trump won due to the undemocratic nature of the almost 250 year old system the americans use. As it stands America is not a democracy as the will of the majority does not apply to the Presidential election. Love her or hate her Hillary got the votes of several million more American voters than the Donald. Hardly 'on mass' for the Donald.

Anonymous said...


National Sovereignty
New Zealand is a sovereign nation state.

No international body whose officers have not been elected by regular, secret ballot of New Zealanders has any mandate to determine New Zealand’s domestic or foreign policy -- including (but not limited to) human rights, environmental policy, immigration policy, and policy with respect to minority ethnic groups or religions.

New Zealanders, through their elected representatives in the New Zealand Parliament, are the sole determinants of New Zealand’s domestic and foreign policy.

Immediate, binding public referendum on UNEXIT.

One Nation, One People
A single common language and culture, to which everyone is required to broadly subscribe, occupies the public square. This is the English language and the New Zealand culture as it has developed since 1840. With the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, by which Maori chiefs agreed that all Maori would become British subjects, the language and culture of the public square became the English language and the Western post-enlightenment culture brought by the settlers.

Minority subcultural associations -- starting with but not limited to Maori language and culture – are private matters for those who value them and have no place in the public square. No New Zealander has any claim on any other New Zealander to fund or promote a minority language or subculture.

The language of all public business is to be English only.

Street and shop signage by law to be in English only, the only exception being if a street or place has a Maori name in long-established general usage.

All prospective immigrants over the age of 10 years old, not just the principal applicant for residency, must demonstrate acceptable proficiency in English before they will be permitted to enter New Zealand.

Single Standard of Citizenship
Rights stem from New Zealand citizenship, not from membership of any group. In a free society all citizens enjoy individual equality in citizenship. This is so whether some of a citizen’s ancestors arrived in a waka in 1350, a sailing vessel in 1850, an ocean liner in 1950, or more recently by airliner. Even someone who put his hand up 30 seconds ago at a swearing-in ceremony is entitled to all the rights of citizenship. Prior arrival or ancestral longevity in the land is no basis for special privilege.

Group rights, whereby one group enjoys separate, different, or superior rights on the basis of group membership, are anathema to a free society. Group rights create two classes of citizenship where only one existed before. They require the intervention of an activist government forcibly taking rights from one group to bestow upon another. As Richard Prebble reminds us: “One group’s positive discrimination is another group’s negative discrimination.”

If New Zealanders can’t do it in your country, non-citizens or naturalised citizens don’t get to do it in ours. For example:

If we can’t start a business in your country of origin without a local majority-equity partner, you don’t get to start a business in ours without a local majority-equity partner.

If we can’t freely move to your country of origin and become a citizen, you don’t get to move to ours and become a citizen.

If we can’t buy freehold property in your country of origin, you don’t get to buy freehold property in ours.

If we can’t buy land, erect a church, and freely preach Christianity in your country of origin; you don’t get to buy land, erect a mosque, and preach Islam in ours, even if you are a naturalised citizen.

Anonymous said...

Immigration Policy
Immigration policy is for the benefit of those who already live in a country, not for the benefit of anyone who might want to come and live there.

We take immigrants with skills that add value for New Zealanders. Immigrants who will hit the ground running, not swell welfare rolls. Preference will be given to applicants whose culture is a good fit with New Zealand’s existing Judeo-Christian, post-Enlightenment culture. This means Europeans, South Africans, North Americans, South Americans, Commonwealth Africans and Indians, skills-qualified Pacific Islanders, Filipinos.

We no longer accept immigrants or refugees from Islamic states. The evidence of other jurisdictions, 30 years further down this path than New Zealand, is way too compelling. Muslims will never integrate, because their religion tells them not to. The rest of the world has seen that wherever Muslims achieve critical mass, they self-segregate and start flexing their religious muscles to the detriment of the host community and culture.

We no longer accept immigrants from Communist countries, as there is an unacceptable risk that they remain loyal to advancing the strategic interests of a foreign power.

We no longer take refugees, most of whom statistically never become productive citizens. There are already enough homegrown bums, bludgers, and moochers without needing to import more.

Anyone arriving in New Zealand without a passport shall be immediately removed to country of origin by the airline that brought them in, with all removal costs the responsibility of the airline concerned.

Any naturalised citizen or permanent resident convicted of acts of terrorism in New Zealand or abroad, or of acts of sedition, espionage, or industrial espionage for the benefit of a foreign power, shall have their citizenship or permanent residency revoked, and shall be immediately deported to country of origin.

If a naturalised citizen or permanent resident is convicted of involvement in acts of terrorism in New Zealand or abroad, or of involvement in acts of sedition, espionage or industrial espionage for the benefit of a foreign power, all family members of such an individual shall have their citizenship or permanent residency revoked, and shall be immediately deported to country of origin.

Any naturalised citizen or permanent resident convicted of a crime carrying a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment or more shall have their citizenship or permanent residency revoked, and shall be immediately deported to country of origin upon the expiration of any custodial sentence imposed by the New Zealand courts.

If any naturalised citizen or permanent resident is convicted of a crime carrying a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment or more, all family members of such an individual shall have their citizenship or permanent residency revoked, and shall be immediately deported to country of origin.

Anonymous said...

We no longer take “family reunification” migrants unless their naturalised citizen sponsors agree to accept full, permanent responsibility for their upkeep. This means such additional migrants have no claim on New Zealand taxpayers for healthcare, welfare, or superannuation, even if they become naturalised, unless they have worked full-time in New Zealand for an aggregate period of 10 years or more.

If guest workers are needed, they come on fixed-term 12-month guest worker contracts. These can be rolled over for up to 60 months. Upon final expiration of any such contract, guest workers must revert to country of origin. A rolled-over contract or New Zealand-born children confer no ongoing rights of residency or citizenship. For a guest worker to achieve permanent residency, they and any non-citizen family members must leave the country, then apply through the usual channels.

Babies born in New Zealand to one or more non-citizen parents do not achieve New Zealand citizenship by having been born here. They are citizens by birth of their non-citizen parent(s) country of citizenship.

Babies born in New Zealand to one or more permanent resident parents do not achieve New Zealand citizenship until their permanent resident parent(s) become naturalised citizens.

Non-citizens and non-permanent residents do not receive taxpayer-funded treatment within the New Zealand health system. They must carry their own health insurance, meet their own medical costs, or solicit crowd-funding from liberal bleeding hearts in the event of illness or injury.

Natural-Born Citizens
Only natural-born New Zealand citizens are eligible to run for public office, or to work in government departments. There is an unacceptable level of risk that those born in foreign countries may remain loyal to political ideologies or hold religious beliefs that threaten the rights and freedoms of New Zealanders.

Freedom of Speech
There is no such thing as a right not to be offended.

All other freedoms flow from freedom of speech, the freedom to challenge being the best prophylactic against tyranny. The assault on freedom of speech -- the mob shouting-down of dissenting opinions, the labelling and demonisation of those challenging received dogma and leftist orthodoxy -- began in the universities, spreading out from there into the public square.

The Education Act designated New Zealand’s universities: “The critic and conscience of society.” This opened the door for leftists to mount an essentially destructive attack on our existing society, by taking over the Academy, then using it as a beachhead for their “long march through the institutions.”

Rhetorical question time: “How many ACT or National voters would you expect to find in a university sociology department? And if a known ACT or National voter did apply, do you think they’d be accepted?”

Leftists must be removed as the gatekeepers to how we talk about our society. The Education Act is to be re-written, requiring universities to provide balanced coverage of all sides of contentious issues, including conservative and libertarian viewpoints. As an intellectual counterweight to the Marxists and liberals which they are currently riddled, universities must be required to employ equal numbers of conservative and libertarian professors, teaching staff, and tutors.

Mervyn said...

Recently I asked Simon Bridges if it might be better for NZ to spend its resources to prepare against the effects of the 99.8% CO2 emitters lest they do little or nothing than our .02%. The answer could have come from Dickens's Office of Circumlocution. I gathered we destined for moral greatness in leading the world as carbon neutral and a Parliamentary Commision be formed to take this great enterprise out of politics. I suggested we get an overseas expert as commissioner with Alexandria Ocasio Cortez as prime candidate for the position. We erks don't need to worry Clive, it's sorted.

mike said...

Good on ya Clive for saying it as it is. If only our political folks both in power and voters could just understand it. Maybe they will see the light by the next election.
While Jacinda appears to be chasing the young vote, has she forgotten who the biggest block of voter actually are?