Trotter et al on Greens
September 28th, 2009 at 2:00 pm by David FarrarI was interviewed for TV3 News on Saturday about what Bradford’s departure may mean politically, along with Andrew Little, Chris Trotter and Matt McCarten.
I took the view that it was potentially beneficial to the Greens as replacing Bradford with Clendon strengthens their environmental brand and if they are smart they could get as much as 10% of the vote if they position themselves as “greening” the Government no matter if it is National or Labour.
I stressed that the Greens will always support a Labour-led Government over a National-Led Government if one is possible. But if only National can form a Government, the Greens might be able to go beyond their current co-operation agreement to an abstain on supply and confidence agreement.
I understand Matt McCarten saw the move as potentially beneficial to the Greens also, and their ability to work on both sides of the aisle so to speak.
Andrew Little saw it as good for Labour, as Labour could pick up social justice voters from the Greens. I responded that this doesn’t actually help Labour win office, just as National picking up ACT voters doesn’t. And it can actually backfire if the Greens drop below 5% (as they have done in last night’s TVNZ poll). Also I have some doubts that Goff-led Labour will be more convincing to social justice voters than the Greens.
The real benefit to Labour would be if the Greens pick up some centrist voters who were previously put off by Bradford. For that will grow the left’s vote.
Chris Trotter sees the departure of Bradford as being the death of the left as the Greens go middle class.
He’s done a follow-up post today, which has some interesting observations:
The dangers inherent in the Greens’ educative model are demonstrated in their policy on the Treaty of Waitangi. Though the signing of the Treaty, like all historical events, is the subject of multiple, and often sharply contradictory, interpretations, the Greens have adopted an unequivocal and quite inflexible interpretation of the Treaty’s meaning. So much so that when some of their own members, unconvinced by the official party line, openly questioned it’s accuracy, they were deemed ineligible to stand as Green candidates by the Party leadership.
That the dissidents’ views on the Treaty of Waitangi were actually more in tune with those of the majority of Pakeha New Zealanders was an “inconvenient truth” to be overcome by – yes, you guessed it – a taxpayer-funded traveling road-show which would take the “true” meaning of the Treaty directly to the ignorant Pakeha masses and educate them into full conformity with the Greens’ historical interpretation.
This authoritarian aspect of the Greens’ political style is nowhere more apparent than in their so-called “consensus-based decision-making” constitution. Described as a means of “seeking positions that the maximum number of people can support, rather than a simple majority”, what these rules actually make possible is the ability of a tiny minority to over-rule and/or subvert the will of the majority.
In practical terms, it allows the leadership of the party, either directly or through their surrogates, to prevent the membership from directly challenging the Green Party caucus’s political strategy and tactics. Rather than promoting the open contest of conflicting political options, it fosters the cobbling together of compromises. Also, by imposing enormous emotional pressure on dissenters, it drives opposition below the surface of party affairs – a situation which, once again, privileges those in senior positions, and makes rank-and-file challenges to official party policy extremely difficult.
That is an interesting analysis of how the much vaunted consensus system actually can favour the hierarchy.
Related posts:
- It’s only official when it is denied
- Trotter on Labour
- Trotter on New Left Party
- Trotter endorses Key for second term
September 28th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Too bad Trotter has absolutely no idea what he is talking about. Otherwise his musings might have some merit. Unlike the rest, the Green Party’s caucus is the one held to ransom by the membership. This is in stark contrast to other parties. The consensus model, far from stifling dissent, actually allows dissenting voices a formal place in the process, but it doesn’t mean the minority opinion dominates. Everyone knows where everyone stands. I have personally witnessed this process turn pre-conceived notions on their head, to the betterment of the Party.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Too bad Trotter has absolutely no idea what he is talking about.
That’s my reaction to almost everything Trotter writes. His status as a commentator and authority on left-wing politics is a perpetual mystery to me.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
He’s nuts. The Green Party fosters deabte or opinion and policy within the membership. Every branch can vote against something they don’t like if the majority of the branch want it. And as for DPF’s anaylsis of Bradfords depature I partly agree, I think it’s very sad and detremential to the Party that shes leaving BUT I think social justice voters will stay with the Greens and I think there may be more oppurtunity to pick blue-green voters from the centre or even possibly the centre-right
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Trotter is spot on as the polls indicate the green utopian bubble is rapidly deflating much to everybody’s delight. It’s so much fun watching the lefty twitters having a bitch fight. And by the way green pig trotters are good eel bait.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
So the far-left Marxists were propping the Greens up and now their posterbird Bwadford is gone they’re looking elsewhere?
If I were RAM or one of the umpteen loonie left parties I’d be looking to soak up some support.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
@tautokai.baxter re..I think there may be more oppurtunity to pick blue-green voters from the centre or even possibly the centre-right.
I can tell you catagorically that this is one “centre right” voter who will never vote for the watermelons as long as my wrinkly arse points down.
They are forever tainted by bradfords politics and the rot remains in locke, norman, delahunty etc etc.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Well luckley for the Greens not every centre-right voter is as narrow minded as you. The majority of voters look at whats offered to them at the election and what they will see is a Party dedicated to environmental protection and combating climate change aswell as retaining social justice policy.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Well put TB … I rest my case.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
The Greens have a problem. They have ruled out working with National so that leaves Labour. But Labour so far have not been willing partners and in fact see themselves competing with the Greens with the lefties core vote. Perhaps the Greens need to think about this and go middle class and focus on Green issues and work with either National or Labour.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
So you think saving our planet is a bad thing? Protecting the low income workers sustaining our economy is a bad thing? Would you rather give a bigger tax cut to high income workers? Somehow that would’nt surprise me.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
“Perhaps the Greens need to think about this and go middle class and focus on Green issues and work with either National or Labour.” -tvb
You may be right but if National continues to ignore princeples that are fundemental to most Green members then theres no way it’s going to happen. And the Greens WOULD NOT work in a government with the climate change-deniers in the ACT Party.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Thank God for that TB, the sooner your flakey party fades away the better.
Vote:I don’t vote act but am proudly a global warming denier.
September 28th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
“The majority of voters look at whats offered to them at the election and what they will see is a Party dedicated to environmental protection and combating climate change as well as retaining social justice policy.”
And here was I thinking they were a bunch of socialist “never done”s who wanted to tell me what car to buy, what food to eat, what to smoke, and how much water to use.
Colour me corrected!.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
They wouldn’t want regulation if it wasen’t so important. Why would they if global warming wasen’t so dangerous and so near already? Or are you like lofty a denier?
Vote:Do you like lofty ignore the simple science that is almost universally acknolwdged and accepted.
September 28th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
“You may be right but if National continues to ignore princeples that are fundemental..” “Well luckley for the Greens..”
“.. think it’s very sad and detremential to the Party ..”
Fine examples of what the NZ education system spits out these days. The same clueless and gullible people (on the verge of illiteracy) who join the Greens and believe the myths the Luddites propagate.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Well maybe if National gave better funding to State education and not 35 million to private education then I would be better at English.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
“universally acknowledged and accepted.”
You’re joking, right?.
and learn to type, I’m sick of correcting idiots spelling when quoting.
Are you on School Hols?, to claim National are responsible for your lack of literacy means you’re either at school now, or terminally stupid.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
ffs, tautokai you’re an idiot. A naive idiot.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Take transport for instance with the Greens. They want Aucklanders to use public transport such as rail. Well rail takes up 1% of passengers now. So we double that to 2% and only after massive investment. That is the problem in Auckland especially. Public transport that has anything close to the convenience of cars will take massive investment of a scale that we cannot afford. When the Greens start talking numbers they might get somewhere. But as usual there is no analysis, no numbers just emotion. The Greens have simply never heard of economics – the study of making do with finite resources, what trade-offs, how to use scarce valuable resources efficiently.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
“You’re joking, right?.
and learn to type, I’m sick of correcting idiots spelling when quoting.
Are you on School Hols?, to claim National are responsible for your lack of literacy means you’re either at school now, or terminally stupid.”
But obviously not sick of incorrect punctuation or grammar as your own is appalling.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
tautokai.baxter 4:20 pm,
I just love the way that bullshit rolls so easily off the tongue.
Vote:I wonder why the ‘global warmers’ now refer to IT as ‘climate change’ instead of ‘global warming’?
Heck, even I believe in climate change; just not the ‘man made’ variety.
September 28th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
It maybe possible that SB (it seems calling John Key JK is a blokesy thing so I will call Sue SB) may end up Deputy Mayor of the Auckland Super City if “my name is Brown, and this is my town) becomes Super Mayor …. hahahahahahahaha
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
I’m surprised the Melons can come to any consensus given their line up. Their caucus meetings must be something out of the twilight zone.First order of business would be deciding what to ban this week. Next, what sort of social engineering scheme can we promote. Then deciding what sort of food should, or should not we eat this week. Then I guess they probably get the unbridled pleasure of Keith Locke dribbling on incoherently. I’m picking most of their meetings would be like something out of “one flew over the cuckoo’s nest”.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Who is this taukota.baxter? The Melons need to sign this person up quick smart. TB has Melon leadership written in all his/her posts.
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
I notice how balanced the panel was 2 left wingers and complete arsehole – wonder what the interviewers leanings where?
Vote:September 28th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
I am a member of the Green Party and proud of it. And goog on you Thrash Cardiom, Leonidas is a hypocrite. I don’t really care about my typing with I see the comments you people leave, i just get angry.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 12:23 am
thats not very Zen of you tutae baxter is it? if you get all cross, perhaps you could have a glass of tepid water and a nice lie down?
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 12:56 am
Well everyone gets angry when the planets at stake, oh thats right! You think everything is hunky dory.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 7:46 am
Oh, I’m so hurt!. If my abuse of grammar is such a crime, how does comrade Philu compare?.
Please, please answer the question: How is National responsible for your poor spelling?.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 8:34 am
It’s not. I was using a hyperbole. The point I was making is that they should stop cutting community education and giving massive amounts of funding to private schools. Its ludicris.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:51 am
“..Its ludicris..”
have you heard his latest..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Just because Chris said it doesn’t make it true. I find his analysis of the Greens pretty light-weight. I wonder how many of us he actually knows. And I wonder if he has ever attended any Green Party gatherings. Frankly I find media commentators in this country in this country a pretty supercilious lot. They wouldn’t last long in Europe or the U.S.
Vote: