Norman v Muldoon

June 9th, 2013 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

writes in the HoS:

Norman was safe and secure in launching a personal attack on Key. It is Key’s style and strategy not to fire back. But Muldoon would not have sat quietly by. Muldoon would have eaten him up and spat him out.

Muldoon also would never have shared his leadership as Norman does. He wasn’t a touchy-feely, let’s-sit-around-the-table-holding-hands sort of guy. He was leader and that was that. Muldoon would never have tolerated a co-leader.

And then there was Norman crying, “Give me back my flag. Give me back my flag.” That was when he was attempting to stick the Tibetan flag in the face of Chinese Vice-President Xi Jinping. Muldoon would never have done that. He was polite and respectful to our guests, whatever he thought of their domestic politics.

And if Muldoon did get into a scuffle, he would not have come out second. Once a rowdy group of young protesters shouting “Heil Hitler” attacked Muldoon as he was leaving a meeting. They hit him in the face, kicked his leg and shoved him against his car.

The then Leader of the Opposition decked one and chased the others down the street shouting, “One at a time and you’re welcome”.

Heh. An iconic moment.

Norman is Australian. Muldoon was a New Zealander through and through. In comparing Key to Muldoon, Norman gave us a very sharp reminder that he’s a very recent arrival. No one who lived in New Zealand would ever think Key was in any way a Muldoon. The comparison is bizarre.

Russel has been whining that it is wrong to say he can’t write about Muldoon as he wasn’t in NZ then, saying that means no one could write about Peter Fraser who wasn’t alive in the 1940s.

He misses the point that no one who actually lived in NZ when Muldoon was PM, would compare him to John Key without bursting into a fit of laughter at the ridiculousness of the comparison.

Norman has a PhD in political science. For Muldoon there were two types of doctors: the ones who made you well, and the ones who made you sick. He would have had a very clear view of what sort of doctor Norman was.

Muldoon fought fascism and totalitarianism in World War II. Norman was for several years active in the Marxist-Leninist Democratic Socialist Party.

They are two very different men. Muldoon was popular. His majority in his electorate was unassailable. The best Norman has done is come third.

They are men of different eras. Muldoon was minister of finance the year Norman was born.

But in other ways they aren’t so different.

Muldoon’s policies were to control the economy, fix prices, set the exchange rate, invest in hare-brained schemes, and print money to pay for it all.

He all but bankrupted the country.

In this regard, Muldoon and Norman are peas in a pod.

Matthew Hooton goes down this road also in the NBR:

Sir Robert left office in 1984, roughly when Dr Norman left high school.  At that time, he tells us, he was busy opposing Australia’s “new right” Hawke/Keating government, elected in March 1983, and “peace rallies, anti-nuclear demonstrations and animal rights activism soon became a large part of extra-curricular high school life.”

It is fantastic that the adolescent Dr Norman had time left over to follow developments across the Tasman, including Sir Robert publicly issuing enemies’ lists, banning unfriendly journalists from his press conferences, personally directing monetary policy, ramming through the Clutha Development (Clyde Dam) Empowering Act 1982, abusing young backbenchers in drunken rages, lying about the country’s fiscal position, provoking a foreign exchange crisis, refusing to follow the instructions of the incoming government and having to be bullied into doing so by his outgoing cabinet.

And on the policy front:

The irony of Dr Norman’s preposterous comparison of Mr Key to Sir Robert is that the party in today’s parliament with an economic programme most similar to Muldoon’s is the Greens.

It is the Greens who advocate greater control of the currency, extra monetary tools and more aggressive interventions by the Reserve Bank.  They are the only main party comfortable with Muldoon-style import substitution and against free trade.  How green were Muldoon’s carless days, designed to reduce reliance on oil?  How stimulatory were his deficits? 

More topically, Sir Robert exercised direct state control of the electricity sector including the state directing what new electricity generation would be built and where.  What else is Labour/Green’s NZ Power?

Instead of an across-the-board GST, Sir Robert favoured lower sales taxes on things he considered good and higher taxes on things he considered bad.

With their promised new “suite of ecological taxes,” the Greens promise the same.

This could be a good question for the Greens. How many of Sir Robert’s economic policies do they disagree with today? Any?

Tags: , , ,

67 Responses to “Norman v Muldoon”

  1. hj (7,023 comments) says:

    One thing about Muldoon he was a Kiwi, he didn’t prattle on about xenophobia and claims of “all ships rise” when elites trade resources with elites across the globe.
    Norman appears to sympathise with that view; too many people are seeing a lower quality of life in the glorious urban crush that is Auckland and unaffordable housing as we bend over so foreigners can sodomise us.
    Compare Muldoons batch to Keys (Success Way Omaha)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Longknives (4,753 comments) says:

    “And if Muldoon did get into a scuffle, he would not have come out second. Once a rowdy group of young protesters shouting “Heil Hitler” attacked Muldoon as he was leaving a meeting. They hit him in the face, kicked his leg and shoved him against his car.
    The then Leader of the Opposition decked one and chased the others down the street shouting, “One at a time and you’re welcome”.

    Fantastic! Muldoon you bloody legend!
    Beats the hell out of wailing with a girly lisp “Give me my fwag back…Give me my fwag back”

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Yeh forgot about that. He was a hard bastard but went on to become a danger to NZ.

    The odd thing about him was that his hobby was growing lillies or something.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. hj (7,023 comments) says:

    Viking2 (9,557) Says:
    June 9th, 2013 at 10:21 am
    Yeh forgot about that. He was a hard bastard but went on to become a danger to NZ.
    ………
    Think Big doesn’t appear to have been such a bad investment (just bad timing). In going too far down the wrong road he gave the right a leg to go too far down the other.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    ‘Muldoon fought fascism and totalitarianism in World War II. Norman was for several years active in the Marxist-Leninist Democratic Socialist Party.’
    Is it too trite to point out on which side the Marxist-Leninist were during that war?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. duggledog (1,558 comments) says:

    It’s one thing to abuse the PM of our country – or the country itself – but kiwis don’t like it being done by someone who has only just got here. Especially an Australian!

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. duggledog (1,558 comments) says:

    That’s right Viking he loved growing flowers, like Churchill enjoyed nothing more than… laying a few courses of bricks!

    Muldoon used to retire to his bach at Hatfield’s Beach and drink beer from a crate and listen to the cricket and not do the lawns

    John Key debate Russel Norman NOW!!

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Komata (1,191 comments) says:

    As I have said before, Rob Muldoon considered himself a ‘Kiwi Bloke’ first and foremost, something that wed wussell can never, ever be. and as such Rob’s actions were for the good of ALL NZ’ers in his view at least). Misguided perhaps his ideas may have been in Muldoon’s later years (as age and position took their toll) , but the motivation was still the same, This is of course, something that wussell will never be able to truthfully say – but then when did the gweens ever let truth get in the way of their ‘reality’?

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. David Garrett (7,289 comments) says:

    Russel “call me bluey” Norman has, in comparing John Key to the late Robert Muldoon, done a great deal more than make a complete fool of himself, and show that his party can be as nasty as the rest when the scent of power wafts across his nostrils. Robert Muldoon was a dictatorial bully who did outrageous things to our democracy; little things like banning journos he didn’t like from his press conferences, and much bigger ones like tearing the country apart for cyncial political gain in 1981. Norman didn’t move here from his native Australia until five years after Muldoon was dead, and almost ten years after he had wielded any power. And it shows. Love him or loathe him – and many had done both by the end of his life – Muldoon was a political giant. Norman is a clown.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Longknives (4,753 comments) says:

    “The odd thing about him was that his hobby was growing lillies or something.”

    Like Mike Tyson breeding and racing his beloved Pigeons..

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    Norman had to go on Frogblog yesterday to defend himself from all those nasty Righties who have been slagging him off. But he doesn’t yet seem to have noticed that he’s getting plenty of grief from the Left as well, most recently No Right Turn (who calls for him to resign) and Bryce Edwards:

    http://keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz/2013/06/friendly-fire.html

    Norman has done enormous damage to the Greens’ “principles before politics” brand.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    KS. Great, and can he do a lot more please. :lol:

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Liberal Minded Kiwi (1,571 comments) says:

    mikenmild – the Marxist-Leninists were supporting regimes back then that eliminated elections, brought starvation upon its populations and left economies in tatters. Not a very savoury lot at all. And you wonder, how many rich free nations freely voted in Marxist Leninist governments…

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Just pointing out an obvious flaw in Hide’s analogy – New Zealand obviously did not go to war to defeat totalitarianism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. tvb (4,422 comments) says:

    Churchill’s main hobby was painting actually not laying a few bricks. Norman is a whining snivelling control freak. Now they are taking steps to restrict debate within the Green Party. This is all in character for a centralising control freak.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    I thought Churchill’s main hobby was drinking…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Rightandleft (663 comments) says:

    I agree with 90% of what Hooton and Hide have to say here. Norman’s economic policies are frighteningly similar to the Muldoonist ones which nearly destroyed the country. Norman does seem shockingly ignorant of history to have compared Muldoon to Key when they are so obviously different. His whole speech seemed absolutely absurd.

    However I don’t like to see the attacks on Norman being Aussie-born and therefore not a New Zealander, or being a recent arrival. He’s been in this country for 16 years, hardly a recent arrival. New Zealand needs immigrants who are willing to accept NZ culture and fit themselves into it. For that to happen Kiwis have to also accept that immigrants can become New Zealanders. We are after all a nation of immigrants. To say an immigrant from Australia can never be a Kiwi, or can never comment on NZ politics or its history because they are foreign-born, is to invite the creation of a hostile immigrant class that feels alienated and makes no attempt to fit into the culture, embracing the European concept of multiculturalism instead. We don’t want to go the way of Germany and France when it comes to immigration.

    Norman should be attacked for his ignorance of history the same way any native-born Kiwi under 40 would be. No one under 30 could recall Muldoon’s time in power and those in their 30s now were just little kids, very few of which would have been politically aware at age 7 or 8. Norman is right in his comparison to being banned from speaking about Peter Fraser if you weren’t alive then. The response should have been that you shouldn’t speak about Fraser or Muldoon if you don’t know a bloody thing about them. On the other hand their are plenty of us too young to have known either of them (I was born after Muldoon left office so it wouldn’t have mattered whether I was born in NZ or not, I wouldn’t recall him) but who have studied NZ history and know all about what their policies and leadership style were like.

    Norman has done a disservice to immigrants in this country by making his wild speech without proper awareness of Muldoon’s history. But the attacks on that speech need to focus on his ignorance, not his national origin.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. wat dabney (3,769 comments) says:

    mikenmild,

    Is it too trite to point out on which side the Marxist-Leninist were during that war?

    Which phase of the war would that be? The part where the Marxist-Leninists colluded with Hitler in 1939, supplying them with vast quantities of war material, doing all they could to weaken opposition to Hitler in the West and actively promoting the moral and military collapse of France; culminating in the joint invasion of Poland complete with atrocities and massacres (and not forgetting the murderous invasion and occupation of the Baltic states at the same time; which would never have been attempted without the pact with Hitler)?

    Is that what you’re referring to, mm? Are you reminding us of Norman’s admiration for this barbaric creed?

    And are you telling us that you share his views?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Redbaiter (8,923 comments) says:

    ” New Zealand obviously did not go to war to defeat totalitarianism.”

    Yes they did, they just didn’t finish the job. Reagan and the US finished it a few decades later when your evil empire fell in economic and social ruin.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    My only intent was to point out the foolishness of Hide’s comment. If New Zealanders went to war to fight totalitarianism then they were unsuccessful.
    New Zealand went to war to support Britain (‘where she goes, we go’), while Britain went to war to prevent German domination of Europe.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Left Right and Centre (2,979 comments) says:

    Two points:

    1) Am I wrong, or would the comparison comments come from the party think-tank as a political strategy (a group made up of mostly NZders) and sold to the public by the party co-leader front desk receptionists? Were they his idea alone? And didn’t I hear Metiria Turei trotting out the same well-rehearsed and poorly delivered lines on Q&A? (or one of those programmes). Point being… she’s a NZder. So.. when she’s going on about Muldoon-Key… not a problem. Because Norman came from Australia…. that makes all the difference? Forget the merits of his rhetoric… he came from Australia… and…??

    2) I started going into point 2) during point 1). If someone comes to NZ in 1997 and they’re still here in 2013… well.. that’s 16 fuckin years mate any way you slice it. NZ… the land of immigration… no-one in Auckland was born in the country… wave after wave of people coming in from somewhere most decades… hell, all the whiteys just decided to show up and take over… and Norman is just another same lingo speaking whitey. Even the accent is close. It’s closer than any other accent bar a kiwi accent.

    I’d say 16 years residency etc shows enough of a commitment to drop the outsider tag. Unlike a lot of ockers… he knows who the fuck Muldoon is. ‘Didn’t he play for Wests in the 60s?’. Nah… NZ prime minister mate. Culturally I’d guess he’s become very kiwi. I’ll bet some of his best friends are NZders… hahaha. I reckon he qualifies as having an appropriate level of sentimental loyalty and patriotism to NZ… the same as the native born. It’s not possible for him to be 100% kiwi but someone that chooses to be one… shouldn’t that count for something?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    i fuckin love it when stunts backfire on norman.

    “gimme back my fwag” being the classic example. he tried to show how hip he was, how he cant be bought, how he stands up for his beliefs etc. but the reality was he ended up looking like a snivelling little bitch boy.

    the latest attack is a god send. just when those freakshows were gaining traction.

    i wouldnt say norman can never be a kiwi bloke because hes only been here 16 years. lots of immigrants turn into kiwi blokes/ good bastards. norman would be an outsider no matter where he was. he will always be part of the alternative, weak, nancy boy crowd.

    the greens should put him in an all blacks jersey and have him sit in the terraces at eden park. that would also be hilarious.

    to sum up, norman will never pass the “yeah id have a beer with him” test.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Than (473 comments) says:

    The contradictory morality of some left-wing commentators and politicians on this issue is amazing.

    Russell Norman goes from denouncing the GCSB bill as an oppressive breech of personal privacy in one breath, then with the next he demands the police breech Peter Dunne’s privacy in exactly the same manner. Idiot/Savant likewise denounces the GCSB bill, but apparently if you call it a leak then breeching somebody’s privacy is not only allowed but heroic.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. David Garrett (7,289 comments) says:

    Mikey: Churchill was certainly a pisshead – probably an alcoholic. But what a man.

    My favourite anecdote about his drinking is from the 1930’s, when he was out of power, out of favour, and broke. His wife said that economies must be made. After much grumping and harrumphing, Churchill said that he thought he could make do on three bottles of Pol Roger a day.

    Russel Norman wouldn’t have been trusted or capable enough to take out the empties.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    GD
    There’s no doubt he was great drinker and a great man, for all his faults. My favourite story is of Churchill being told by Lady Astor “You are drunk”, and the reply. “And you are ugly, but I shall be sober in the morning”. Probably apocryphal, but still a great line.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. maxwell (55 comments) says:

    I can’t imagine Muldoon knighting an ex Labour Minister of Finance, whose parting shot was
    “I’ve spent the lot, the cupboards empty” and whose party had abolished knighthoods.

    I don’t think Muldoon would have been “relaxed” about the Greens vandalising their election hoardings.

    FWIW, I thought Muldoon was an utter c**t, and marched on many protests against him and his party,
    but at least you knew where he stood on any issue. Not like watermelon Norman or whatever works Key
    (‘interest free loans are unsustainable but we’re keeping them because we’ll lose too many votes”).

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. F E Smith (3,305 comments) says:

    Russel has been whining that it is wrong to say he can’t write about Muldoon as he wasn’t in NZ then, saying that means no one could write about Peter Fraser who wasn’t alive in the 1940s.

    Well, that is what the left often argue; your opinion on something cannot be valid unless you have lived/experienced it.  

    It just doesn’t apply to them!

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    F E Smith’s modus operandi:
    Finds something he disgrees with; attributes it to ‘the left’.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. David Garrett (7,289 comments) says:

    Mikey: No, that story about Lady Astor is apparently true….as is another of their clashes.

    Lady Astor: Winston, if you were my husband I would put poison in your tea.

    Churchill: Madam, if I were your husband, I would drink it.

    Somewhat more memorable that “Gimme my flag back…” innit.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Dean Papa (784 comments) says:

    If Rusty is a Kiwi citizen then he is a Kiwi, just like MJS was. End of story. Rodney ‘Perk-buster’ Hide has zero credibility anyway, he’s just one more of these dime-a-dozen troughing hypocrites.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    DG
    I did a little web research and it appears both those stories are a bit dubious. The poison in the tea one was also attributed to Lloyd George. The ‘ugly’ one is most commonly attributed to Churchill talking to Bessie Braddock, a noted Labour MP and battleaxe, but is probably also made up. Still, Churchill has more than enough genuine quotes.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Dean Papa (784 comments) says:

    “An iconic moment”

    really, I’ve never even heard that story before, is it true?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    @mm Is it too trite to point out on which side the Marxist-Leninist were during that war?

    yes because they were being executed flat out by the Stalinists

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Indeed PEB. I was reminded of another (genuine) Churchil quote: ‘if Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons’.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. wat dabney (3,769 comments) says:

    they were being executed flat out by the Stalinists

    And it’s wrong to blame the Nazis for anything, because they were being executed by “Hitlerists” weren’t they.

    Twat.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    What was that Wat?

    Have a read of the purges on the Leninists and other enemies of the state, how Stalin ordered Beria to clean them out, then come back and the twat here will make you look foolish again, carry on.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. duggledog (1,558 comments) says:

    DG at 10.37

    Nicely put.

    Right and Left at 11.10

    Balls.

    16 years in New Zealand does not automatically make you a New Zealander. We give that sort of shit away too easily. I welcome foreigners who want to become kiwis with open arms – I think they are mostly great, but thinking you are a kiwi just by learning the haka and buying a pair of jandals is bollocks.

    If you want to draw a line, to me (my personal opinion) it would be being born here. Norman is an Australian New Zealander, and I am reluctant to give him that because he is as poisonous to my battered old nation as an inland Taipan

    I’d bet dollars to doughnuts he’ll go home eventually; he’s making a complete laughing stock of himself. Once he is replaced or his party goes down the toilet I don’t imagine many employers would want to employ him.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. flipper (4,067 comments) says:

    It is amazing how many folks contributing on the Norman/Muldoon issue simply demonstrate their ignorance of the man and the economic realities of his time as Minister of Finance, Leader of the Opposition and then PM/MoF.

    The comments indicate student indoctrination and learning from disconnected media bullshit.

    My comments on this will not surprise some, since I have posted them in/ on Kiwiblog before, and in detail. There are fuckwits like mikey, who does not know to differentiate between shit and clay.

    There are those who believe what was published in the papers, spouted by lefty wing Cracademics, and there are those who know the truth, but are so overwhelmed by their commitment to PC BS, that they have to join the chorus of anti-Muldoonism.

    Then there are those liked Hooton and DPF who are too young to make accurate judgments.
    There is also Rodney Hyde, who makes a valiant attempt but is inaccurate on detail.
    But first a general observation: Violence against New Zealand politicians is noteworthy for one thing – it is always union (student or tirade) driven against centre right politicians. Not once ( I stand to be corrected) has it been directed against left wing leaders such as Nash, Nordmeyer, Kirk, Rowling, Watt, Lange, Palmer, Moore, Clark, Goff and Shearer. And, understandably, no one has wasted time on the Australian wimp.

    Rodney was wrong on detail, in that there was more than one attack on Muldoon. The worst followed that mentioned by Rodney. It followed an Auckland public meeting, and on that occasion Muldoon was surrounded by a cordon of Police. But in those days Police protection was bloody awful, and totally ineffective. The trade union thugs (mainly drivers and watersides) did not punch Muldoon. They kicked between Police legs striking at Muldoon’s shins. The results were horrific. Did it make the newspapers? Not to my recollection. But it did become public when in my own home, in front of an audience of 24 other dinner guests he sat on a chair, pulled his trouser legs, and displayed his scab, scar and bruised shins, at the culmination of his recitation of events of that evening.

    The attack ion Muldoon was deliberate. It was almost identical to one made on Keith Holyoake in Palmerston North. Just socialist, sickening, violence.

    But back to Rob Muldoon. As the Outside The Beltway Group wrote in January 2012:

    “ … on some issues he was like a dog with a bone, and placed short term goals above long term objectives [solutions]. While there is disagreement over where he (Muldoon) will sit in New Zealand’s political history, much of the vitriol is undeserved and he must go down as the only foreigner who told Robert McNamara, then with the World Bank, where to get off. He did it to New Zealand’s advantage, and when times, post EEC, were tough. But Rob Muldoon went beyond the pale in his pursuit of some media folk (for reasons which in hindsight are risible). That was unforgivable.
    Nevertheless, it is all too easy to vilify someone who held Treasury to account, or who questioned the Reserve Bank. (In fact, to remind them that he had been elected and they were appointed, he had no compunction over keeping Treasury mandarins in his waiting room while he, and his collection of model aircraft, entertained 30 kindergarten children.) But he did NOT do it for personal gain. Having said that, Rob, patriot that he was, lost the plot. He did so to the extent that Bob Jones, (now Sir Robert Jones) took him on – “Face to Face”.
    And Bob Jones is quoted on this by OTB:
    “When I put my hand up in protest in 1982, which ultimately led to the formation of the New Zealand Party in 1983, I was probably the most reluctant political debutante in history. Apart from having no personal desire to enter parliament which I was temperamentally unsuited to attacking the government, I was to all intents turning on long established friends and no-one enjoys that.
    I say to all intents as that was the effect but I never saw it that way. Rather, I was attacking the status quo re the role of government, regardless of who the government was. I most certainly was not declaring war on Rob Muldoon who I held then and hold now, in the highest esteem and I hugely resent the misrepresentation of him which is currently fashionable. As it transpired the New Zealand Party was simply the local faction of a world-wide revolution, manifesting itself in Britain with Thatcher, the USA with Reagan and so on, its ultimate expression arising with the collapse of communism.
    When to everyone’s surprise, the incoming Labour government began immediately to apply the New Zealand Party’s policies, it was with great relief that we pulled stumps and cheered Roger Douglas on from the side-lines”.
    ….

    Good afternoon, but first good riddance to made mikey and the red melon wimps et al. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. wat dabney (3,769 comments) says:

    PEB,

    Yes, and Hitler order the Night of the Long Knives.

    So that’s okay then is it? The Brownshirts’ hands are clean?

    The atrocities and barbarities carried out by Marxist-Leninists is a litany without end.

    And this fact is altered not one jot by the fact that some murderous Marxist-Leninists executed some other murderous Marxist-Leninists.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Wat

    You’ve missed the point totally

    My reply was to this by milky.

    mikenmild (6,754) Says:

    June 9th, 2013 at 10:29 am
    ‘Muldoon fought fascism and totalitarianism in World War II. Norman was for several years active in the Marxist-Leninist Democratic Socialist Party.’
    Is it too trite to point out on which side the Marxist-Leninist were during that war?

    The Left has always had major factions, just like the greens now- red greens, green greens, the popular peoples front of the greens, the lets not wash greens – all fighting for power and will kill each other off to keep it.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Funnily enough, flipper, I can agree with much of your comment re Muldoon. A more balanced and nuanced view of him will emerge over time. For those who buy into the Muldoon = Polish shipyard caricature, I’d recommend they read Gustafson’s excellent biography.
    I do take issue with your view on political violence. While thankfully rare in New Zealand, serious politcal violence has almost always been directed against the left.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. David Garrett (7,289 comments) says:

    Well Mikey, you have been asked to give some examples of political violence against the left…let’s hear some.

    Flipper: I have to disagree with you – and unlike many here, I am certainly old enough to remember the old bastard well. Perhaps he was a personal friend of yours? I doubt he showed his battered shins to just anybody. He was certainly known to be unfailingly loyal to his friends, so that may explain your somehat roseate view of him.

    However, all of that said, he certainly wasnt single handedly responsible for all the ills of post EEC pre 1984 New Zealand. As Bob Jones memorably said after he had fallen, and all the vilification started in earnest “Where were McLay and all the rest of them when all these decisions were made – hiding in the toilet?” Given that he never had any secret police ready and willing to “take out” dissenters, the failure of his cabinet members – with rare exceptions like Quigley – to stand up to him can only be put down to either their cowardice, or that that hey had no better ideas than he on how to solve some seemingly intractable problems.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Sure DG, how about Waihi 1912, Wellington Trades Hall 1984 and Rainbow Warrior 1985. Those are just the fatal attacks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Komata (1,191 comments) says:

    MM

    Re: (in NZ) serious politcal violence has almost always been directed against the left’.

    Examples please?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. flipper (4,067 comments) says:

    David G….
    I had both public and private disagreements with him. So blue tinted specs? May be.
    But someone able to chew McNamara and get him to back down was, all things considered, good for this country, and bailed us out of an EEC / US trade policy hole.

    And, apropos the nation being bankrupt, that is exactly what we have with Europe at present, and would have in NZ if Shearer/Norman/Parker/Kelly (and all the dickheads such as Hickey and Berl) have their way. On that, RDM was hugely wrong, and Roger Douglas right.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Dean Papa (784 comments) says:

    @ duggledog, merely being born here, or anywhere for that matter, doesn’t automatically make you of that place. I’d say 16 years is more than enough. Heck, you can play rugby, cricket or netball for NZ after only living here a couple of years, and without even being a citizen. Sivivatu made his AB debut while on a working visa!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. flipper (4,067 comments) says:

    Say MM…you really have gone thru the bottom of the barrel.

    .Trades Hall bombing? Trade union, left v left, was it not? :)
    Rainbow Warrior? Get real.
    Waihi? Hardly political. Trade unions again.
    Queen Street? Trades Union violence, which begat violence.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    flipper
    You were the one who explicitly raised trade unions in your discussion of political violence.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. flipper (4,067 comments) says:

    What is the common denominator MM?

    It has been thus.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Common denominator: serious political violence in NZ soley directed against the left?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. rouppe (971 comments) says:

    While perhaps not obviously political violence against the right, I think a better definition is violence “by the left” versus violence “by the right”. And I had a wee chuckle about mm quickly trying to change the conversation to “serious” and “political” violence, when flipper said only violence against politicians.

    I seem to remember:
    * Offensive objects being thrown at both John Key and Don Brash
    * The lamington incident against John Boscawen which was apparently OK but when perpetrated against Len Brown was “outrageous”
    * The incident when a union protester, not being content with screaming in people’s faces through a loud hailer (which in my opinion is an assault due to the real danger to hearing) then struck someone with it when they wouldn’t back down
    * Ports of Auckland strike, where anyone turning up to work was initially prevented from going about their lawful business and then had threats against their person shouted at them
    * PSA members turning up with their loud hailers again and bashing on windows to prevent court from sitting

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. David Garrett (7,289 comments) says:

    MM: The only one that stands up is Waihi, and that was 100 years ago.

    Noone knows – unless you do – what the motive was for the bombing at the Wellington Trades Hall, and who or what the target was.

    The Rainbow Warrior bombing wasnt really political at all; it was a disgraceful attack on a vessel which was in the harbour of a friendly power. A power which had sent two generations of young men to die in the defence of the cowardly aggressor. It was simply coincidence that Labour was in power at the time, and what a hash they made of it. 25 years later it still makes my blood boil that the perfidious French did that, and the perpretrators not only were allowed to get away with it, but went home heroes. Thanks again, Professor Sir Geoffrey, who pulled Lange’s strings on that one.

    Mafart and Preiur should have met with a mysterious accident, and the SAS should have killed the crew of the Ouvea. And no, I am not bloody joking. The Rainbow Warrior affair established as a precedent forever that if you have enough power or influence, you can buy your way out of a NZ jail. Disgraceful.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. MT_Tinman (3,187 comments) says:

    Robert Muldoon was a dictatorial bully who did outrageous things to our democracy; little things like banning journos he didn’t like from his press conferences,

    From memory the main (if not only) “journalist” banned from Muldoon press conferences was pathetic communist cartoonist Tom Scott who Muldoon, correctly, described as not a journalist.

    One of the communist wannabes’ more successful lies.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. doggone7 (805 comments) says:

    flipper

    Wasn’t ‘Citizens for Rowling’ an attack on R D Muldoon? Was that union (student or tirade) driven?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. F E Smith (3,305 comments) says:

    and Rainbow Warrior 1985

    So you accept that Greenpeace is a left wing organisation?  Can I just point out that the bombing was ordered by the then Socialist goverment, so that was essentially left on left violence.

    serious political violence in NZ soley directed against the left?

    Which is a fair point, however, as Flipper pointed out, your other examples are also mostly left on left.  So your overall point appears to be that the left is both the perpetrator and victim of political violence in NZ?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Tauhei Notts (1,714 comments) says:

    Much has been made of the fact that Russel Norman is an Aussie.
    So was the venerable Michael Joseph Savage.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. David Garrett (7,289 comments) says:

    tinman: You make the right sound stupid…the multi talented Tom Scott was a political columnist for the Listener at the time. He is/was no more a communist than I am.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. JMS (330 comments) says:

    Muldoon would have eaten him up and spat him out.

    I doubt it. Russel Norman constantly humiliates himself without caring. When somebody else humiliates him he just smirks….. and continues to humiliate himself without caring.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. David Garrett (7,289 comments) says:

    Fuck…another one whose been on the sacrament…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. MT_Tinman (3,187 comments) says:

    David Garrett, you make yourself sound stupid – I always have been.

    I admit to calling all left-wing nutters communists or wannabe-communists – it is a matter of degrees. Scott definitely qualifies as such

    Scott was, and is, a drawer of pictures. In both Muldoon’s and my eyes not a particularly good one.

    Muldoon correctly described him as such and as such refused him the position of “journalist” during his (Piggy’s) press conferences.

    Having read some of Scott’s literary output I agree whole-heartedly with Muldoon.

    As an aside I do not think it does anything to democracy to ban slime from anything, certainly slime who you know will not “report” honestly.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. David Garrett (7,289 comments) says:

    At the time, I was an activist for the Labour party. I don’t recall Scott ever being seen as anything other than a damn good cartoonist, and a mediocre columnist who had occasional flashes of brilliance. He was certainly not seen as a tool of the left…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Tauhei Notts (1,283) Says:
    June 9th, 2013 at 3:12 pm

    Much has been made of the fact that Russel Norman is an Aussie.
    So was the venerable Michael Joseph Savage.
    ================
    correct and he was also a pacifist and a homosexual. Many of his collegues in Parliament were also aussie pacisfists as they moved from aussie to escape the draft. ( nothing changes in the Labour left)

    He and his Cabinet were all pacifists as the Cabinet Rule at the time required that no Cabinet minister could have been in the Armed Services. That’s where he came head to head with John A Lee. He was also the instigator of left v’s left violence against the same said John a Lee.
    One of Savage’s hallmarks was that women would swoon when he entered the room. They all used to have photo’s of him on the wall in the house. Hallmark of the homosexuality of the man.

    Mother in Laws father was a Labour politician of that time. ( didn’t like tories like me haha.) Mother in Law spent lots of her early life around these people. Before she died we discussed Savage one day. Lovely lady summed him up thus. “Savage wasn’t a very nice man.” In her terms she was confirming what I said above.

    Savage also took the kudos for developing housing. Well that was a Labour lie as the person the drove that was John A Lee.
    His penalty for being a Kiwi soldier was to never make Cabinet and to be rail roaded out of the party before he could unseat or expose the homosexual Savage. Before they rail roaded him out he was like Key, the most popular politican in NZ.
    Worth reading his stories if you can get hold of any of his books these days.

    Nothing much changes in Labour. They have been a Party that used the union Movement and they have been a party of queers forever. I think the only period when they had any semblance of normal balanced famil;y was during the Douglas/Lange era.

    A

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Komata (1,191 comments) says:

    IMHO, Tom Scott ‘s ‘problem’ is that he has an over-inflated opinion of his own self-importance and his abilities…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Sop, a bit of history.
    You might like this peice then! :lol:

    http://screencast.com/t/SkZ1UTpXm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Akaroa (557 comments) says:

    Hmmm! Lot of talk about how long Russel Norman has been in NZ in the context of whether he can consider himself a Kiwi.

    For what its worth I am one person who takes the ‘Kiwi” label seriously.

    Very seriously!

    To explain. I emigrated to NZ in 1974 and became a NZ citizen three years later – that being the minimum period permissable for that process.

    I don’t, and never have, consider-ed myself a “Kiwi” – even though i served in Kiwi military uniform and later held a overseas NZ diplomatic post.

    Confused? In my book yer actual archtypical, good-keen-man, genuine “Kiwi” is a joker who was actually born and bred in this fair land.

    OK. I admit people look on me as a Kiwi, and I never put them right.

    But my definition, above, of a true-blue dyed-in-the-wool cradle Kiwi stands. (Wish i’d been born in Waikikamukau,eh?)

    So that’s settled then, alright?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    including Sir Robert publicly issuing enemies’ lists, banning unfriendly journalists from his press conferences, personally directing monetary policy, ramming through the Clutha Development (Clyde Dam) Empowering Act 1982, abusing young backbenchers in drunken rages, lying about the country’s fiscal position, provoking a foreign exchange crisis, refusing to follow the instructions of the incoming government and having to be bullied into doing so by his outgoing cabinet.

    It’s puzzling that so many right wingers hate Muldoon more than the left ever did. Perhaps it was because, despite all his differences with the left, no-one could accuse Muldoon of not caring about ordinary people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. In Vino Veritas (139 comments) says:

    mikenmild, I think you’ll find the Waihi violence was started by the striking miners and finished by the police. And this after shots were fired by the radical unionist Fred Evans, who by the way, was an Australian.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote