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.


Showing posts with label John Key. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Key. Show all posts

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:






Footnote

The four bills pulled from the ballot were:

25
Education (Restoration of Democracy to University Councils) Amendment Bill
Hon David Cunliffe
5
Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration (Preventing Name Change by Child Sex Offenders) Amendment Bill
Dr Jian Yang
27
Electricity Transparency Bill
David Shearer
37
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. 


Posted by at 6 comments
Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, April 30, 2015

PonyTailgate: My [Conflicted] View …




In the case of a prime minister what Hospitality could have chosen to do is play him back with jocularity. In good humour pull his hair – because a woman could get away with that like a man can’t (the genders are different, get over it) – or refer to his lack of hair, whatever; keep it light hearted. People are in a café to wind down and let their guards down, especially after a drink or three, 
Hospitality normally tries its hardest not to throw this back in a patron's face: bad for business.




There's a public stock being built for me in Progressivestan on the back of the above quote, alone.

This post is in the nature of a random - totally muddled, even - discourse, and putting the lie to this post ...

My blog is two thirds read out of the US and Europe, so sorry to my readers there, this post relates to New Zealand, though you may find it interesting. #Ponytailgate, for the uninitiated, involves the furore barnstorming New Zealand on our Prime Minister John Key (who runs a socialist government) tugging the ponytail of a café waitress coming up to our general election over 2014.

Take 1: my attitude to ponytailgate?

My previous post on Giovanni Tiso only concerned the free speech issues of his attack on the sponsors of Seven Sharp (with the intention of having co-anchor Mike Hosking sacked for his comment on #ponytailgate), and then the subsequent attack launched from the grey wastelands of Progressivestan on the tenets of our free press proper. Hosking’s offence which caused Tiso’s umbrage taking was immaterial.

Noting that for our entire country to be cavorting over the pulling of a waitress’s pony tail yet bears certain inferences as to how good this country is to live in – because, look at the world – one of the problems with campaigns such as Tiso’s, is that prudent people learn in short order to shut up and take their opinions underground. That is a bad thing as pertaining to living free lives, and it threatens, ultimately, the peaceful society.

That said, and I've said it before, I am not a prudent man.

I am a classical liberal feminist, but my response to #ponytailgate is somehow skewing itself to a sexist one. This partly due to my ongoing campaign against a collectivist hell threatening to be delivered on the free society via Marxist Feminism and identity politics – which I've written just this month has for some time been committed to the Orwellian task of destroying language itself – but partly due also to … well, read my tweet timeline below and decide for yourself …

Take 2: my attitude to ponytailgate?

Of course Prime Minister John Key was in the wrong, and abusing his power by pulling a waitress’s pony tail. The problem is not that he did it once (if that then my Twitter timeline comments below would be 100% correct). The problem is he supposedly did it multiple times after being asked to stop.

Take 3: my attitude to ponytailgate?

There’s a huge element of my thesis from Retrieving the Corpse of Roger Sutton from the Cross of Shesus in all this. If you want the deep view on my attitude here, and the agendas being played out – and agendas because The Daily Mud blog is involved – then you would need to read that.

You’ll note from this piece I’m a bit conflicted – this post is about honesty, (to aid those of you who will at some stage use it against me).

Take 4: my attitude to ponytailgate?

To hell with this. Following is my Tweet exchange with media commentator John Drinnan; noteworthy, please, it was late on Wednesday night, 29 April.

Outside the sexism – yes there is sexism in #ponytailgate - no one is acknowledging the reality of what it is to work in hospitality. And my real point: neither of the groups to which waitress Amanda Bailey has turned, that turgid promoter of identity politics, The Daily Mud – for my overseas readers, The Daily Blog - and now Unite Union, seems to be considering or concerned about her future.

Is my take that emerges from the below exchange sexist? In some aspects yes. Hell yes, in the context of that story. I am uncomfortable extrapolating some of my positions evident in this. But I’m not necessarily willing to let them go.

Does that make me sexist? No.

And some of this is important, so I’m just putting it up, you decide for yourself.

As with most Twitter timelines this became fragmented, so I’ll simply copy and paste in coherent chunks, then leave off with that. I realise this is rather long, but as the radfems don’t say, it’s about me, so must be interesting. And give me life’s flawed characters any day.

Remember this is Twitter: no apologies for the typos.


Timeline Fragment 1:










Timeline Fragment 2:











Timeline Fragment 3:














That!

‘But you can also decide to enter the spirit of those out to relax, that’s hospitality.’

In the case of a prime minister what Hospitality could have chosen to do is play him back with jocularity. In good humour pull his hair – because a woman could get away with that like a man can’t (the genders are different, get over it) – or refer to his lack of hair, whatever; keep it light hearted. People are in a café to wind down and let their guards down, especially after a drink or three, Hospitality normally tries its hardest not to throw this back in a patron's face: bad for business.

Much of hospitality is an attitude you choose to have, within context of the customers.



Timeline Fragment 4:







Timeline Fragment 5:





I shall definitely regret that tweet at some future date.






Pretty much it by this point. Other than a thanks to John: it’s so nice to have a grown up conversation on Twitter for once.





Posted by at 0 comments
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)