“You cannot rewrite history AG, Douglas is one man who has earned his knighthood, he and one or two other brave souls took the tough decisions that saved this irrelevant little nation from bankruptcy and forged the economic conditions that enabled Labour to squander the best economy in living memory.”

I agree that Rog. D. et al have reconfigured NZ’s economic environment. Some of this was good, some wasn’t, and the methods used were dubious (in terms of their democratic mandate). Nevertheless, irrespective of the merits of Rog. D.’s actions, I think that the great majority of NZers remember that process and his role in it with distaste, and have no wish to revisit it. There may well be a degree of cognitive dissonance in that fact, but welcome to the world of political reality. Or, to give it a biblical tone, a prophet is without honour in his own country.

You want to know the quickest way to get Labour back in 2011? Put Rog. D. in cabinet. Seriously …

Yes same one…..I am a Libertarian whos no longer a member of Libz…..there are many of us out there…Lindsay Mitchell is one….Rick Giles another….and for the same reason….the cult of Perigo sickened us so we moved on. I remember when Libz got 6,ooo votes and the only way was up….sadly the rot set in and now they get less votes than some really odd little parties do.

Im still a fan of Rands Objectivism but not the purist way its used by the Libz cult to beat people over the head who are not “quite pure enough:

I still argue on the same principles but not as a Libz man…..Im in ACT and haven’t really got another option.

Are you the same Libertarian James that usually posts here?? The new charm offensive is really putting me off balance.

Without a concrete philosophy ACT will die off…..the reason Douglas’s remedy was eventually rejected by the people was they never got the people onside by changing minds and turning on the light in their minds….and for that you need principles to base yourself on.Early ACT disregared that and have struggled ever since to remain afloat.

Yes Libz the party are arseholes….but the ideas are eternal and right….and ACT can’t disregard them without consequence.

Too bad most didn’t understand at the time the damage Lange’s “cup of tea” did. Too bad most didn’t realise at the time, the effects of the failure to carry through the reforms during the Bolger years, notwithstanding Ruth’s and Don’s combined attempts.

Idiocy, fantasy and hatred for one’s fellow traveler are evident when assessing the disdain of the politicians of the 80’s/90’s in preventing those attempts to restart what was in its day a world-leading reform program. If only it had been finished, if only it had been re-started when the opportunity was rife. If only it had been, NZ would be riding an unbelievable wave of national pride, optimism, satisfaction and security in 2009.

Instead, we contemplate the burning remnants of Liabore’s envy, self-interest, ignorance and ideology as the dashed legacy of an ideal that once held so much promise hope and freedom. It’s not too late, but it will take steely resolve to carry it through, and I don’t think Mr Pragmatic has it in him, neither spiritually nor intellectually.

Says who?, those same voters should pray at the alter of Rogernomics every day of their miserable lives.

You cannot rewrite history AG, Douglas is one man who has earned his knighthood, he and one or two other brave souls took the tough decisions that saved this irrelevant little nation from bankruptcy and forged the economic conditions that enabled Labour to squander the best economy in living memory.

You seem to overlook the fact that while the left like to demonise Sir Roger the voters of NZ elected him for a second term, they sure as hell did not vote for Lange the second time around.
Sir Roger is a once in a lifetime gift and it annoys the hell out of me to see selfish politicians ignore his skills for political reasons.

No matter how hard the left try they cannot take away the fact that he is the architect of the recent golden run and the reason this nation is still grimly able to hold onto first world status despite the best efforts of Cullen and Clark.

Or not. Alternatively, Rog D. might once again be reduced to prowling these message threads, seeking a modicum of the attention he get find elsewhere (a bit like Trev M.) Must be hard when you’ve been a minister of the Crown, with your every word being law to a bevy of public servants, to then suddenly be a back-bench irrelevance (and even worse, the poster-boy for an era that, frankly, very few voters care to remember).

Rodney has changed, he has become soft on most issues (Winston Peters aside) and I get the horrible feeling he used Sir Roger simply to get himself returned to Parliament.
Rodney did not fight hard enough to get Sir Roger around the cabinet table, he (like Peters) caved in at the first sight of a Ministerial BMW and the baubles of office.

Sir Roger is not a young man, it is bloody criminal to have him in the house and not use his considerable talents, I hope that Sir Roger produces another of his alternative budgets soon, this at least will get the public asking questions of Key and that idiot English. If Rodney does not make use of Sir Roger I fear he may well find he has better things to do with his remaining years, we simply cannot let him go to waste as a back bencher, it is time for Rodney to rediscover his old self or piss off and let Sir Roger run the show.

Since then they’ve been taken over by Ayn Rand religionists who spend most of their time debating doctrine amongst themselves instead of planning strategies that will see them become an electoral force.

Fucking about with queers and drugs when there are so many more tangible and relevant issues they could be focused on.

One has to jump through more hoops than a circus pony to understand where they’re coming from. Fuck that. Too complex for me and too complex for most people I’d guess, and that’s the reason their support has plunged to about a quarter of what it was when Perigo first started promoting them.

Get rid of the religionists. Get down to earth. Get funding. Get electoral strength. Get power.

Or fuck off.

(Any other party leaders would have resigned in shame after such pathetic non-performance.)

How much voluntary funding do they attract???

What percentage of the votes did they win???

There’s your answer.

Just what sort of party should ACT be if its no longer Libertarian in its priciples Red……another control freak one? Don’t we have enough of those now?Its the non libs in ACT that should consider fucking off to somewhere that suits them better….its they who are misplaced.

Why the fuck are we talking about what the Libertarians want?? ACT is a separate party. The Libertarians have their own party.

I say to the so called Libertarians who want to shape ACT policy- please fuck off. Make your own way in politics. What ACT do is nothing to do with the damn incessantly whining whinging small minded dipshits calling themselves Libertarians.

Here’s a message Libs.

Shut the fuck up about ACT. Get your own party elected.

Its that simple.

There are some that talk about freedom but really mean free trade between companies, countries and of people but when it comes to true freedom of the individual they recoil. The idea of a company hiring and firing at will because that is their right seems acceptable as is the idea that an unemployed man is responsible for his situation.

Introduce real ideas of freedom though and these free-marketers leap back virtually to the bible which makes me wonder if they truly believe in freedom or dream of a different time.

The freedom of the individual is the most powerful idea that exists because it can destroy most other ideas we have. If an individual is truly free states could not exist and religions would become powerless.

Most people who talk about freedom really mean a longer chain.

Then you are not wanted Murray… The drive to legalise is perfectly consistent with ACT’s liberal principles…any other position would contradict them.Freedom choice and personal responsibility….got a problem with that?

“Notice how Nandor in his last few terms went strangely silent on the cannabus legalisation issue. The reason, liberalisation of yet more harmful substances is not popular with a large % of the population.”

Thats because they haven’t thought about it nor the consequences.Its the same reason Labour gets voted in …people are ignorant of reality.If they realised how much more threatened their kids are now in a prohibited enviroment from drug crime than they would be in a liberalised enviroment they would end prohobition over night.

“It’s bad enough with the legal ones we have now. I really like the people in ACT although I find Lindsay Mitchell’s attitude to liberalisation strange. On one hand she promotes a toughening up on welfare and on the other thinks what people choose to put in thier own bodies is their own business.”

Whats strange…? Thats perfectly consistent and not in conflict.State Welfare requires stealing other peoples money to fund it…that violates the rights of the ones stolen from.Drug use does not….its a consentual use of ones own most personal property, ones body, as one chooses…thats the crux of Liberalism.Lindsay understands this …you don’t.

“From my experience nothing leads to paracitism quicker than the abuse/addiction of substances, legal or otherwise. Peoples actions impact on others, no man is an island.”

And no man is a collective….all humans are individuals with their own thinking minds…that requires freedom and private property rights to realise fully.Liberalism realises that man has the right to be wrong…and make poor choices for himself with whats his.

“MikeE & James – “yer dreamin” If you think the crims who make a living out of drugs now will resort to legitimate employment once drugs are legalised, you are absolutely and totally wrong.”

I never said they would…but they would be denied from making huge fortunes and harming so many others as they do now.You do realise that most of the harm,carnage and death that are associated with drugs is due to the attempt to prohibit them…not the drugs themselves or use and supply of them between consenting adults?Go have a look at Mexico sometime to see what a wonderful place that is with the war on drugs.

“These people are criminals, now and quite probably forever. Any crime will do as long as it pays.

“As long as it pays”…exactly! Prohibition pays out to dealers big time…Drug use and consentual supply is not criminal….there is no external victim having their rights violated.They are vices….activities that may be self harming and irrational for a living being to engage in but they ARE NOT crimes…actions which violate the rights of unconsenting others.That is the difference.Trying to restrict vices is criminal itself…its a violation of human rights.

Yes a lot of other dominos will have to fall at the same time drugs are legalised but they should anyway…they are State monopolies funded by taxation that should be swept away and a free market put it their place…

Does this include situations like the mandatory wearing of seatbelts – that is, legal power that prevents private citizens from going about their business (travelling unresrained in their own vehicle?

Who’s been banned outside of the procedures?