Blog description.

Accentuating the Liberal in Classical Liberal: Advocating Ascendency of the Individual & a Politick & Literature to Fight the Rise & Rise of the Tax Surveillance State. 'Illigitum non carborundum'.

Liberty and freedom are two proud words that have been executed from the political lexicon: they were frog marched and stood before a wall of blank minds, then forcibly blindfolded, and shot, with the whimpering staccato of ‘equality’ and ‘fairness’ resounding over and over. And not only did this atrocity go unreported by journalists in the mainstream media, they were in the firing squad.

The premise of this blog is simple: the Soviets thought they had equality, and welfare from cradle to grave, until the illusory free lunch of redistribution took its inevitable course, and cost them everything they had. First to go was their privacy, after that their freedom, then on being ground down to an equality of poverty only, for many of them their lives as they tried to escape a life behind the Iron Curtain. In the state-enforced common good, was found only slavery to the prison of each other's mind; instead of the caring state, they had imposed the surveillance state to keep them in line. So why are we accumulating a national debt to build the slave state again in the West? Where is the contrarian, uncomfortable literature to put the state experiment finally to rest?

Comments Policy: I'm not moderating comments, so keep it sane and go away with the spam. Government officials please read disclaimer at bottom of page.

Thursday, October 15, 2015

Why Not Labour Make This Compassionate Gesture for Euthanasia Law?

What a dysfunctional democracy we have where our individual rights are abrogated in Parliament, not protected, by a dufferish old coiffed codgerati scared witless of a fairy tale God.

Unfortunately David Seymour’s private member bill to legislate euthanasia in New Zealand didn’t get pulled from the lottery of the ballot today. I think it’s crazy something so important is left to a lottery, but this is authoritarian democracy. So given we’ll never see such a basic right from the National Government, I’m calling for a grand gesture from the ballot winners.

For those who would say this isn’t how Parliament works, I say this is death and pain we’re dealing with - what is more important than the humanity existing in those two issues. And on these primal matters, on protecting rights to our bodies and our health outcomes, then thanks to the cruel historical Catholicism working like a virus in the National Party, Parliament obviously doesn’t work.

For David Stephens, for Helen Kelly, for all those who would avail themselves of a death with dignity in this century:


The four bills pulled from the ballot were:

Education (Restoration of Democracy to University Councils) Amendment Bill
Hon David Cunliffe
Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration (Preventing Name Change by Child Sex Offenders) Amendment Bill
Dr Jian Yang
Electricity Transparency Bill
David Shearer
Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)
Andrew Little

So I’m calling on Messrs. Cunliffe, Yang, Shearer and Little: seriously, none of your bills is more important than the suffering, now, of a single individual, either dying with terminal disease, or in chronic pain (ie, we need medicinal cannabis as alternative to those for whom morphine doesn’t work).

Which one of you will stand aside and allow the only bill of any consequence currently in Parliament that needs to be debated, and is long overdue? (I realise Seymour's bill doesn't cover cannabis oil, but for those whom morphine doesn't work, then given Minister Dunne doesn't think we're grown up enough to have (big indrawn breath) cannabis oil, at least for them there would be the choice of euthanasia. What a dysfunctional democracy we have where our individual rights are abrogated in Parliament, not protected, by a dufferish old coiffed codgerati scared witless of a fairy tale God. 


  1. Calm down and take a breath - you are starting to sound like a leftie march past. Its coming shortly because public opinion now demands it and in a democracy public opinion (disguised as apathy on occasion) drives everything. A conscience vote will see it piss in.


    1. My point is those dying now don't have the luxury of time. On current terms this is still looking unlikely over next ten years.

      And on issues such as this, 3:16, you will, of course, always be wrong. ;)

  2. ... always wrong... Sounds like a wife talking. Its not 10 years away so the ill just need to hang on a bit longer so they can die later but in the acceptable manner.

    I'm not against this as I think you should be able to top yourself anytime you like. Been there and nearly done that. Just don't ask me to assist you do it - not everyone is cut out for that type of job. What's "wrong" is yet to be decided and it is a moving target.

    I'd be into cannabis oil as well if it helped - I'm not much for rules about how I treat myself but see no need to flout the law by bragging that I flout the law. Harmless as a dove, cunning as a snake etc...


    1. Mmm. The reason to legalise is so 1) you can die with loved ones in a planned way, b) you can die painlessly and non-violently (as opposed to the awful methods people tend to use for suicide, namely plastic bag over the head - never understood those who use that one (must be desperate) - and shooting yourself.

  3. Of course, it sounds lovely and I'm sure the law will be wonderful, simple and not lead to death for the depressed or lonely who could be happy if someone gave a shit.

    I'd vote for it, despite my concerns, because you should have your wishes in such personal things that cannot physically hurt others. I'm not sure I could watch an assisted suicide though - it seems a bit ghoulish.

    I'm a jumper actually. In the end a son's love kept the wolf from the door. He has no idea what a difference he made or even that he did anything special but I'm in his debt forever.