Someone teach Mr Little what fascism really is

November 14th, 2013 at 4:00 pm by David Farrar

3 News reports:

A bill that would have allowed employers to hire temporary workers during a strike has been defeated on its first reading in Parliament.

The member’s bill was drafted by National’s Jami-Lee Ross to repeal a section of the Employment Relations Act that has been in force since 2000.

It was not a government bill.

Mr Ross said that under current law unions held an unfair advantage.

“It allows them to hold employers to ransom,” he said.

“Firms can’t hire casual or temporary workers during a strike and millions of dollars worth of productivity are lost every day.”

Labour fiercely opposed the bill.

“We’ve just heard the voice of the fascist National Party,” said .

Oh yes a law change that would not allow a union to cripple an employer is fascism. Pretty fucking insulting to all those people who died actually fighting fascism.

“This bill doesn’t just cover strikes, it covers lock-outs as well,” he said.

“An employer would be able to lock out its employees and hire casual workers in their place – it would cause very serious harm.”

I believe the bill should cover strikes only, but not lock-outs. Basically I think both strikes and lock-outs should be a last resort. Hence allowing temporary labour for strikes but not lockouts would discourage both employers and unions from resorting to them. Once you do, it is very hard to ever have good faith relations going forward.

Although all 59 National MPs and ACT leader John Banks voted for the bill, government ally Peter Dunne didn’t.

The vote was tied at 60-60, which meant the bill didn’t pass its first reading.

A pity, as I think it would have been good to have it go to select committee, so people could submit on it, and it could be amended. But under MMP the major party in Government doesn’t win all the votes.

Tags: ,

110 Responses to “Someone teach Mr Little what fascism really is”

  1. Archer (170 comments) says:

    I agree it was worthwhile legislation DPF (although maybe not in the form it was in). However it must be pleasing for central voters that have clear proof that Peter Dunne will not, and does not, rumber stamp legislation he doesn’t favour.

    As far as Labour MP Andrew Little saying we have a fascist government – what an insensitive dickhead.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    All a part of the left wing’s goal of redefining the meaning of fascism that took place after WW2. It shows not so much of an ignorance as an actual intention to redefine what our troops fought to oppose during that war and make their sacrifice meaningless.

    It is disgraceful on Little’s part.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Manolo (13,320 comments) says:

    Although all 59 National MPs and ACT leader John Banks voted for the bill, government ally Peter Dunne didn’t.

    Ah, the perennial whore Dunne repositioning himself (well-known expert on the subject.)

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. gazzmaniac (2,317 comments) says:

    But under MMP the major party in Government doesn’t win all the votes.

    There lies one of New Zealand’s biggest problems.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. nickb (3,658 comments) says:

    Thanks Peter Dunne. Is one man’s worth really enough to stall such an important piece of legislation?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. nickb (3,658 comments) says:

    What is so inherently objectionable about a business being able to hire temps when their staff refuse to work?

    I would have thought the reverse, i.e. banning the above, is 1000000x more objectionable than the former.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. nickb (3,658 comments) says:

    However it must be pleasing for central voters that have clear proof that Peter Dunne will not, and does not, rumber stamp legislation he doesn’t favour.

    Yea, real pleasing that NZ’s legislature is dictated by the political windsock (windcock?) that is Peter Dunne and UF.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. queenstfarmer (742 comments) says:

    I’m sure comments like that play well to a party’s hard-core activists, but they alienate moderates.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. dime (9,357 comments) says:

    All good. Get it through next time.

    Its gonna be like Return of the Jedi:

    JK: Craig, strike Dunne down and take your rightful place at my side!

    Cept unlike ROTJ, craig will.

    5 Conservative MP’s making Dung totally irrelevant. Glorious.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 32 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. gazzmaniac (2,317 comments) says:

    Until he nationalises your land Dime.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    That is a bit unfair of Andrew Little. Genuine fascists would rule Jamie-Lee Ross out of membership on the basis of having a poofy name and being a pompous git.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 21 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. dubya (214 comments) says:

    When will the randy roadkill rug wearer finally be put out to pasture?!

    One can only assume Peter Dunne, having never had a job in the productive sector, is unaware of what a misery unions can make your life if you are an employer.

    I am glad I work in an industry where ‘trade union’ is a bad word, and membership would be greeted with ridicule.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. calendar girl (1,172 comments) says:

    Yes, Mr Dunne shows his true idealogical colours. While this was not a National Bill (why wasn’t it, Simon Bridges, Minister of Labour?), all National MPs voted for it. That Dunne felt more comfortable voting with his former Labour Party bedfellows – and their CTU wing – says a great deal about Dunne’s reliability, or lack of it, as a Government support partner.

    He can argue that a private member’s Bill is not covered by his “Party’s” Confidence & Supply Agreement with National; but that’s a mere technicality in the present circumstances. Dunne has made the clear choice of ratting on his alleged political allies. Because trust and reliability lie at the heart of any worthwhile partnership, I hope that National remembers his action next year, and puts up a strong candidate to contest the Ohariu seat vigorously.

    The sooner National has a reliable political partner genuinely to its right, the better.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    Just more union bashing by the corporates. Last ACT for Roger Douglas was to cripple student unions. As if they were a problem. The main union problem was letting banned UK union delegates get a foothold in NZ and help destroy unionism.

    Unionism is a democratic part of a fair civilised society which Kiwiblog corparates stand against every inch of the way to help faciltate fascist feudalism and everything men fought aginst during WW2

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 30 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. redqueen (451 comments) says:

    As Orwell said, everyone and thing is now fascist when you don’t agree with it. It’s a devalued statement, used by people who lack thought or expression. That said, the right uses the term ‘socialist’ in a similar vein…although, when we do it, it must be right… ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 31 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. redqueen (451 comments) says:

    Ahh, thank you @wikiriwhis business! Feudalism: another word used without any understanding or meaning! That said, ‘fascist feudalism’ sounds rather intriguing…I’d love to know what such an august ism might entail…

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. calendar girl (1,172 comments) says:

    wikiriwhis @ 4:30pm – What are “Kiwiblog corparates”? You’ve lost me totally.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. gazzmaniac (2,317 comments) says:

    Last ACT for Roger Douglas was to cripple student unions. As if they were a problem.

    I have a problem that I was required to pay money to a student union in order to study at university, and that a portion of that money was used to purchase cannibis for members of the student union exec to smoke.

    I would also have a problem if I worked at the Port of Auckland and someone pissed on the staff barbecue.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    S. Smith: This is the reason our company does indepth checks on all job applicants . . . we don’t want left-wing bludgers on our staff, the employees make damn good money with excellent conditions, and once these losers infiltrate the system it will be time to go offshore.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. simonway (371 comments) says:

    Fantastic news that this bill was defeated.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 28 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. dubya (214 comments) says:

    ‘My’ student union ‘representatives’ used our stolen funds to buy a van, customise it with a PA system, and used it sing solidarity forever and anti -Israel slogans at every opportunity. I hate those cunts still. Oh and one of the ugly union skanks spent 6k on telephone psychics.

    Not a problem, Whyfuckafairy’s Business?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. david (2,531 comments) says:

    Shouldn’t it be illegal for locked-out workers to earn from another employer or get a benefit – just to even the playing field.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. burt (7,791 comments) says:

    OMG – A bill that was seeking to make it so unions don’t run the country …. They run the Labour party so why not every business ?

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. burt (7,791 comments) says:

    david

    No, that wouldn’t be fair – have you not taken your red pill this morning ?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. rouppe (913 comments) says:

    Fascism is when the Nazis marched into my fathers home town in the Netherlands, and took over my grandfathers business for their own purposes.

    As far as New Zealand was concerned, the closest we came to fascism was the Electoral Finance Act.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. SW (213 comments) says:

    “Pretty fucking insulting to all those people who died actually fighting fascism”. – coming from the guy who sponsored all those EFA billboards!!

    Please DPF… I suppose those were in light hearted jest and not disrespectful to all those who died actually fighting facism?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. burt (7,791 comments) says:

    redqueen

    That said, the right uses the term ‘socialist’ in a similar vein…

    Yes… ‘The right’ do call the left what the left call themselves … Oh the horror ….

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. virtualmark (1,470 comments) says:

    Peter Dunne is only useful to National if UF captures enough of the party vote to bring at least one other MP in alongside Mr Bouffant.

    Given where UF are polling at the moment they are dreaming if they think they can deliver that other MP. So Peter Dunne can’t fulfil his side of the “bargain” with the Nats. And in the meantime he represents a threat that he will side with Labour after the next election and help them into power rather than helping the Nats

    And really, isn’t this move today just Peter Dunne ingratiating himself a bit with the Labour Party? He’s just covering his options for Nov 2014. (yes, sure, he hates the Greens. But when a Ministerial limo’s at risk, well, needs must …).

    Given that, the Nats should put the knife into Peter Dunne at the next election. Run a strong candidate in Ohariu and kill him off. Remove the option that that extra seat can flip-flop across to support Labour.

    Peter, you’re either useful or you’re in the way. And right now you’re in the way.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. David Garrett (6,309 comments) says:

    rouppe: Well said Sir/Madam…

    “fascist”…probably in the top 5 of “words used by people who haven’t a clue what they mean”…

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. greenjacket (415 comments) says:

    The 20th century produced two truly horrible ideologies. Italy, Spain and some South American countries adopted fascism. Its extreme version was Nazism, which took racist nationalism to its genocidal conclusion. Some countries adopted socialism, and spawned communism, which proved to be almost as genocidal as nazism but sadly lasted longer.

    Fascism and socialism were utter disasters – fascist and socialist governments oppressed and impoverished their people. Anyone using the term fascist or socialist with abandon – without comprehending the ghastly failure of those ideologies – is a fool.

    These days we can all accept that fascism was a fucking awful ideology. What intrigues me, though, is that some left-wingers embrace being “socialist”, without any sense of shame.

    That Andrew Little uses the term ‘fascist’ to attack his opponents says a lot about Andrew Little.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. nickb (3,658 comments) says:

    Out of all the ridiculous bias against employers in our employment laws this is one of the most oppressive (fascist, even?).

    It is the equivalent of passing a Bill that says that during a strike or lock-out, employees will not be paid and also not be permitted to earn any other income from jobs in the meantime, nor draw down social welfare.

    If this Bill was fascist, what would Andrew Little call my Bill above!

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Cato (1,094 comments) says:

    So what’s the United Future justification for voting against this pretty sensible measure?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Meatloaf (142 comments) says:

    If this bill had got through, their would be no bargaining power for the unions. If they could just hire a replacement at will, then why bother with the unions demands. And having temp workers always replace other workers will get this country nowhere. We need as many stable jobs as possible, otherwise you can’t expect people who work to have reliable transport such as cars. A stable job, means that person’s earnings flow to the rest of us.

    And temps usually would like a permanent job too, I’ve been one.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. nickb (3,658 comments) says:

    Ok Meatloaf, so if you wanted an even playing field, you would be happy with my proposal, namely a requirement that striking/locked out workers are not entitled to pay for the period off work, are not entitled to seek alternative work during the strikes/lockouts, and are not entitled to any social welfare during the strikes/lockouts?

    That would be consistent, wouldn’t it? Or are you just a commie dropkick who’s never risked a dollar in your life who wants union thugs to be able to take a loaded gun to the negotiation table?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. David Garrett (6,309 comments) says:

    nickb: Hold on there tiger! Not allowing striking/locked out workers to seek work anywhere else is a bit too tough for me!

    Off topic a little, does anyone know what actually happened re the Auckland watersiders strike/lockout? It was all over the news 6 or 9 months ago, then just quietly disappeared…Did it ever settle? Are they still having endless meetings?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. wally (61 comments) says:

    David Garrett (4,470) Says:
    November 14th, 2013 at 5:33 pm
    rouppe: Well said Sir/Madam…

    “fascist”…probably in the top 5 of “words used by people who haven’t a clue what they mean”…

    I think “neoliberal” would also make the list.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. nickb (3,658 comments) says:

    DG: Hypothetical, I was only using that to draw a comparison. That is what this Bill does by refusing to allow employers to seek alternative workers. So who in their right mind could be against either?

    I’d be interested to know that too, it kind of faded out of the news a bit. I was very busy at the time IIRC and didn’t follow it in great depth.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Manolo (13,320 comments) says:

    Where is the slave to defend the master?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Johnboy (14,876 comments) says:

    I know I have said this before but the more I look at Andy Little the more he resembles Oliver Cromwell! :)

    I look forward to the day when he is subjected to posthumous execution and his bits are distributed about the electorates! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. David Garrett (6,309 comments) says:

    Manolo: Talking of those missing in action…where’s russell tonight? He was extremely active last night, on several threads…I hope it didn’t all become a bit too much for the poor boy…

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Johnboy (14,876 comments) says:

    He couldn’t handle wearing a sheepskin I suspect! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Johnboy (14,876 comments) says:

    He did of course have the option of the French Maids outfit! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Longknives (4,397 comments) says:

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Reid (15,912 comments) says:

    Pretty fucking insulting to all those people who died actually fighting fascism.

    Since fascism is when corporations (both as themselves and in the modern form of PACs even from other states, as in AIPAC) control the interests and operations of the state and the state employs them accordingly in their state-issued contracts, how precisely does one view the US’ political operations right now?

    Or does one hallucinate it’s still “Morning in America?”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Johnboy (14,876 comments) says:

    You left the “u” out of “Morning” Reid! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. MT_Tinman (2,984 comments) says:

    I look forward to the day when he is subjected to posthumous execution and his bits are distributed about the electorates

    Why wait?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. burt (7,791 comments) says:

    Using a work like fascist to describe employment law changes …. It’s like this law change threatens union membership numbers and therefore donations to Labour and the Greens …. Oh wait ….

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. mikemikemikemike (301 comments) says:

    “Oh yes a law change that would not allow a union to cripple an employer is fascism. Pretty fucking insulting to all those people who died actually fighting fascism.” – coming from the guy who called a group health Nazi’s. Pretty fucking insulting to all those people people who died actually fighting Nazi’s……

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. OneTrack (2,568 comments) says:

    “I am glad I work in an industry where ‘trade union’ is a bad word, and membership would be greeted with ridicule.”

    You might not have any choice in 2015. Helen Kelly will visit your workplace personally to set your award and smoko break times.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. wat dabney (3,655 comments) says:

    Technically speaking Labour are fascists and not socialists, since they don’t advocate state ownership of the means of production and of its disposal. Instead they favour retaining private ownership, but in name only; stripped of real meaning and with our lives and actions effectively under political control (witness the RMA.)

    So here we have an actual fascist using the word as a term of abuse.

    I’d say he’s confused, but he’s certainly not confused about how to use violence to line the pockets of himself and his cronies.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Pretty fucking insulting to all those people who died actually fighting fascism.

    Actually, the complete opposite is true. Those who died fighting fascism were surely fighting for freedom…freedom of expression is pretty important. As Voltaire might have said “I might not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. OneTrack (2,568 comments) says:

    “As Voltaire might have said “I might not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.”

    Thanks Ross, but why it is always the left who are very quick to suppress that “right” when you dont follow the party line. The Standard is just one chilling example of how the collective hive mind thinks and acts.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. CharlieBrown (889 comments) says:

    If labour, the greens, racists maoris and winston first get in next election you will have a bunch of socialists and nationalists in government… national socialists… now who is the fascist?

    They believe in an electorate determined on racial and gender lines… they have a history of wanting to regulate what and how we eat, and make speaking a specific language compulsory.

    Its pretty easy to make glancing comparisons to nazis, even though none of that is even close to the attempted extermination of an entire race the nazis and facists tried.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Keeping Stock (10,090 comments) says:

    My father fought against fascism in North Africa, Crete and Greece in WWII. When he went to war, he was from what his brother told me a right Jack-the-lad. Like thousands of other young men he returned home damaged; psychologically more than physically. I feel a deep sadness that I never saw the man he was pre-war.

    So when someone like Little comes along and glibly throws around lines like this, I get angry; bloody angry. Sure, he’s exercising free speech. But he needs to remember the lives lost and the lives destroyed by men who fought for his freedom of speech, and exercise it a bit more judiciously.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Komata (1,106 comments) says:

    CB:

    Re: ‘…attempted extermination of an entire race the nazis and facists tried’

    Wrong dear boy, it is still happening, except it is (to paraphrase your good self) the

    ‘…..attempted extermination of an entire civilization (Western, Christian, Europe)’ and the European Middle class (both male and female)

    Which is something BTW, that neither the nazis and facists tried.

    So far it would seem that the socialists have, unfortunately, been very successful in this intention…

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. thedavincimode (6,522 comments) says:

    Where’s Ned?

    Waiting for instructions?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Yogibear (274 comments) says:

    The Fascists committed many crimes, most of which are well-known and I wont go into here.

    But its time we shone a light on on some of the lesser crimes of Fascists – their architecture resulted in some of the most appallingly ugly buildings I have ever seen.

    The University of Rome is a Mussolini-designed abomination of concrete and marble that will haunt that wonderful city long after what that prick did to human beings is gone from living memory.

    In other news, I don’t think its far off what Andrew Little would be capable of drawing with his red crayons.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Inky_the_Red (734 comments) says:

    http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm

    9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

    10. Labor Power is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Fletch (5,994 comments) says:

    It turns out that not even the experts know exactly what fascism is.
    This excerpt from a new book by Jonah Goldberg.

    There is no word in the English language that gets thrown around more freely by people who don’t know what it means than “fascism.” Indeed, the more someone uses the word “fascist” in everyday conversation, the less likely it is that he knows what he’s talking about.

    You might think that the exception to this rule would be scholars of fascism. But what really distinguishes the scholarly community is its honesty. Not even the professionals have figured out what exactly fascism is. Countless scholarly investigations begin with this pro forma acknowledgment. “Such is the welter of divergent opinion surrounding the term,” writes Roger Griffin in his introduction to The Nature of Fascism, “that it is almost de rigueur to open contributions to the debate on fascism with some such observation.”

    The few scholars who have ventured their own definitions provide a glimmer of insight as to why consensus is so elusive. Griffin, a contemporary leading light in the field, defines fascism as “a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultra-nationalism.” Roger Eatwell claims that fascism’s “essence” is a “form of thought that preaches the need for social rebirth in order to forge a holistic-national radical Third Way.” Emilio Gentile suggests, “A mass movement, that combines different classes but is prevalently of the middle classes, which sees itself as having a mission of national regeneration, is in a state of war with its adversaries and seeks a monopoly of power by using terror, parliamentary tactics and compromise to create a new regime, destroying democracy.” 2

    While these are perfectly serviceable definitions, what most recommends them over others is that they are short enough to reprint here. For example, the social scientist Ernst Nolte, a key figure in the German “historians’ dispute” (Historikerstreit) of the 1980s, has a six-point definition called the “Fascist minimum” that tries to define fascism by what it opposes–that is, fascism is both “anti-liberalism” and “anti-conservatism.” Other definitional constructs are even more convoluted, requiring that contrary evidence be counted as exceptions that prove the rule.

    It’s an academic version of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle: the more closely you study the subject, the less clearly defined it becomes. The historian R. A. H. Robinson wrote twenty years ago, “Although enormous amounts of research time and mental energy have been put into the study of it… fascism has remained the great conundrum for students of the twentieth century.” Meanwhile, the authors of the Dictionnaire historique des fascismes et du nazisme flatly assert, “No universally accepted definition of the fascist phenomenon exists, no consensus, however slight, as to its range, its ideological origins, or the modalities of action which characterize it.”

    Stanley G. Payne, considered by many to be the leading living scholar of fascism, wrote in 1995, “At the end of the twentieth century fascism remains probably the vaguest of the major political terms.” There are even serious scholars who argue that Nazism wasn’t fascist, that fascism doesn’t exist at all, or that it is primarily a secular religion (this is my own view). “[ P] ut simply,” writes Gilbert Allardyce, “we have agreed to use the word without agreeing on how to define it.”

    Jonah Goldberg (2007-04-14T22:00:00+00:00). Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning (Kindle Locations 95-121). Doubleday. Kindle Edition.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Fletch (5,994 comments) says:

    Another snippet –

    The major flaw in all of this is that fascism, properly understood, is not a phenomenon of the right at all. Instead, it is, and always has been, a phenomenon of the left. This fact–an inconvenient truth if there ever was one–is obscured in our time by the equally mistaken belief that fascism and communism are opposites. In reality, they are closely related, historical competitors for the same constituents, seeking to dominate and control the same social space. The fact that they appear as polar opposites is a trick of intellectual history and (more to the point) the result of a concerted propaganda effort on the part of the “Reds” to make the “Browns” appear objectively evil and “other” (ironically, demonization of the “other” is counted as a definitional trait of fascism). But in terms of their theory and practice, the differences are minimal.

    Jonah Goldberg (2007-04-14T22:00:00+00:00). Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning (Kindle Locations 193-199). Doubleday. Kindle Edition.

    I haven’t really started reading the book yet.
    One of those things that’s a bit hard to get into last thing in bed at night.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Ryan Sproull (7,026 comments) says:

    Fletch,

    Describe the general faring of trade unions under fascist regimes.

    Just for a laugh.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Meatloaf (142 comments) says:

    In response to Nick B. As a matter of fact, I have risked my own money, I have earnt my own money, and I know how hard people work for that extra dollar. No I don’t think Unions should ask for an unreasonable amount. It should be fair both ways. If someone strikes, they are not entitled to social welfare for 13 weeks. This is the cost of striking. You don’t get welfare, you lose money, in the hope that you’ll get more pay. Furthermore someone from the third world came into New Zealand, did cabinetwork, was getting the minimium wage, and didn’t even know, that what they were getting was the minimium wage. In their country they had to work 70 hours a week to make a living. My point is, that the power is in employer’s hands these days. And without the minimium wage or unions, people will abuse their power. I’m not saying that unions are always right, but I am saying, it works the other way too.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Camryn (550 comments) says:

    Labour is a product that workers sell. The law allows them to form cartels (called unions) to avoid price competition. In the past, these were near monopolies. We don’t do this for any other product, but labour is somehow special when you’re selling it instead of buying it or using your own.

    All this law was going to do was stop an employer buying labour from someone else if the cartel decided to stop selling it. Imagine if Sanatarium was able to stop selling Marmite (in order to get us to accept a price rise) and was allowed to stop us buying Vegemite in the meantime! Weird!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Pete George (22,740 comments) says:

    Funny. I hadn’t looked at this thread until now.

    Andrew Little made a dickish comment. I think it reinforces an impression he is not future leadership material, but when you look at Cunliffe’s vapid and vitriolic style of criticism it can’t be ruled out in the current Labour party.

    To the dopey Dunne bashers, I have no idea why he voted against it, but I can guess.

    The defeat was not unexpected as a number of National ministers and employer groups have expressed disquiet about the bill being a step too far.

    So his vote seems sensible to me. Coincidentally he may have done National a favour.

    Moanolo’s cut and paste ” the perennial whore Dunne repositioning himself” is clearly wrong, especially when you look at what else was voted on and how he voted – Members’ Bills Shot Down.

    Dunne also voted against Winston Peters’ Reserve Bank Amendment Bill presumably because it’s a dumb bill.

    And he indicated (in the news) he will vote against Harawira’s Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools Bill because he thinks it is “fundamentally flawed for a number of reason” and he thinks the current Government approach is cheaper and “a far more comprehensive and feasible approach”.

    Perpetual Dunne bashers don’t bother to find out for themselves, they ask me to do it for them. It’s not difficult if you want actual facts to back your comments with. On the other hand facts prove them to be nothing more than pissy dissers so that probably explains it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. OneTrack (2,568 comments) says:

    Ryan, Describe the general faring of trade unions under communist regimes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    George Orwell on the definition of Fascism:

    OF ALL the unanswered questions of our time, perhaps the most important is: ‘What is Fascism?’

    One of the social survey organizations in America recently asked this question of a hundred different people, and got answers ranging from ‘pure democracy’ to ‘pure diabolism’. In this country if you ask the average thinking person to define Fascism, he usually answers by pointing to the German and Italian régimes. But this is very unsatisfactory, because even the major Fascist states differ from one another a good deal in structure and ideology.

    It is not easy, for instance, to fit Germany and Japan into the same framework, and it is even harder with some of the small states which are describable as Fascist. It is usually assumed, for instance, that Fascism is inherently warlike, that it thrives in an atmosphere of war hysteria and can only solve its economic problems by means of war preparation or foreign conquests. But clearly this is not true of, say, Portugal or the various South American dictatorships. Or again, antisemitism is supposed to be one of the distinguishing marks of Fascism; but some Fascist movements are not antisemitic. Learned controversies, reverberating for years on end in American magazines, have not even been able to determine whether or not Fascism is a form of capitalism. But still, when we apply the term ‘Fascism’ to Germany or Japan or Mussolini’s Italy, we know broadly what we mean. It is in internal politics that this word has lost the last vestige of meaning. For if you examine the press you will find that there is almost no set of people—certainly no political party or organized body of any kind—which has not been denounced as Fascist during the past ten years. Here I am not speaking of the verbal use of the term ‘Fascist’. I am speaking of what I have seen in print. I have seen the words ‘Fascist in sympathy’, or ‘of Fascist tendency’, or just plain ‘Fascist’, applied in all seriousness to the following bodies of people:

    Conservatives: All Conservatives, appeasers or anti-appeasers, are held to be subjectively pro-Fascist. British rule in India and the Colonies is held to be indistinguishable from Nazism. Organizations of what one might call a patriotic and traditional type are labelled crypto-Fascist or ‘Fascist-minded’. Examples are the Boy Scouts, the Metropolitan Police, M.I.5, the British Legion. Key phrase: ‘The public schools are breeding-grounds of Fascism’.

    Socialists: Defenders of old-style capitalism (example, Sir Ernest Benn) maintain that Socialism and Fascism are the same thing. Some Catholic journalists maintain that Socialists have been the principal collaborators in the Nazi-occupied countries. The same accusation is made from a different angle by the Communist party during its ultra-Left phases. In the period 1930–35 the Daily Worker habitually referred to the Labour Party as the Labour Fascists. This is echoed by other Left extremists such as Anarchists. Some Indian Nationalists consider the British trade unions to be Fascist organizations.

    Communists: A considerable school of thought (examples, Rauschning, Peter Drucker, James Burnham, F. A. Voigt) refuses to recognize a difference between the Nazi and Soviet régimes, and holds that all Fascists and Communists are aiming at approximately the same thing and are even to some extent the same people. Leaders in The Times (pre-war) have referred to the U.S.S.R. as a ‘Fascist country’. Again from a different angle this is echoed by Anarchists and Trotskyists.

    Trotskyists: Communists charge the Trotskyists proper, i.e. Trotsky’s own organization, with being a crypto-Fascist organization in Nazi pay. This was widely believed on the Left during the Popular Front period. In their ultra-Right phases the Communists tend to apply the same accusation to all factions to the Left of themselves, e.g. Common Wealth or the I.L.P.

    Catholics: Outside its own ranks, the Catholic Church is almost universally regarded as pro-Fascist, both objectively and subjectively;

    War resisters: Pacifists and others who are anti-war are frequently accused not only of making things easier for the Axis, but of becoming tinged with pro-Fascist feeling.

    Supporters of the war: War resisters usually base their case on the claim that British imperialism is worse than Nazism, and tend to apply the term ‘Fascist’ to anyone who wishes for a military victory. The supporters of the People’s Convention came near to claiming that willingness to resist a Nazi invasion was a sign of Fascist sympathies. The Home Guard was denounced as a Fascist organization as soon as it appeared. In addition, the whole of the Left tends to equate militarism with Fascism. Politically conscious private soldiers nearly always refer to their officers as ‘Fascist-minded’ or ‘natural Fascists’. Battle-schools, spit and polish, saluting of officers are all considered conducive to Fascism. Before the war, joining the Territorials was regarded as a sign of Fascist tendencies. Conscription and a professional army are both denounced as Fascist phenomena.

    Nationalists: Nationalism is universally regarded as inherently Fascist, but this is held only to apply to such national movements as the speaker happens to disapprove of. Arab nationalism, Polish nationalism, Finnish nationalism, the Indian Congress Party, the Muslim League, Zionism, and the I.R.A. are all described as Fascist but not by the same people.

    It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley’s broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.

    Yet underneath all this mess there does lie a kind of buried meaning. To begin with, it is clear that there are very great differences, some of them easy to point out and not easy to explain away, between the régimes called Fascist and those called democratic. Secondly, if ‘Fascist’ means ‘in sympathy with Hitler’, some of the accusations I have listed above are obviously very much more justified than others. Thirdly, even the people who recklessly fling the word ‘Fascist’ in every direction attach at any rate an emotional significance to it. By ‘Fascism’ they mean, roughly speaking, something cruel, unscrupulous, arrogant, obscurantist, anti-liberal and anti-working-class. Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathizers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come.

    But Fascism is also a political and economic system. Why, then, cannot we have a clear and generally accepted definition of it? Alas! we shall not get one—not yet, anyway. To say why would take too long, but basically it is because it is impossible to define Fascism satisfactorily without making admissions which neither the Fascists themselves, nor the Conservatives, nor Socialists of any colour, are willing to make. All one can do for the moment is to use the word with a certain amount of circumspection and not, as is usually done, degrade it to the level of a swearword.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Cato (1,094 comments) says:

    @Ryan Sproull – have a look at how unions fare under communist or socialist regimes. Just for a laugh.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Cato (1,094 comments) says:

    Hugo Chavez was condemned by the ILO for persecuting the Venezuelan equivalent of the CTU. Guess that means socialist must be a right wing phenomenon.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    Cato (938) Says:
    November 15th, 2013 at 7:42 am

    @Ryan Sproull – have a look at how unions fare under communist or socialist regimes. Just for a laugh.

    Any regime which interferes with the right of workers to organise and advocate for the conditions under which they are prepared to labour is undemocratic and, consequently, regressive in nature. This is the reason the attempt to repeal the that section of Employment Relations Act failed.
    The only bargaining chip workers posses is the ability to withhold their labour, in the vast majority of instances this is a decision that is not taken lightly. Striking involves extreme hardship for most of the participants. If employers cannot provide an adequate level of compensation for the time workers are expected to sacrifice in their employ they should accept the consequences of that decision and negotiate with those on whom their income depends.
    Bad employers are among the biggest drags on the economy.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. calendar girl (1,172 comments) says:

    Yoza: “Any regime which interferes with the right of workers to organise and advocate for the conditions under which they are prepared to labour is undemocratic and, consequently, regressive in nature.”

    The Bill in question was not about “interfering with the rights of workers to organise …”. It was about employers having the right to employ casual replacements when workers strike. The right to protect their business from harm.

    But don’t allow the facts to cloud your prejudice.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Sure, he’s exercising free speech. But he needs to remember the lives lost and the lives destroyed by men who fought for his freedom of speech, and exercise it a bit more judiciously.

    Yeah, as long as he doesn’t say anything you disagree with, he’s allowed to speak. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    It was about employers having the right to employ casual replacements when workers strike.

    It was about bad employers having the right to employ casual replacements when workers strike.

    FIFY

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    Mussolini stated Fascism is the state and corporates joining together to stiffle competition.

    A very good example of the modern era. Wall st and the bush/Obama administrations have formed a huge regime where corparatism now holds over 51% of the US. Most industry is outsourced offshore. Apple is completely offshore denying opportunity to Americans. made in America is a rare moniker in teh US fascist based economy.

    Fascism is very easy to describe. Esp under the Patriot Act where Posse Comatus has been stripped and US citizens are coming under martial law. The ground swell in Washington is also to do away with the constitution. Esp to ban fire arms which was the first facsist tool under Hitler which made it far more effective to intern European Jewry.

    History repeating today. In fact Homeland Security was a German term from the 30′s.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    WB,

    link please, so we can judge context.  Mussolini was an anti-capitalist and I suspect that the only reason that he would want to stifle competition would be so that he could control it.

    Mussolini claimed that dynamic or heroic capitalism and the bourgeoisie could be prevented from degenerating into static capitalism and then supercapitalism only if the concept of economic individualism were abandoned and if state supervision of the economy was introduced. Private enterprise would control production but it would be supervised by the state.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    What is fascism? Easy: fascism is socialism for one nation.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    “What is fascism? Easy: fascism is socialism for one nation.”

    With Keysnian economics as the catalyst

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    Keynesian economics is another excuse for pursuing a statist agenda, which is a feature of the left today, just as it was in the 1920s and 1930s. Unfortunately, statism also had strong proponents within the UK Conservative Party in the 1930s as well, but they managed to get rid of them (at least until David Cameron turned up).

    WB, that link, please.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    If employers cannot provide an adequate level of compensation for the time workers are expected to sacrifice in their employ they should accept the consequences of that decision

    If an employee considers that the wages offered by their employer are inadequate for the work performed there is no law requiring them to stay in that position. They are perferctly entitled to leave that job.  Happens all of the time.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    Italian Fascism promotes a corporatist economic system whereby employer and employee syndicates are linked together in associations to collectively represent the nation’s economic producers and work alongside the state to set national economic policy.[3] It promoted corporatism as an alternative to capitalism and Marxism, which it regarded as “obsolete doctrines”.[4

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Fascism

    Exactly the US model as we see in the current era. ie corporatism which explains my mantra of Kiwi blog corporates.

    The left will have us believe capitalism is fascist when it fact the truth is corpatism is the true fascism that uses capitalism to thrive until Capitalism can be overturned 51%

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    Returning to the point Orwell is making about Fascism being a label anyone can apply to a similarly minded group of people with whom they do not agree renders the definition of Fascism as meaningless as asking someone to define the shape of water. Socialism gets similar treatment throughout the Western establishment – anything that threatens the dominance of the self-serving agenda of those at the top of the heap is reflexively labelled socialist.

    The modern ‘democratic’ nation state is being driven toward corporate totalitarianism, where our elected representatives and public institutions serve the profit motives of powerful multinational corporate entities. This growing form of governance is far more insidious and destructive than anything the traditional ‘Fascists’ could dream up.

    I imagine there are groups who will exploit the growing powerlessness to pursue something resembling Mussolini’s style of Fascism, but it will only be allowed to exist if it does not threaten the objectives of the corporate set.

    Som

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    “corporate totalitarianism”

    Fascism

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    F E Smith (2,936) Says:
    November 15th, 2013 at 10:13 am

    If an employee considers that the wages offered by their employer are inadequate for the work performed there is no law requiring them to stay in that position. They are perferctly entitled to leave that job.

    …or seek redress through industrial action.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    Returning to the point Orwell is making about Fascism being a label anyone can apply to a similarly minded group of people with whom they do not agree renders the definition of Fascism as meaningless as asking someone to define the shape of water.

    Translation: I can’t hide the fact that fascism is a left wing ideology so I am saying instead that it now means nothing and therefore my own views are not tainted by association with it.

     Yoza, the 1890s called and wants its doctrines back, please.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    …or seek redress through industrial action.

    Why would any employee want to inflict economic damage upon their employer in order to drive their own wages higher? That seems vindictive.  Surely it is better simply to find work elsewhere at a more satisfactory rate of pay?

    EDIT: And why then complain when that employer seeks to ameliorate the economic damage by hiring temporary workers to meet a need? That seems nasty.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Nookin (3,033 comments) says:

    I think it is a quantum leap to conclude that every strike action is unjustified and is undertaken with the intention to cripple an employer unjustifiably.

    The right to strike does need to be protected in just the same manner as the right to lock out. Those rights do however need to be clearly defined and must relate to the workplace.

    I am opposed to the idea of sympathy strikes. I am also opposed to strikes based on a “one suit fits all” philosophy. Working conditions and profitability in one part of the country may be entirely different to another part. Dumbing down achievement in favour of uniformity (e.g. teachers Unions) also needs to be discouraged. Essentially, rights to strike and lock out are, in my view, remedies of last resort. The rights must remain but abuse needs to be curtailed. Employers need to have remedies for unjustifiable strike action. Unjustifiable lockout may appropriately be looked at as unjustified dismissal or suspension.

    Where I definitely draw the line is the right to strike for reasons wholly unrelated to the workplace. Here is a section from the Greens industrial relations policy:

    “7.Support the right of workers and their unions to campaign for political, environmental, social and work-related industrial issues, including the right to strike in support of these.”

    This is an extremely frightening policy. It would allow, for example, unions to blacklist companies working on the Denniston Plateau, . It would allow civil servants to go on strike in protest against asset sales. The scope for holding businesses to ransom simply because those businesses support political, environmental or social policies viewed with disfavour by unions is scary to say the least.

    We have already seen how nasty the Green party can be (its deliberate sabotage of the Mighty River Power float by introducing a spurious and ill thought out policy for example). Imagine the havoc that the Greens’ activists could have on business if they ever saw the seats of power.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    “Surely it is better simply to find work elsewhere at a more satisfactory rate ”

    Unless as in most cases you are painted into a corner with no other opportuntiy to turn to which is exactly the state of the economy for most

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    “Imagine the havoc that the Greens’ activists could have on business if they ever saw the seats of power.”

    I ‘ve always said, give them a chance so no one votes for them again. Innoculation is a powerful suppressant :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

     I think it is a quantum leap to conclude that every strike action is unjustified and is undertaken with the intention to cripple an employer unjustifiably.

    Nobody suggested that it was every strike, nor that there is an intention to ‘cripple’ the employer.  But causing economic damage does not necessarily equal ‘crippling’.  There is sufficient hyperbole in your statement that means that it is invalid.

    The right to strike does need to be protected in just the same manner as the right to lock out. Those rights do however need to be clearly defined and must relate to the workplace.

    Nobody is saying that they should not have the right to strike.  But why should the employer be prevented from doing its best to prevent economic damage to its business by hiring temporary workers?  

    If the present workers think that they should be paid more, but there are other potential workers who are willing to work at the same job at the present rate of pay, perhaps that simply means that the first-mentioned workers are wrong?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    Unless as in most cases you are painted into a corner with no other opportuntiy to turn to which is exactly the state of the economy for most

    Rubbish.  There is no such situation, unless it is one of your own making.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. PaulL (5,872 comments) says:

    There is a reason that unions are so much stronger in the public sector than the private. Because ultimately public organisations are often monopoly providers. If you want to be a teacher, you’re probably going to work for the government. Similarly if you want to be a nurse.

    The government is the ultimate bad faith employer. As an example, they continue to pay teachers far less than (I believe) most parents would pay them, largely because they can. And they can because those teachers have nowhere else to go. In turn that leads to the formation of strong unions to oppose the monopoly power of the state.

    In a similar private model, there are quite different characteristics:
    – multiple employers who compete for the best workers
    – sanctions and eventually termination for poor workers
    – a closer relationship between the people paying for the service and the people who pay the workers

    In short, to a large extent unions are a creature of large bureaucratic monopoly organisations, and since our economy was deregulated so that most corporations could no longer take advantage of government regulation to establish monopolies, the last vestiges of those monopolies largely exist in government.

    If we were to conclude that the “bad employers” that some on here are complaining about are largely the government, you’d have to wonder why those same people are so in favour of extending the reach of the government. Is it perhaps because that in turn extends the reach of the unions, at the expense of the workers who are now working in an environment that requires unions?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    Every time the poli’s vote for a pay rise their teachers and medical professionals should be included as being under the govt umbrella.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    “I can’t hide the fact that fascism is a left wing ideology ”

    The Nazi Party and USSR both came under the Socialist umbrella but strange how we never consider Hitler as left wing.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. MikeG (391 comments) says:

    I look forward to Farrar’s post berating Peter Dunne for comparing the Greens to the Taleban

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    wikiriwhis business (2,029) Says:
    November 15th, 2013 at 11:21 am

    The Nazi Party and USSR both came under the Socialist umbrella but strange how we never consider Hitler as left wing.

    This was mainly because big business, the Catholic church and the established elite supported Hitler and Mussolini, but those institutions were eliminated in the USSR.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    F E Smith (2,940) Says:
    November 15th, 2013 at 10:46 am

    Translation: I can’t hide the fact that fascism is a left wing ideology so I am saying instead that it now means nothing and therefore my own views are not tainted by association with it.

    Your definition of fascism is so meaningless that debate is pointless.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. unaha-closp (1,111 comments) says:

    To be fair to Labour and the Greens most of the people who died fighting Fascism were Communists.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. unaha-closp (1,111 comments) says:

    This was mainly because big business, the Catholic church and the established elite supported Hitler and Mussolini, but those institutions were eliminated in the USSR.

    Eliminated – I don’t think that word means what you think it means…

    The church and businesses were controlled by the state, not eliminated. Fascists used crony capitalists, Communists used cronies (having eliminated capitalism).

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Cato (1,094 comments) says:

    “the Catholic church and the established elite supported Hitler and Mussolini”

    Link please.

    Here are some to begin with: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mit_brennender_Sorge
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_Nazi_Germany

    Enjoy your learning, idiot.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    In the long-term, Nazi radicals like Goebbels, Himmler, Rosenberg and Bormann, backed by Hitler, hoped to de-Christianize Germany, or distort its theology to their point of view

    What an interesting statement, given the troll Kea’s oft repeated assertion that Hitler was a Christian.

    Anyway, back to the subject at hand, and that is to add to Cato’s comment the observation that the Catholic Church had little sway in pre-Revolutionary Russia, the Russian Orthodox Church being the religious power in that empire.

    Yoza, your use of the word ‘eliminated’ with regards big business, the elite, and the Church, in the USSR troubles me as being somewhat vague.  I think using the word ‘murdered’ would be better, although ‘executed’ might be acceptable.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    Cato (946) Says:
    November 15th, 2013 at 6:53 pm

    “the Catholic church and the established elite supported Hitler and Mussolini”

    Link please.

    Well, …there is this form The Independent:

    In the late 1990s, searching for a way to disarm the ever greater numbers of historians who suspected it of a cover-up, the Vatican allowed the British writer, John Cornwell, limited access to its papers about Pius XII. A cradle Catholic, ex-seminarian and the author of a book which conclusively refuted allegations that Pope John Paul I had been murdered, Cornwell, the monsignori decided, could be trusted.

    However, he describes how, having read only a part of the archive about Pius, he found himself “in a state I can only describe as moral shock. The material I had gathered, taking the more extensive view of [Pius XII's] life, amounted not to an exoneration but to a wider indictment.”

    When Cornwell’s book, Hitler’s Pope, was published in 1999, it alleged that Pius was seemingly prepared to put up with any Nazi atrocity because he saw Hitler as a good bulwark against the advance across Europe of godless communism from Russia.

    …and then there is this from The Guardian:

    Behind a disguised offshore company structure, the church’s international portfolio has been built up over the years, using cash originally handed over by Mussolini in return for papal recognition of the Italian fascist regime in 1929.

    Since then the international value of Mussolini’s nest-egg has mounted until it now exceeds £500m. In 2006, at the height of the recent property bubble, the Vatican spent £15m of those funds to buy 30 St James’s Square. Other UK properties are at 168 New Bond Street and in the city of Coventry. It also owns blocks of flats in Paris and Switzerland.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. F E Smith (3,301 comments) says:

    The Independent and The Guardian!!! Seriously?? That is like using Lenin to justify a bolshevik-led revolution!

    Next you’ll be quoting Chomsky at us…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Lucia Maria (2,202 comments) says:

    Cornwell’s book, Hitler’s Pope, has been debunked by several scholars with more up to date information. Cornwell has even admitted he got a number of things wrong.

    Need to keep up Yoza.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    Heh, it’s fun watching you lot grasping at straws.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    What’s this? A Nazi photo album with pictures of the senior clergy consorting with the Nazi hierarchy!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Yoza (1,521 comments) says:

    Oops,… more Catholic Nazis!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. big bruv (13,210 comments) says:

    “Cornwell’s book, Hitler’s Pope, has been debunked by several scholars ”

    Name those scholars then.

    No doubt they will (like you) be apologists for the evil Catholic church.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. Meatloaf (142 comments) says:

    About this whole thing about Nazism, Communism, capitalism etc. Communism is complete control by the state. A Leninist Communist, takes over the country by military force. A Marxist communist is someone who slowly overturns society by the ten planks of the communist manifesto. The 2nd and 5th plank, say a central bank, and income tax, and other planks say a state education, and labour unions. This does not mean New Zealand is communist because we have those 4 things. Other things have to happen, like abolishing private property, and taxing inheritances. So a Marxist Communist is someone who progressively makes a country more and more left wing, until it is completely communist.

    Nazism says we will allow businesses to continue, but we will have many controls. So for instance the government pays for weaponry from a factory, and then puts a big tax on that place. So communism is complete control, but done little by little. Nazism is big control, but they do understand you need to give some sort of freedom for society to function.

    So to say being pro labour union or anti labour union is fascist or communist, just isn’t quite right. If labour unions are communist, what about our central bank-Reserve Bank, income tax, and public education. The thing that matters is are people being fair. I know a third world immigrant who got paid minimium wage to do cabinetry. He didn’t even know it was the minimium wage, because the employer took advantage of him not knowing what he was worth. This means he’s not getting a fair wage, and someone else in New Zealand is losing that opportunity, because someone else is willing to work for less than what they should.

    What I’d like to see is a wage performance system. Where someone assesses your performance, and writes a report saying this is what this person is worth. So it might say, this person does data entry, their speed and accuracy is above average. The average data entry person is being paid $17.50 (i’m not sure what the actual figure is), this person is above average and deserves $20 an hour. It would eliminate this exploitation by employers, and it would also keep the workers demands reasonable. This is what a level playing field means.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. unaha-closp (1,111 comments) says:

    Meatloaf

    It’d be like an NCEA for everyone all the time.

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

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.