“…..The really radical concept is that government should have such a pervasive hand in public education in the first place. In all other examples of government-provided services, such as hospitals, public housing and food programs, much greater allowance is made for choice than what we find in education. “The government doesn’t tell the family how often they should go to the hospital, and on what schedule; it doesn’t require that food can be obtained only if the government establishes the menu and operates the kitchen; yet it has no hesitancy in directing a child about what school to attend, on what days, in what classes, with which teachers, and what books to read.”
Indeed, says Kirkpatrick, “education is the last bastion of compulsory socialism providing social services to the general citizenry.” As John Stuart Mill warned over a century ago, “A general state education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another; and as the mould in which it casts them is that which pleases the predominant power of the government, whether this be a monarch, a priesthood, an aristocrat, or the majority of the existing generation; in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by natural tendency to one over the body.”
Labour wants to mold the current 92% of kiwi children into mindless despots like themselves. And most of National.
In Holland, one of the world’s most socialistic democracies, full educational choice came into effect in 1917. Article 23 of the Dutch Constitution not only guarantees the provision of education, public or private, but implicitly outlaws discrimination in funding. The results of this arrangement are revealing: in 1920 nearly 70 per cent of Dutch children attended public schools; today over 70 per cent attend private schools.
It was of course people like B. A. Santamaria who decades ago fought for some equity here.[ in australia]
He rightly argued that some people, such as Catholics, were facing double jeopardy in this: having to subsidise with their tax dollars secular government schools, while also having to dish out money to send their children to non-government schools.
The debate can still be had as to whether and to what extent governments should be involved in school funding at all……”
It has not taken long for radio and print media to start trying to give the lying leeching Labour leader a little help. Assumedly, Little has rallied his union thugs to threaten reprisals against anyone who dares upset the union clone (“Tojo”), as he is a key card for their disgusting ideals if elected. Come on, we don’t want to let this mongrel off the hook like Lecher and Slobcom.
Today let’s play *reasons why ‘left’ = ‘left out of lawmaking’* . . .
(1) Labour: 280 000 NZ children live in ‘poverty’.
(2) Internet-Mana: Want free education.
Um . . . what constitutes poverty or relative poverty ? For me it’s a nonsense misuse of the word. And Labour are therefore probably a dumb misuse of a vote.
Education is ‘free’ from primary to secondary age. Tertiary costs course fees / point fees – yes. Apparently the actual cost is four times the fee paid by the student. Who pays the other three-quarters ? Is the three-quarter part in fact . . . free ? Isn’t tertiary education mostly free as it stands ? The cost that racks up is the living costs, not so much the fees. Students with rent and bills to pay – that’s where the big debt mounts up. I suppose Internet-Mana want to cover everything ?
Labour wants to mold the current 92% of kiwi children into mindless despots like themselves. And most of National.
What a stupid argument that quote was. “The Government doesn’t tell people when to go to hospital”. For God’s sake, stopped reading after that point. Hey Harry – The Church tells you when to go to its premises! That priest always trying to 92% of children into his cultist ways…
Yet again this National government has passed more social engineering legislation for which they have no mandate for but appeases certain pressure groups and will end up taking away more of our liberties as they yesterday they passed the Orwellian sounding “Vulnerable Children Bill”, that changes to the law so that “abusive or neglectful” parents will have to prove they are safe if they wish to keep their children they have. Of course we already have laws that protect against violence (which are not properly enforced – some might say deliberately?) and of course it will be the State that decides what “neglectful” is.
Following on from other numerous social engineering pieces of legislation passed over the past 15 years, this is yet another way in which our one party NatLab State is attempting to expand its power over every aspect of our lives. The reason given (of course) is that they are just trying to protect the vulnerable. To me it looks as though these left wing Do-gooders who have gained bureaucratic power wish to dictate how children should be raised by criminalising those parents who do not produce children to the government approved “healthy” format.
We need to stop this erosion of our basic rights, parents need to be able to bring up kids how they want not, in a manner dicated by the State. If you don’t recognise this as 1984, there truly is no hope.
“…What a stupid argument that quote was. “The Government doesn’t tell people when to go to hospital”. For God’s sake, stopped reading after that point….”
So why are they then so concerned about education – not kids being educated in general – but every fucken particular? Isn’t healthcare MORE important than education?
They should just make it compulsary for -say um – pregnant women to go to hospitals, given that the government paid particular importance in educating women in every other important matter in their lives – like sex education – why would women complain about that compulsion – as it follows on from sex education?
Why are people restrained from freedom with education? They arn’t with healthcare.
“…..in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by natural tendency to one over the body.”….”
But I have read before that it is immoral for a government to ‘return’ children to homes that will never provide a place where children ‘thrive’. Currently the government removes children from homes where the parents are ‘complex dysfunctionals’ – but is then forced to return the child when ‘some basic improvments have been made’ – they are then only removed again at a later date. Complex dysfuntionals ‘uneducated, drugged ect ect never make good parents because they can hhardly look after themselves.
I also read that the government could maybe be later seud by the child.
Which leads me to believe that ‘a child removed for the wrong reasons’ could in turn sue the government. – which then eases my mind a little with regards to the government expanding it’s powers.
Interesting piece in today’s Herald on how the “puffed up puffball’s” Tv ratings are going down compared with Mike Hosking at 7 p.m. Little attention is paid to the obvious fact that the puffball’s idea of fun is licking the haemorrhoids on left wing politicians. The general public, unlike the trendy lefties, find that sort of behaviour distasteful.
It never ceases to amaze me .
Quelle? The stupidity of political fools.
How so? The fools believe that there s only one way – theirs.
Compromise is seen and described as the betrayal of principle. Notwithstanding all the ultra right or left wing bullshit that sometimes appears in contributions to this esteemed blog, there have been no, not even one, denials of the National Party’s constitutional principles. Close, yes. But no cigar.
As I have said here before, there is no possibility whatever of any government espousing extreme right or left wing views ever securing power in New Zealand by legitimate means. Any party wishing to govern and to both influence and implement policy must win and control the centre.
As it is with diplomacy, western democratic politics are driven by the art of the possible. If you cannot accept that principle, go back to school. So, while I do NOT agree with everything the J Key Government says or does, I can support and live with their weaknesses because the alternative is too horrible to contemplate.
@ Harriet (4,294 comments) says:
June 20th, 2014 at 8:39 am
I’m not quite sure it is possible to ‘sue’ the government over such things. I know of a case where a child placed through Closed Adoption, into a home where severe abuse occurred attempted to hold the Government responsible, however received a very unsatisfactory response due to the fact that such matters were deemed to be covered by ACC. (there was a large amount of factual evidence that supported the claims of abuse). The assistance received from ACC was next to useless, and the organisation they were referred to more interested in feminist issues than actually assisting the person in dealing with lifelong PTSD issues.
Leaving children in a home in which they will suffer is negligent, and simple improvements may be deemed satisfactory, however as soon as the family is exposed to stress, the original dysfunction is likely to return. There has to be a system where the child is removed from such an environment, but where the biological relationship is allowed to continue under supervision. By that I mean the child is situated away from the harmful family environment, but that access is still encouraged so that the relationship is not completely severed.
@ Elaycee (4,213 comments) says:
June 20th, 2014 at 8:40 am
Our cricket team is in the West Indies? Bugga all coverage on that one, and judging from the ‘blushing’ one can presume its best not to say too much about it. Perhaps some things are best left unspoken?
Can someone tell us what the current status of Greenpeace is –is it still a charity? I thought they successfully fought the loss of their charity status and in Court they told the Judge that if they got it back they would stop any political advocacy/lobbying. Have I got it wrong ?? The reason for asking is this
I thought you started early on our bet to stop posting for a month after the election as you had given up on the left winning the benches
Good to see you are alive.Was starting to wonder if you had taken David Cunliffe stance and gone to the mattresses.
Dose it not grind your gears that we all know that youre just dying inside a little every day.
Tauhei: You’re the man . . . well said. I would love to see the slimy little arsehole bundled up in the gutter with his left-wing filthy mates. Hope Mazda realise the damage being done to their product supporting this piece of excrement. Our company no longer use any of their products for reps or servicemen. Gone to Toyota.
NZ’s defence is quite inadequate e.g. using Orions for bombing runs [although it does show the versatility of the Orions. Switzerland during in the 1930s poured money into defence rather than social welfare programs and it saved them during World War Two.
Can someone tell us what the current status of Greenpeace is
Interesting point…and it is also interesting that their NZ leader is one of the least trusted in NZ. Pity that TVNZ and Tv3 continue to use her and that ultra left wing Hone/Jabba party member as “g peace’ spokes…..
I want to agree with you but I can’t. I have Fabian friends who are open about their desire to reset society and all its social norms and structures back to year Zero but they realise they can’t do it all in one go – they have to be “progressive” about it.
Back to my earlier post, if you asked the question “Should children be forcibly taken by state employees, backed by secret courts, from their parents and given for adoption by Homosexuals, Lesbians or Transgender people?” I would imagine 99% of the population would think this an extremely bad idea.
But bit by bit, the one party NatLab Government are achieving a situation where this will be perfectly normal. First they normailse gay marriage, then they massivley publisice and celebrate “gay parents” when Prince George comes to visit, next we have Cabinet ministers telling us that “there is one remaining equality missing” and the campaign begins: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Make-Gay-Adoption-Legal-in-New-Zealand/128540560496055 then we yesterday passed a law so that the State can forcibly remove children if the State think the children is being “neglected”.
All of a sudden the formally absurd will become the new normal and it’ll be normal to take children away for adoption to a state sanctioned “modern” couple…….
It is just SO blatant now. I keep thinking there’s going to be a revolution to rout these Marxists but then I see National climbing to above 50% in the polls and you realise just how dumbed down and naive the general NZ public is.
Watch this video if you want to understand the Fabian mindset
Um . . . what constitutes poverty or relative poverty ? For me it’s a nonsense misuse of the word. And Labour are therefore probably a dumb misuse of a vote.
Poverty is deemed to be circumstances in which some are unable to afford what is deemed to be the basic necessities of living in the particular society in which they inhabit. Therefore, as WINZ (a governmental agency) has deemed that certain things are ‘necessities’, those that do not have those things (by not being able to afford them) are considered to be in ‘poverty’ in New Zealand. As an example, it is deemed unsatisfactory for a child not to have television (my personal opinion is that they are probably a damn sight better off it they don’t). Therefore, WINZ will provide assistance for a family to have a television set. Those families that still cannot afford one, would meet one of the criteria of ‘living in poverty’.
Of course one of the major determining factors is the quality and regularity of good nutritious food, and the ability of the family to provide this food. This determination is not judged by income alone, but by circumstance. So for example, if a person is earning a certain amount, but more than half their income is paying rent or whatever (example only), and that expense means they are unable to afford the right sort of food, then that is deemed to be ‘poverty’. There are of course other determining factors, but the gist is that if they are unable to provide the basic level of what is deemed to be necessary in our society, then they fall into the poverty situation. What other countries have or don’t have, has little to do with it.
Kiwi kids no better off than those in India’s slums – author
The poorest Kiwi children are now no better off than some children in the slums of India, a leading author says.
Professor Jonathan Boston, co-author of Child Poverty in New Zealand, said at the book’s launch in Auckland last night that he saw worse poverty in some Kiwi families than he saw when he spent a month late last year in Delhi slums where his wife, Dr Mary Hutchinson, worked as a volunteer doctor for a Christian charity. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11276365
Labour’s answer – the $60 baby bonus
Over which there was such a furor – you get the paid time off or $60 a week, but not both – people totally missed the kick in date is April 1, 2016. Not 2015. But fucking 2016.
Labour hung this about their claim of 50,000 children, under three years, in “poverty”
So this policy does nothing for them, nor an extra 33,300 [this year and next] so 83,300 before parent[s] of a single new born baby gets $60 a week from April 1, 2016
@ lilman (802 comments) says:
June 20th, 2014 at 8:57 am
First of all, I never made any bets with you. Just because you suggest it, doesn’t mean I accepted it. I told you then and I’ll tell you again, I have no intention of not posting when I feel like it. If DPF decides he doesn’t want me posting here, then he will take the necessary action to prevent it, until then, nothing you say would affect me in the slightest.
Secondly, I have never, and will never let what happens in Politics affect my over all enjoyment of life. It is very sad that your complete life experience is judged by what you read on blogs and politics, but for most people, they are merely a small fraction of their life experience, and I suspect the majority, although spending time on here, actually have a life in which they give this blog no more thought, and certainly do not let it dominate their existence.
It is rather sad that you feel so obsessed by this election that you need to stalk, and gamble over it. But I guess if your life is somewhat empty, and politics is all you have, then its better to be so entertained, than simply playing with yourself all day.
Re: ‘…Adoption by a state sanctioned “modern” couple’
It’as a funny thing, that absolutely NOTHING is EVER mentioned (least of all by the MSM), about the ‘possibility’ (gasp!) (and, indeed, regrettably, the very distinct likelihood), that the same gender ‘modern couple’ may eventually ‘Divorce’ and that this will inevitably have an effect on the child of said couple.
Sadly ‘divorce’ does occur even in such supposedly ‘superior’ groups, and, if US studies are to be believed, the psychological damage to the by-now very confused child is horrendous.
But, because it doesn’t fit the narrative, this aspect of the ‘oh so responsible / all sweetness and light’ rainbow groups is never, ever mentioned.
Very odd, and, for the child caught in the middle, very sad.
Would ‘State intervention’ be a good idea in such a situation, or would that be a ‘bridge too far’?
They had done a manual search of hard copies, but only kept them for about 3 years. One computer hard drive from his office had been stolen, another was disabled in a power spike, and the letter was mis-filed under LUI rather than LIU in a retired staff member’s files.
God is not happy with David either. You want these people to run the country for you?
@ Komata (1,056 comments) says:
June 20th, 2014 at 9:13 am
If the State was to intervene in such circumstances, then it would need to do the same to ALL couples who separate (including those not married).
Children are affected by the separation of parents, and changes to the family dynamics, regardless of what sex their parents are. The negative effects can be really damaging, and leave life long ‘scars’.
Personally I don’t think the State should be interfering, however, I do believe there needs to be much more emphasis put on the children in such cases, and the parents made aware that they are their combined responsibility. All too often children are used as pawns in the situation.
I still maintain that human development 101 should be compulsory in the school curriculum, so that everyone knows what the basic requirements of leading a self sufficient and healthy life are. In the old days this was passed from parent to child, it seems somewhere along the way that knowledge has missed a couple of generations in some circumstances.
I want to agree with you but I can’t. I have Fabian friends
Thanks for steer
Interesting video clip, taken I notice from that most “progressive” of all TV outlets in the USA, MSNBC…..
Hitler would have been proud of the silly woman. The mind-set that the state owns children is sick, but the MSM must accept that they promote such obscene views. It explains, in large part, why an intelligent woman like Elizabeth Rata, abandoned the Fabians, and why they and their disciples hate her. They really are luddites.
Thanks All-in-Red. So it seems they did get their charity status back. I’m sure I’m correct in saying that they said they would stop political activities if they did —where is McCready when you need him ???
“……As I have said here before, there is no possibility whatever of any government espousing extreme right or left wing views ever securing power in New Zealand by legitimate means. Any party wishing to govern and to both influence and implement policy must win and control the centre…….western democratic politics are driven by the art of the possible. If you cannot accept that principle, go back to school…..”
What Sarah Palin is really known for is “Sell Baby Sell” – she sold the Republicans their own polices – the exact same policies that they allowed to be compromised by the left. She didn’t invent any new ones.
Everyone is talking about the same things – but it’s who you compromise with that matters!
And that’s all Mr Craig is really going to do – instead of Key compromising only with the left on every matter in the country via Select Committees – he’s now going to be hearing from Mr Craig. The public will probably be first though.
Keating said you have to ‘take the public with you’ – well, all Key’s really done so far is taken the center itself! They never came to him! Where has he taken them to in 6 yrs? Nothing has changed from Helen.
The poor arn’t the fucken center. But the poor is where all his policies have been. decile this blah blah… National have compromised themselves too much. They’ve simply done stuff for the far left’s rusted on. Or for people who don’t vote at all.
It’s piss easy. Maintain the faith. Or as Redbaiter said : It’s a One Party Socialist State.
The PR-political machine has begun softening us up to open more doors to asylum seekers. A Hooerald article today implies we should be taking more because we haven’t increased our quota for years and because other countries are taking more.
Because the big upheavals at the moment are in the Middle East, this is in effect a call for us to open the door to more Muslims.
Why? This is likely connected to NZ pompous politicians and pampered MFAT diplomats’ vainglorious campaign to win NZ a seat on the Security Council. To get, then maintain this, there will have to be big-noting from our tiny country, and this will doubtless entail taking in thousands of refugees and asylum seekers. This is how we got the Somali incomers. It was about the last time we had a seat on the council.
Red: Well you know what to do…Gather 500 like minded souls around you – that should be 30 minutes work, surely – and set up your own party…Select the party list (an authoritarian like you would only countenance you being the soul arbiter) and stand! Quick! Before the country goes any further to the Prog dogs…
Jack5: I am firmly of the view that taking in one more Muslim into this country is one Muslim too many…
Hey Jack5 we’re being betrayed by the very same people who profess to be in parliament looking after our interests. if you’re a white European, and a male especially you’re getting fucked over by these duplicitious slimebags who smirk behind your back at how easy you are to fool.
There’s only one real answer to these pigs and that is to STOP VOTING FOR THEM. Who to vote for? look at who they hate the most. Its Colin Craig, because for all of his failings, he’s not one of them. he’s an outsider to the Wellington beltway gangsters.
Vote Craig and Conservative Party even if its just a protest vote these Prog scum will eventually get the message. Voting for the same old same old means no change and the things you’re complaining of just go on happening.
We simply must break the sclerotic orthodoxy of the Nat/ Labour one party state, and the CP represents the best opportunity to do that that has come along in a while.
Jeez, at least the guy has got some fight. He’s not just some smirking twit gormlessly sucking up to communist criminals like Obama and the Clintons. His posters attacking the loser tweedle dee National Party show that.
Daniel Barenboim was big enough to conduct the music of the anti-semite Wagner in Jersalem, because the music transcends even its own composer’s racial hatred… but for you a Schubert song is just an endorsement of your master race.
What are the words of the Schiller poem used in Beethoven’s 9th symphony? You should look them up.
What a nasty sack of shit you are.
Petty nasty little xenophobes like you aren’t good enough to comment on beauty in music.
“Reddy obviously hasn’t listened to much Chinese music.”
From one of the only Kiwi groups I really like, and one of our only Neo-Folk bands, a traditional Chinese folk song. Cannot understand a word of it, but it’s still powerful. Red will hate it, because he’s NOT a real Conservative.
“NZ’s defence is quite inadequate e.g. using Orions for bombing runs [although it does show the versatility of the Orions. Switzerland during in the 1930s poured money into defence rather than social welfare programs and it saved them during World War Two.”
If Hitler had wanted to conquer Switzerland he could have done it in no time flat.
You do realise that repeating this is going to have no effect on me whatsoever, right?
Sorry Red, but no. I’m going to continue challenging your claim to be a Conservative and continue to point out that your living in Marxist la la land with your progressive notions of ideological purity.
I’m telling you to FO because all you’re trying to do is point score against Redbaiter because I’ve offended you. To you the issues are secondary. I’m interested in the argument, not dealing with the obsessive nit picking pedantry of some revenge driven child like numpty who probably still lives with his mum and dad and has yet to learn basic comprehension and grammar. That’s grammar with an a you loser.
And spare me the hypocritical smilies. That’s a dead giveaway to you having the mindset of a snivelling leftist dickwad.
“A person who cannot defend their arguments with, well, an actual argument, but resorts to just telling people to “F-off” is likely not very well versed in the philosophy they claim to support.”
Sometimes you get to a stage where “F-off” is the only avenue left. Take my dealings with the NZ Police for example: after years of trying to get them to do their duty without fear or favour I decided that instead of taking up arms against them I’d just tell them to “F-off”.
@ ciaron (1,258 comments) says:
June 20th, 2014 at 10:33 am
As I said yesterday, I’m not worried about them. I’ve been aware for many years how personally some people take what they read on the internet, letting it flow into their private lives, and how desperate they are to try and silence anyone that doesn’t agree with them. I enjoy robust discussion and welcome alternative opinions, which is why I come here – a place where obviously few are going to agree with me, but its great exercise for the mind, and challenging, which I enjoy. I see no point in taking part in discussing topics where everyone agrees – might have been the done thing back in the 1800’s in gentlemen’s clubs, but it really is a sad practice in today’s society.
What I found funny though was the stupid way in which people ignorantly use their email, thinking that what they say stays within the group and how unaware they are of how these things are passed on – to people they least want to see them.
So that’s a no to having an intelligent argument then Red.
Basically you just strike me as too dumb to defend your positions.
And personal attacks are right out of the Marxist play book remember? You said that yourself, and here you are behaving like a typical Leftist, all piss and wind, no substance, and riddled with Lefty style personal attacks.
Thinking of joining the Communist Party Red? You’ll fit right in!
I notice that TVNZ is stirring up the homosexual hornets nest again, in the form of Seven Sharp getting a couple of actors (of the same sex) to perform public displays of affection and then judging the public reaction. According to a companion story on the GayNZ website,
Without giving too much away before the segment airs, the reporter says while there wasn’t any overt negative reaction, aside from a couple of shouted comments on the street, the conversations they had with passers-by afterwards were different. “There was still quite strong feeling and strong opinion against gay relationships, which I just, yeah – it does stun me that that’s still the case.”
So, no overt negative reaction, therefore they had to poll passers-by to find some. According to the Seven Sharp blurb – “the results will surprise you!” You see, it doesn’t matter if gay marriage is legal, as long as homosexuality itself is not 100% publicly accepted (as the GayNZ headline reads – “Gay affection appears far from ‘100% OK'”). You and the whole nation MUST believe that it’s OK or it’s not good enough. Gay behaviour must be normalized.
As Robert R. Reilly writes –
The power of rationalization drives the culture war, gives it its particular revolutionary character, and makes its advocates indefatigable. It may draw its energy from desperation, but it is all the more powerful for that. Since failed rationalization means self-recrimination, it must be avoided at all cost. For this reason, the differences over which the culture war is being fought are not subject to reasoned discourse. Persons protecting themselves by rationalizing are interested not in finding the truth, but in maintaining the illusion that allows them to continue their behavior. For them to succeed in this, everyone must accede to their rationalization. This is why revolutionary change is required. The necessity for self-justification requires the complicity of the whole culture. Holdouts cannot be tolerated because they are potential rebukes. The self-hatred, anger, and guilt that a person possessed of a functioning conscience would normally feel from doing wrong are redirected by the rationalization and projected upon society as a whole (if the society is healthy), or upon those in society who do not accept the rationalization.
The homosexual movement’s rationalization is far more widely advanced in its claims. According to Jeffrey Levi, former executive director for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, “We (homosexuals)_ are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a right to protection from wrong. We have a right – as heterosexuals have already – to see government and society affirm our lives.”
What’s interesting is that the show had problems finding gay people to appear on camera. Eventually, the gay producer of Seven Sharp (surprise, surprise) and an actor had to join in.
Even a widespread search through community contacts and social media was sluggish. “It took a very, very long time,” Higgins says. “We had two or three bites, but when it actually came down to it they all pulled out.”
They eventually found two couples, including a lesbian pair in Dargaville and an Auckland gay duo. Gay Seven Sharp Supervising Producer Jonathan Williams and an actor made up the third couple – Williams took part after trying and failing to get coupled-up friends, and even singles ones, to take part. He says none were comfortable “being that gay on TV”.
Our local climate deniers end up with poached eggs spattered over their faces and court jester costumes . The NZ Climate Science Education Trust (CSET) virtually bankrupt and unlikely ever to meet its considerable liabilities . Yet that has not stopped its Chairman retired lawyer and National Party politician , whizzing “off to Las Vegas to speak at the latest climate crank networking event organized by far right US lobby group the Heartland Institute ,”
“Neofolk is a form of folk music-inspired experimental music that emerged from post-industrial music circles. Neofolk can either be solely acoustic folk music or a blend of acoustic folk instrumentation aided by varieties of accompanying sounds such as pianos, strings and elements of industrial music and experimental music. The genre encompasses a wide assortment of themes. Neofolk musicians often have ties to other genres such as neoclassical and martial industrial. A majority of artists within the neofolk genre focus on archaic, cultural and literary references. Local traditions and indigenous beliefs tend to be portrayed heavily as well as esoteric and historical topics.”
Well the silly little fag needs to get out a bit more.
I was once fairly ambivalent towards queers and had no particular problem with their life style, but since they’ve become a political movement and in most cases (but not always) attached themselves quite firmly to the progressive faction, I’ve become far less detached.
Their ugly public displays of profanity and bad taste, (“Hero” parade for example) always presented with layers of brash and smug self assurance are also particularly off putting.
Then there are their public advocates, like Chardonnay Guy for example who writes here frequently. With his arrogant ill mannered snideness and his unashamed hatred of Christians he is a stark reminder of what nastiness some homosexuals are capable of.
The GayNZ writer must be pretty thick if he’s only now coming to grips with the concept of backlash.
Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace (who subsequently left because of all the arguments not based in science) says that greenies are now raging extremists and that there is NO scientific proof at all for climate change. Moore was pretty much the only member of Greenpeace who knew anything about science, and always tried to keep Greenpeace claims factual, until he left.
Patrick Moore, a Canadian environmentalist who helped found Greenpeace in the Seventies but subsequently left in protest at its increasingly extreme, anti-scientific, anti-capitalist stance, argues that the green position on climate change fails the most basic principles of the scientific method.
“The certainty among many scientists that humans are the main cause of climate change, including global warming, is not based on the replication of observable events. It is based on just two things, the theoretical effect of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, predominantly carbon dioxide, and the predictions of computer models using those theoretical calculations. There is no scientific “proof” at all.”
Moore goes on to list some key facts about “climate change” which are ignored by true believers.
1. The concentration of CO2 in the global atmosphere is lower today, even including human emissions, than it has been during most of the existence of life on Earth.
2. The global climate has been much warmer than it is today during most of the existence of life on Earth. Today we are in an interglacial period of the Pleistocene Ice Age that began 2.5 million years ago and has not ended.
3. There was an Ice Age 450 million years ago when CO2 was about 10 times higher than it is today.
4. Humans evolved in the tropics near the equator. We are a tropical species and can only survive in colder climates due to fire, clothing and shelter.
5. CO2 is the most important food for all life on earth. All green plants use CO2 to produce the sugars that provide energy for their growth and our growth. Without CO2 in the atmosphere carbon-based life could never have evolved.
6. The optimum CO2 level for most plants is about 1600 parts per million, four times higher than the level today. This is why greenhouse growers purposely inject the CO2-rich exhaust from their gas and wood-fired heaters into the greenhouse, resulting in a 40-80 per cent increase in growth.
7. If human emissions of CO2 do end up causing significant warming (which is not certain) it may be possible to grow food crops in northern Canada and Russia, vast areas that are now too cold for agriculture.
8. Whether increased CO2 levels cause significant warming or not, the increased CO2 levels themselves will result in considerable increases in the growth rate of plants, including our food crops and forests.
9. There has been no further global warming for nearly 18 years during which time about 25 per cent of all the CO2 ever emitted by humans has been added to the atmosphere. How long will it remain flat and will it next go up or back down? Now we are out of the realm of facts and back into the game of predictions.
Moore makes his remarks in the foreword to a new book by bestselling Australian geologist Dr Ian Plimer called Not For Greens. The book describes the various, complex industrial processes which go into the making of just a single teaspoon, starting with the mining of various metals.
This is interesting – there is a link between “that awful video” that the U.S Govt once claimed caused rioting that led to the Benghazi attack, and the Canadian makers of the Obamacare website. The same company is involved, and indeed, helped to push the video, before disappearing into the blue again.
Walid Shoebat has uncovered ties that show the company who created the Obamacare website, CGI Federal, may have also helped push the “Innocence of Muslims” video:
The evidence is well established that in 2010, CGI acquired Stanley Associates, which “provides services to the U.S. federal civilian, defense and intelligence agencies”. 
When the crudely produced video “Innocence of Muslims” was posted to YouTube it needed a boost, especially since it was posted by someone no one had ever heard of and who had only uploaded two videos – that were basically the same.
A short version of the video was uploaded to a Youtube Channel called NewsPoliticsNow3 (NPN3). This channel has been linked to Stanley Associates, the company purchased by CGI Federal, via their logo:
Screenshot reveals NPN connection to Stanley as well as CGI merger with Stanley in 2010.
Here is the screenshot of the Youtube Channel with the logo at the top:
Note: Screen capture from 9/12/12
Photo by: top right
Here’s an interesting twist. The short version was uploaded on September 11, 2012 to NewsPoliticsNow3 (NPN3). The original version was posted to Sam Bacile’s Youtube Channel (alias for Nakoula Basseley Nakoula) a couple of months earlier.
But it was in fact NPN3 which gave the video a new title called “Innocence of Muslims”. See the screenshot above. It wasn’t named that on Sam Bacile’s channel:
According to Walid Shoebat:
After NPN3 caused the video to gain more than four million views of its 1:32 long trailer, NewsPoliticsNow3 took down the video on or before 9/20/12. The skids of Sam Bacile’s YouTube channel had been sufficiently greased; his video was off and running. NPN3 had done its job of priming the pump; then it vanished.
Fletch, Re Patrick Moore. Your account of his departure from Greenpeace does not present the full facts or picture . Here a different one emerges of one whose autocratic style got him offside with his former colleagues. On leaving it was not long before he established his on anti green PR firm that , among many things, provided advice and assistance for pulp, paper and Palm Oil interests (FPP ) in Indonesia noted for their clear felling and other associated environmental degradations in e.g Sumatra.
And you find it quite acceptable that The NZ Climate Science Education Trust (CSET) and its Chair barry Brill can apparently walk away from their financial liabilities over their failed court action against NIWA.?
As far as vocalists, check out Steve Balsamo doing a song live from show Poe (based on Edgar Allan Poe).
Apparently, he made Andrew Lloyd Webber cry with his performance of Gethsemane from Jesus Christ Superstar (also available on youtube). Balsamo has this ability to get into a part so much that he actually cries while performing/singing.
flipper – “As I have said here before, there is no possibility whatever of any government espousing extreme right or left wing views ever securing power in New Zealand by legitimate means. Any party wishing to govern and to both influence and implement policy must win and control the centre.”
I wish I was as confident. We are still very close to a coalition of the envious taking the treasury benches this year, with a dysfunctional Labour Party which would be easily rail-roaded by the hard-left Greens into doing virtually whatever they wanted. Nationalisation of all the power companies, etc. – even Labour wants to do that. Add hard-left Hone and Internet into the mix, and you have exactly the scenario you are talking about.
Russel has already shown the power he had over Labour when he got Shearer kicked out. There are obviously a lot of Green supporter still in the Labour Party.
Fletch, as I’ve posted Greenpeace give a very different view of why Patrick Moore left and Fox News naturally give him some very sympathetic airtime.
Yes , Moore was quickly up and running with his PR firm recommending clear felling and extinction of Sumatran tigers etc, etc.
My guess he’s getting paid a lot, lot more .!
Start your post with a lie Fletch
It has been pointed out that Patric Moore was not a founder of green piece many times to you yet you still keep Up the lie.
The author of your crap is on record as saying he has absolutely no idea about science because he doesn’t actually read any
He is just another anti science climate change denial religion nutter .
The Lies of Sarah Palin: The Untold Story Behind Her Relentless Quest for Power,
“…The Lies of Sarah Palin is a journalistic tour de force that vividly reveals the Queen of the Tea Party movement as a vengeful and manipulative empress without clothes. This is the definitive book on Sarah Palin.”
The left’s stubborn refusal to deny their historical connections to Adolf Hitler is starkly illustrative of the delusions that underpin their worldview.
Hitler lead the National Socialist Worker’s Party. He came to power after a vicious and murderous struggle with other far left groups. Once in power he solidified his position by exercising far more power than he was entitled to and made Germany a totalitarian one party state. Then he began killing off the people he didn’t like. In the end, the only way he could be made to relinquish his murderous hold on power was by force of arms.
This is the pattern that has been repeated throughout history in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia and Soviet Russia. Its a pattern that runs totally contrary to the Conservatives wish for a small weak govt that can never intimidate its citizens.
Yet stupid ignorant of history half educated socialist mungbeans, in most cases the product of a corrupt and dysfunctional education system, still try to construct a connection between Conservatives and Hitler. Proving they’re hopelessly unable to reason and are in their mass delusions a plague on western civilisations just as grasshoppers are to grain growers.
If we were ever free of the left and their insanity, this world could be such a beautiful and prosperous place. A place where no Hitler would ever rise to power ever again.
The party emerged from the German nationalist, racist and populist Freikorps paramilitary culture, which fought against the communist uprisings in post-World War I Germany. Advocacy of a form of socialism by right-wing figures and movements in Germany became common during and after World War I, influencing Nazism. Arthur Moeller van den Bruck of the Conservative Revolutionary movement coined the term “Third Reich” and advocated an ideology combining the nationalism of the right and the socialism of the left. Prominent Conservative Revolutionary member Oswald Spengler’s conception of a “Prussian Socialism” influenced the Nazis. The party was created as a means to draw workers away from communism and into völkisch nationalism. Initially, Nazi political strategy focused on anti-big business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric, although such aspects were later downplayed in order to gain the support of industrial entities, and in 1930s the party’s focus shifted to antisemitic and anti-Marxist themes
Your anti marxist politics and those of the nazis are alike in many ways redtard
As I said you are an empty vessels making lots of meaningless noise yet when challenged has no answers to questions .
Bloody funny how the left bitch and moan about Singapore but there’s no Singaporeans risking their lives on rubber tyre rafts heading for the mainland as there is in Cuba, which according to the same left wingers is a heaven on earth.
I know many who have gone back disgusted with the high taxes, crime, racism, drug and alcohol addiction and general profanity of life here. They say a lot of NZers are communists, and Singaporeans don’t like communists much.
Lee Kuan Yew taught them about the commies, whereas in NZ, its the commies doing the teaching. Its why you RRM are such a boring commie twit.
Unfortunately this article is behind the WSJ paywall, so some quotes will have to suffice. First up is a the usual establishment of bona fides before the farting in church begins:
I’ve spent my life on the foreign-policy left. I opposed the Vietnam War, U.S. intervention in Central America in the 1980s and our invasion of Iraq. I have headed a group trying to block U.S. arms and training for “friendly” dictators, and I have written books about how U.S. policy in the developing world is neocolonial.
That’s Caleb Rossiter, a left-leaning professor of media studies (chuckle) at American University and a fellow with the Institute for Policy Studies, which is about as left wing as it gets in the USA outside of Mother Jones and The Nation. The farting commences:
But I oppose my allies’ well-meaning campaign for “climate justice.” More than 230 organizations, including Africa Action and Oxfam, want industrialized countries to pay “reparations” to African governments for droughts, rising sea levels and other alleged results of what Ugandan strongman Yoweri Museveni calls “climate aggression.” And I oppose the campaign even more for trying to deny to Africans the reliable electricity—and thus the economic development and extended years of life—that fossil fuels can bring.
The left wants to stop industrialization—even if the hypothesis of catastrophic, man-made global warming is false.
Heh, heh, heh. But it gets even better. A few days after writing this Rossiter got a letter from his beloved Institute for Policy Studies, an outfit he’d been with for 23 years:
We would like to inform you that we are terminating your position as an Associate Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies. As you know, Associate Fellows at IPS are sponsored by an IPS project director or by the director. In your case, both of us sponsored your Fellowship. Unfortunately, we now feel that your views on key issues, including climate science, climate justice, and many aspects of U.S. policy to Africa, diverge so significantly from ours that a productive working relationship is untenable. The other project directors of IPS feel the same. .
Another leftist has the scales falling from his eyes:
“When I countered a claim of ‘rapidly accelerating’ temperature change with the [UN] IPCC’s own data’, showing the nearly 20-year temperature pause — the best response I ever got was ‘Caleb, I don’t have time for this.’”
Mr Rossiter probably well knows the whole “Are you now, or have you ever been a member of … routine but I think the following paraphrase applies better:
Everything within the environment, nothing outside the environment, nothing against the environment.
About a decade ago, Rossiter assigned his international statistics students a paper that asked them to analyze some topic of international affairs using statistics. When one female student turned in a paper on humans’ role in global warming, he gave her an F.
“She came to see me and said, ‘But Doc, it’s not fair, I am just repeating exactly what they said,” he recalled. “And I said, ‘That’s impossible, because the evidence you cited here is just wishful thinking, there is no real data.’”
“So I sat down with her and we looked over the article, which is one of the classic ones in climate change in which they developed a computer model that tries to say how much of the half a degree rise in temperature can you attribute to natural variation or the Arctic oscillation, or whatever the hell is going on up in the north there when the seas gets warmer and colder over long periods, things sort of like El Niño- or is it human [caused]?”
“I had to raise her grade because she certainly had cited the evidence they had given, but I just couldn’t give her much of a grade because she should have been able to see – as most people should be able to see – that the computer models were just guessing and sort of notional, and just kind of playing around to get a good fit, but didn’t have much scientific basis.”
“So I became quite interested in this phenomenon,” he added. “So many of my colleagues and so much of educated America and liberal newspapers and all just believe that mathematicians have set up models that should make us very certain that the recent half-degree uptick from 1980 to 2000 was human caused – when in fact they were just playing with the models. I use models a lot, and these were pretty weak.”
From then on, Rossiter specifically assigned students papers to look at global warming and climate change issues, and over the years graded hundreds of papers on the topic. The results from this further solidified his belief that the global warming crisis is one that’s man-made.
“So there is really two big statistical questions: what caused the little warming, and what effect did the warming have on these other climate variables?” he said. “I am a pretty decent statistician, I have taught for many, many years. The data that support the headlines are very, very weak, very, very notional, and simply not logical.”
“You couldn’t have this many terrible effects from a half a degree rise in global temperature. It’s probable that there are some, but it gets a little boring because it’s always weak data, because that is the nature of a tremendously complex system.”
Over the years, he’s broken a few students’ hearts when they learn of this truth.
Redbaiter (7,125 comments) says:
June 20th, 2014 at 1:11 pm
“The left’s stubborn refusal to deny their historical connections to Adolf Hitler is starkly illustrative of the delusions that underpin their worldview…..”
Your inflammatory and tedious bombast is more in tune with Hitler and the Nazis.
You do not understand the historical facts. Hitler was plainly and hysterically anti Communist ( like You) and lumped the Jews and the Bolsheviks together as the real enemy,
One of his first actions was to turn against the left faction in his party the S A led by Eric Rohm and liquidated them in 1934 .Their anti capitalist rhetoric deeply concerned German Industrialists like Krupp and Farben and Hitler quickly saw their point,
Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile
Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal
Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana
Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela
Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala
Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico
Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia
Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru
Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Académie des Sciences, France
Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada
Academy of Athens
Academy of Science of Mozambique
Academy of Science of South Africa
Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy of Sciences of Moldova
Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt
Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science
African Academy of Sciences
Albanian Academy of Sciences
Amazon Environmental Research Institute
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Anthropological Association
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Fisheries Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
American Public Health Association
American Quaternary Association
American Society for Microbiology
American Society of Agronomy
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Australian Academy of Science
Australian Bureau of Meteorology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Institute of Marine Science
Australian Institute of Physics
Australian Marine Sciences Association
Australian Medical Association
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
Botanical Society of America
Brazilian Academy of Sciences
British Antarctic Survey
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
California Academy of Sciences
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Canadian Association of Physicists
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Geophysical Union
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Society of Soil Science
Canadian Society of Zoologists
Caribbean Academy of Sciences views
Center for International Forestry Research
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia)
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences
Crop Science Society of America
Cuban Academy of Sciences
Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters
Ecological Society of America
Ecological Society of Australia
Environmental Protection Agency
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
European Science Foundation
Federation of American Scientists
French Academy of Sciences
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
Geological Society of London
Georgian Academy of Sciences
German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indian National Science Academy
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK
International Alliance of Research Universities
International Arctic Science Committee
International Association for Great Lakes Research
International Council for Science
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
International Research Institute for Climate and Society
International Union for Quaternary Research
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
Islamic World Academy of Sciences
Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Korean Academy of Science and Technology
Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts
l’Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Latin American Academy of Sciences
Latvian Academy of Sciences
Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences
Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology
Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts
National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
National Academy of Sciences, United States of America
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Association of State Foresters
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Council of Engineers Australia
National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Research Council
National Science Foundation
Natural Environment Research Council, UK
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Network of African Science Academies
New York Academy of Sciences
Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters
Oklahoma Climatological Survey
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Pakistan Academy of Sciences
Palestine Academy for Science and Technology
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Polish Academy of Sciences
Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain
Royal Astronomical Society, UK
Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
Royal Irish Academy
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
Royal Scientific Society of Jordan
Royal Society of Canada
Royal Society of Chemistry, UK
Royal Society of the United Kingdom
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Russian Academy of Sciences
Science and Technology, Australia
Science Council of Japan
Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research
Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Slovak Academy of Sciences
Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Society for Ecological Restoration International
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of American Foresters
Society of Biology (UK)
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Sudanese National Academy of Science
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
The Wildlife Society (international)
Turkish Academy of Sciences
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Forestry Congress
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization
Zambia Academy of Sciences
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences
I would rather belong to the cult of science than the cult of ugly jerks who have to pay chicks to fuck them.
Another episode of the Kickstarter-sponsored continuation of the original Star Trek series, Star Trek Continues, is online. It follows directly after the episode Mirror, Mirror from the original TV series.
“Nazis were socialists”
“No they weren’t”
“Yes they were”
You’d be better off concentrating on what Nazis actually did rather than arguing about how they should be labelled. It seems important to some, however…
You’d be better off concentrating on what Nazis actually did rather than arguing about how they should be labelled. It seems important to some, however…
I agree, but I’ve watched several decades of arguments – in writing, on video, and in person – where it often seemed very, very important for left-wingers to label the right-winger in the debate as a Nazi, or a Neo-Nazi, or a best of all – a Crypto-Nazi.
That’s all began to change since Goldberg published his bestseller – which was exactly his intention of course. Now we have increasing numbers of left-wingers explaining how they’ve tired of the epithets and how labelling is just awful and unhelpful to a debate.
Seems to have had the desired effect, despite being “trash”, milky.
Besides, I’ve seen any amount of stuff praised to the skies by left-wing intellectuals that has turned out to be “trash”, starting with Das Kapital and most recently with Capital in the Twenty-First Century.
I’d be willing to bet you’ll never refer to those as “trash” or their authors as “nutters”.
tom hunter (4,252 comments) says:
June 20th, 2014 at 2:46 pm
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences
Is you picking one name out of many and focusing your argument and your beliefs about AGW on that
A reflection of your mindset Tom
Denial is sad in the stupid for someone like you its truly pathetic.
BTW, what are your predictions for dairy prices this season? The financial, economic and marketing experts at Fonterra have had their best crack at it, but before I finalise my budget this year I thought I’d get the word from my favourite AGW guru and his powerful forecasting theory.
Nick Smith is going to change the law ( I assume the change will be quite specific ) to allow taking the native trees felled in the recent big storm to allow them to be milled and the wood utilised. Very sensible but the Greens say they should be left to rot !!!!
For Redbaiter particularly, and the general edification of the KB community.
Ten general Conservative Principles, by Russell Kirk.
“Being neither a religion nor an ideology, the body of opinion termed conservatism possesses no Holy Writ and no Das Kapital to provide dogmata. So far as it is possible to determine what conservatives believe, the first principles of the conservative persuasion are derived from what leading conservative writers and public men have professed during the past two centuries. After some introductory remarks on this general theme, I will proceed to list ten such conservative principles.
Perhaps it would be well, most of the time, to use this word “conservative” as an adjective chiefly. For there exists no Model Conservative, and conservatism is the negation of ideology: it is a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the civil social order.
The attitude we call conservatism is sustained by a body of sentiments, rather than by a system of ideological dogmata. It is almost true that a conservative may be defined as a person who thinks himself such. The conservative movement or body of opinion can accommodate a considerable diversity of views on a good many subjects, there being no Test Act or Thirty-Nine Articles of the conservative creed.
In essence, the conservative person is simply one who finds the permanent things more pleasing than Chaos and Old Night. (Yet conservatives know, with Burke, that healthy “change is the means of our preservation.”) A people’s historic continuity of experience, says the conservative, offers a guide to policy far better than the abstract designs of coffee-house philosophers.
It is not possible to draw up a neat catalogue of conservatives’ convictions; nevertheless, I offer you, summarily, ten general principles; it seems safe to say that most conservatives would subscribe to most of these maxims. In various editions of my book The Conservative Mind I have listed certain canons of conservative thought—the list differing somewhat from edition to edition; in my anthology The Portable Conservative Reader I offer variations upon this theme. Now I present to you a summary of conservative assumptions differing somewhat from my canons in those two books of mine. In fine, the diversity of ways in which conservative views may find expression is itself proof that conservatism is no fixed ideology. What particular principles conservatives emphasize during any given time will vary with the circumstances and necessities of that era.
First, the conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order. That order is made for man, and man is made for it: human nature is a constant, and moral truths are permanent.
Second, the conservative adheres to custom, convention, and continuity. It is old custom that enables people to live together peaceably; the destroyers of custom demolish more than they know or desire. It is through convention—a word much abused in our time—that we contrive to avoid perpetual disputes about rights and duties: law at base is a body of conventions. Continuity is the means of linking generation to generation; it matters as much for society as it does for the individual; without it, life is meaningless.
Third, conservatives believe in what may be called the principle of prescription. Conservatives sense that modern people are dwarfs on the shoulders of giants, able to see farther than their ancestors only because of the great stature of those who have preceded us in time. Therefore conservatives very often emphasize the importance of prescription—that is, of things established by immemorial usage, so that the mind of man runneth not to the contrary. There exist rights of which the chief sanction is their antiquity—including rights to property, often. Similarly, our morals are prescriptive in great part. Conservatives argue that we are unlikely, we moderns, to make any brave new discoveries in morals or politics or taste. It is perilous to weigh every passing issue on the basis of private judgment and private rationality. The individual is foolish, but the species is wise, Burke declared. In politics we do well to abide by precedent and precept and even prejudice, for the great mysterious incorporation of the human race has acquired a prescriptive wisdom far greater than any man’s petty private rationality.
Fourth, conservatives are guided by their principle of prudence. Burke agrees with Plato that in the statesman, prudence is chief among virtues. Any public measure ought to be judged by its probable long-run consequences, not merely by temporary advantage or popularity. Liberals and radicals, the conservative says, are imprudent: for they dash at their objectives without giving much heed to the risk of new abuses worse than the evils they hope to sweep away.
Fifth, conservatives pay attention to the principle of variety. They feel affection for the proliferating intricacy of long-established social institutions and modes of life, as distinguished from the narrowing uniformity and deadening egalitarianism of radical systems. For the preservation of a healthy diversity in any civilization, there must survive orders and classes, differences in material condition, and many sorts of inequality. The only true forms of equality are equality at the Last Judgment and equality before a just court of law; all other attempts at levelling must lead, at best, to social stagnation.
Sixth, conservatives are chastened by their principle of imperfectability. Human nature suffers irremediably from certain grave faults, the conservatives know. Man being imperfect, no perfect social order ever can be created. Because of human restlessness, mankind would grow rebellious under any utopian domination, and would break out once more in violent discontent—or else expire of boredom. To seek for utopia is to end in disaster, the conservative says: we are not made for perfect things. All that we reasonably can expect is a tolerably ordered, just, and free society, in which some evils, maladjustments, and suffering will continue to lurk. By proper attention to prudent reform, we may preserve and improve this tolerable order. But if the old institutional and moral safeguards of a nation are neglected, then the anarchic impulse in humankind breaks loose: “the ceremony of innocence is drowned.” The ideologues who promise the perfection of man and society have converted a great part of the twentieth-century world into a terrestrial hell.
Seventh, conservatives are persuaded that freedom and property are closely linked. Separate property from private possession, and Leviathan becomes master of all. Upon the foundation of private property, great civilizations are built. The more widespread is the possession of private property, the more stable and productive is a commonwealth. Economic levelling, conservatives maintain, is not economic progress. Getting and spending are not the chief aims of human existence; but a sound economic basis for the person, the family, and the commonwealth is much to be desired.
Eighth, conservatives uphold voluntary community, quite as they oppose involuntary collectivism. Although Americans have been attached strongly to privacy and private rights, they also have been a people conspicuous for a successful spirit of community. In a genuine community, the decisions most directly affecting the lives of citizens are made locally and voluntarily. Some of these functions are carried out by local political bodies, others by private associations: so long as they are kept local, and are marked by the general agreement of those affected, they constitute healthy community. But when these functions pass by default or usurpation to centralized authority, then community is in serious danger. Whatever is beneficent and prudent in modern democracy is made possible through cooperative volition. If, then, in the name of an abstract Democracy, the functions of community are transferred to distant political direction—why, real government by the consent of the governed gives way to a standardizing process hostile to freedom and human dignity.
Ninth, the conservative perceives the need for prudent restraints upon power and upon human passions. Politically speaking, power is the ability to do as one likes, regardless of the wills of one’s fellows. A state in which an individual or a small group are able to dominate the wills of their fellows without check is a despotism, whether it is called monarchical or aristocratic or democratic. When every person claims to be a power unto himself, then society falls into anarchy. Anarchy never lasts long, being intolerable for everyone, and contrary to the ineluctable fact that some persons are more strong and more clever than their neighbors. To anarchy there succeeds tyranny or oligarchy, in which power is monopolized by a very few.
The conservative endeavors to so limit and balance political power that anarchy or tyranny may not arise. In every age, nevertheless, men and women are tempted to overthrow the limitations upon power, for the sake of some fancied temporary advantage. It is characteristic of the radical that he thinks of power as a force for good—so long as the power falls into his hands. In the name of liberty, the French and Russian revolutionaries abolished the old restraints upon power; but power cannot be abolished; it always finds its way into someone’s hands. That power which the revolutionaries had thought oppressive in the hands of the old regime became many times as tyrannical in the hands of the radical new masters of the state.
Tenth, the thinking conservative understands that permanence and change must be recognized and reconciled in a vigorous society. The conservative is not opposed to social improvement, although he doubts whether there is any such force as a mystical Progress, with a Roman P, at work in the world. When a society is progressing in some respects, usually it is declining in other respects. The conservative knows that any healthy society is influenced by two forces, which Samuel Taylor Coleridge called its Permanence and its Progression. The Permanence of a society is formed by those enduring interests and convictions that gives us stability and continuity; without that Permanence, the fountains of the great deep are broken up, society slipping into anarchy. The Progression in a society is that spirit and that body of talents which urge us on to prudent reform and improvement; without that Progression, a people stagnate.
Therefore the intelligent conservative endeavors to reconcile the claims of Permanence and the claims of Progression. He thinks that the liberal and the radical, blind to the just claims of Permanence, would endanger the heritage bequeathed to us, in an endeavor to hurry us into some dubious Terrestrial Paradise. The conservative, in short, favors reasoned and temperate progress; he is opposed to the cult of Progress, whose votaries believe that everything new necessarily is superior to everything old.”
Ross: Are you serious?? Of course you are, silly me…they will do much more for Gaia over the next 40 years (natives take a long time to rot) than is justified by people being able to get some lovely native timber…and of course – horror of horrors – the market will ensure that someone makes a handsome profit on them…
” they took us on in Dunedin playing a game at real pace and worked out they couldn’t”
Jesus Christ Steve- Terrified referees are the ONLY thing keeping the All Blacks in the games at the moment (you were getting pumped until that yellow card..) By rights they should have lost their last three matches..
I don’t know that arrogantly rubbishing the opposition when the whole rugby World is laughing at how lucky your recent victories have been is such a good idea ‘Champ’….
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.”
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 95-121). Doubleday. Kindle Edition.
Fascism always has been, and always will be a left-wing ideology—period. That means that the Nazis, being a subset of Fascism, are left-wing as well. I cannot stress enough the importance of understanding this truth.
The oft repeated lie that Fascism and the Nazis are right-wing has effectively served three important purposes:
It has enabled the political left to deny any culpability for the atrocities committed by Hitler.
It has unfairly and incorrectly shifted the blame for the Holocaust, Nazi eugenics, and other Nazi programs onto the right-wing, i.e. conservatives.
It has served to muddy the waters to such an extent that true conservative values are tainted by “guilt through association” right from the starting gate.
I am not claiming that Communism and Fascism are the same thing—they are not. They are, however, variations on the same theme—the theme of collectivism. That is, they both promote Big Government at the expense of individual freedom. As such, they both belong on the left side of the political spectrum.
The media has long promulgated the myth of a political spectrum that looks something like this: Far-Left (Communists)—————-Moderates—————Far-Right (Fascists).
What is wrong with that picture? What is wrong with it is that the true political spectrum looks like this: At the far left of the political spectrum we have collectivist ideologies such as Communism and Fascism, then moving to the right we find Socialism, then the Moderates. On the right side of the spectrum we move from the Moderates to Conservatives (who favor a Constitutional, or limited, form of government), and finally at the far right we find the true anarchists, who favor no government at all (not to be confused with faux-anarchists, who wish to tear down existing governments so that they can replace them with other forms of government).
In short, the political spectrum moves from Big Government on the far left, to no government on the far right, with the size and influence of government decreasing as one moves to the right, and vice versa. Fascism belongs squarely on the left side of the spectrum.
Benito Mussolini (who was raised on Marxist philosophy) essentially brought Fascism onto the world stage—so perhaps if I rephrase Mussolini’s quote from above it will make how Fascism views the role of government clearer:
“Everything within the federal government, nothing outside the federal government, nothing against the federal government.”
The Māori Party has championed a campaign to keep our families strong, healthy and intact by protecting them against activities or substances which are known to be hazardous to people’s health. Excessive sugar intake is another barrier to our health, as much as tobacco use, alcohol abuse and problem gambling harm.”
“I have talked to our families about sugar being the food of colonization – a product which takes away from our abilities to focus on living healthily,” says Mrs Turia.
The Hooerald is on about soldiers bitching about the Steyr assault rifles, the Government is preparing to sell.
NZ took them up because Australia bought them, and Australia now makes its own version.
Some soldiers always grizzle about their rifles. They bitched about the FN when it was introduced, and some reckoned they should have kept the old Lee-Enfield .303. Americans grizzled about their rifles in Vietnam, and bar talk was they were no good because they wouldn’t fire when full of mud (like the AK47 supposedly does). What soldier has a rifle with mechanism full of mud? Look at what the defence contractors carried in Iraq, and they could choose. AK47s? Of course not.
The Hooerald says unnamed soldiers hated the Steyr, which is now more than 20 years old, so probably should be updated. But are they as bad as The Hooerald reports? It calls them “crap”.
An unnamed soldier is quoted as saying he couldn’t hit the side of a barn with it. Another reckons he would rather rely on throwing stones.
Is the Army recruiting blind folk and schoolboys these days?
The Hooerald reports one guns-blog poster as saying: “NZDF have always destroyed old gear rather than sell to civilians.”
What bullshit! Tens of thousands of New Zealanders have hunted deer and pigs with ex-Army .303’s.
The Hooerald calls NZ soldiers “squaddies”. I’ve heard that description for UK soldiers, but not before for NZ troops.
The newspaper says NZ is shopping for combat shotguns. So the Geneva Convention has gone out the barracks window.
Fletch and the ongoing fetish for far right wing nuttiness ,
The Canada Free Press,
“or a Canadian site, they seem to have an odd fetish for American nationalism. They peddle all the wingnuts’ usual pseudosciences, such as creationism, global warming denial, and abstinence and abortion-related nonsense. Two of their environment “reporters” are lobbyist Steve Milloy and general crank Alan Caruba, a promoter of Robert W. Felix’s brand of insanity as well his own. They also promote birtherism. CFP has also scrubbed a number of columns that apparently went too far even for them. After Tim Ball, one of their favorite sources for commentary on global warming, was sued for libel by two climatologists, they removed the offending material and took down a number of other columns he wrote. Judi McLeod, one of the founding editors, co-authored a brilliantly deranged column implicating a United Nations-backed global warming conspiracy, Harry Reid, and the mob as the perpetrators of 9/11, which was later scrubbed.”
The Vatican ordered that Hitlers birthday was to be celebrated every year right up to the wars conclusion. Not only that, but the infamous rat lines shipped out some of the very worst Nazi’s to safety well after the end of the war.
A bit of a surprise here. Everyone had Cairns “hung, drawn and quartered” but now no charges by the cricket board in Britain.
The headline is a bit (very) misleading. It only says the ECB won’t charge him in relation to match-fixing in cricket he played in England (for Nottinghamshire) which I was not even aware was being investigated (and I have followed this quite closely). It has nothing to do with police charges.
His two major issues have always seemed to be the ICC investigation into the ICL fixing, and the UK police investigation (both still outstanding).
The coverage of the whole issue is a bit frustrating. It makes you wonder what kind of gag orders have been flying around the NZ and UK media.
If he were a ‘left-winger’ I’d be less sceptical that his purported primary concern that the moral dilemma posed by supposedly inhibiting Africa’s economic development through preferment for non fossil fuelled energy technologies is genuine.
A Christian who puts the Judaic values of bloodshed, revenge and hellfire over and above the virtues of compassion, empathy, poverty of spirit, rejection of material possessions and charity. One who loves to judge others but remains oblivious to their own faults. One who opposes the separation of Church and State. One who longs for the extermination of life on Earth in the name of a mythological event that will result in a large proportion of humanity being tortured for eternity by a vengeful God. A death cultist. A hypocrite. One who obsesses on the evils of sexual desire but ignores physical greed and gluttony. One who opposes the right of women to terminate pregnancy and artificial contraception but supports the death penalty.
The Nazis claimed that communism was dangerous to the well-being of nations because of its intention to dissolve private property, its support of class conflict, its aggression against the middle class, its hostility towards small businessmen, and its atheism. Nazism rejected class conflict-based socialism and economic egalitarianism, favouring instead a stratified economy with social classes based on merit and talent, retaining private property, and the creation of national solidarity that transcends class distinction.
During the 1920s, Hitler urged disparate Nazi factions to unite in opposition to “Jewish Marxism”. Hitler asserted that the “three vices” of “Jewish Marxism” were democracy, pacifism and internationalism.
In 1930, Hitler said: “Our adopted term ‘Socialist’ has nothing to do with Marxist Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true Socialism is not.” In 1942, Hitler privately said: “I absolutely insist on protecting private property … we must encourage private initiative”
Dairy is all good will pretty much continue at present levels off its extreme high price in 1013as El Nino is expected to drop rain into the western states and corn belt later this year in .time for the corn crops peak demand
Red wheat is going to rise in the medium term due to the ongoing drought in Ozzie and winter cropping areas already planted in the states.
Meat prices should firm over the next six months as drought striken farmers have mostly sold down their herds in effected areas already
Nut nut nutter is saved for the conspirowhacky spurting wingnuts not those whose libertarian views are to blame for their denial.
you wanna spurt some global conspirowhackys and I will give you the nutwhacking nut nut nutter :
…..”Christians or conservatives aren’t forcing anything on anyone”….
Then why are the wankers dead set on backing the CCCP? Anyone who wants to take the time to read their 2011 manifesto & candidate list will realise that it’s a vehicle to move the moral standards of NZ back to the 50’s.
If the Godnutters get a chance to “stiffen the backbone” of National we can expect the franchise equivalent of the Magdalene laundries opening through the length of the country by year’s end.
There raped pregnant women will have their babies removed then adopted out while doing penance for their sins by washing the cum stains out of the priest’s cassocks.
Christian love…..coming to a workhouse near you soon!
Smoke nazis: The latest finding is that second hand smoke is just as bad no matter where you try to hide the puffers in a restaurant setting – so they’re not safe anywhere – hmmm. I’m a non-smoker – I feel sorry for smokers – they’re being squish-squashed. Secondhand vehicle emissions are probably worse now, aren’t they ? And a host of other heinous health risks.
Mr Farrar give the rightwing idiot larry williams a guest post on your blog as this idiot seems to wet its nappie when he talks to you or Mr Slater on NewsTalkZB,with his droll voice and VAST knowledge of fuck all, hes your man for a guest post , williams the face of the right wing,dribble dribble
Redtard still backing Colon Crag of the moon landing hoax for a place in government
I see massive disappointment in the future for the god whacked conservonutters when they eventually realize that colon is just a nut whacked populist with the politics of whinny using their brand to suck in a few more idiots.
I get the feeling that even spawn is distancing himself from the sycophantic cohort of true blue reading conservonutters.
May haps Shawn has a brain and realizes that flogging the redbaiting horse has no good purpose in 2014 in fact it was stupid back in the days of McCarthyism’s height.
Silly old man leads a bunch of befuddled old men into the political wildness there to peregrinate aimlessly for ever lost and ignored except for baiting redbaiter time on KB.
“Zero Hedge is a batshit insane Austrian economics-based finance blog run by a pseudonymous founder who posts articles under the name “Tyler Durden,” after the character from Fight Club by Chuck Palahniuk.
Tyler claims to be a “believer in a sweeping conspiracy that casts the alumni of Goldman Sachs as a powerful cabal at the helm of U.S. policy, with the Treasury and the Federal Reserve colluding to preserve the status quo.” While this is not an entirely unreasonable statement of the problem, his solution actually mirrors the anatagonist in Fight Club in that Tyler wants, per Austrian school ideas, to lead a catastrophic market crash in order to destroy banking institutions and bring back “real” free market capitalism.
The site posts nearly indecipherable analyses of multiple seemingly unrelated subjects to point towards a consistent theme of economic collapse any day now, and has accurately predicted 200 of the last 2 recessions. Tyler seems to repeat The Economic Collapse Blog’s idea of posting blog articles many times a day and encouraging people to post it as far and wide as humanly possible. Tyler moves away from the format of long lists to write insanely dense volumes filled with (often contradicting) jargon that makes one wonder if the writers even know what the words actually mean. The site first appeared in early 2009, meaning that (given Tyler’s habit of taking a shit on each and every positive data point), anyone listening to him from the beginning missed the entire 2009-2013 rally in the equities market.
The only writer conclusively identified is Dan Ivandjiiski, who conducts public interviews on behalf of Zero Hedge. The blog came online several days after he lost his job at Wexford Capital, a Connecticut-based hedge fund (run by a former Goldman trader). And proceeded to choose his pen name from a nihilistic psychotic delusion.
Zero Hedge is not quite the NaturalNews of economics, but not for want of trying…..”
So, the Maori Party says that ‘Sugar is the food of colonisation’.
OK, if that is her attitude, and to avoid a charge of hypocrisy, Mrs Turia must IMMEDIATELY stop her family and all maori fropm eating absolutely EVERYTHING that is ‘Post European’ and from now on eat only the foods that Maori were eating at the time of European ‘coloniosation’.
From the top of my head only, this list would include the following (in no order ):
Kumara (the ‘original, not the current ‘Kumara’ which is from North America)
Karaka (berries only)
Not much is there?
And as well, if she was REALLY true to her convictions, then she would get rid of absolutely EVERYTHING that had a ‘European / Colonisation associations…
She would of course be ‘far healthier. far ‘fitter’, and probably far colder as well…..
For some strange reason, somehow, I can’t see her ever having ‘The courage of Her convictions’….
The days before KFC were hard ones for the Tangata Whenua Komata.
….”Bracken fern root was an important staple for many iwi. Eating this increases the chance of cancer. The fibrous Māori diet meant people tended to wear their teeth out, which over time led to malnutrition, disease and death.”……
“I think the current administration, from top level to local, are shitting themselves over the prospect of many trained army personal coming home to unemployment & a general feeling of dissatisfaction.”
You know that’s bullshit Narsekissa.
The police are being militarized to defend the pathological communist progs like you in the US who are trying to dismantle the Constitutional Republic and make it another basket case socialist democracy, and are fearful there might be some armed resistance to their plans.
Just the same old same old. The left using armed force to take power.
“The police are being militarized to defend the pathological communist progs like you in the US who are trying to dismantle the Constitutional Republic and make it another basket case socialist democracy, and are fearful there might be some armed resistance to their plans.”
Next thing you know old Bedwetter will be telling us he can see Russia from his house.
Supermarket employee is outside scratching an instant ticket. I hold back from saying anything. I go in the shop – come out. She’s there again with more tickets – or is it her ? So now I’m asking her – ‘was that you before’? Yep. And now I’m trying to stop myself saying anything else – but being me – I just can’t help myself. ‘I always wonder why people who gamble don’t go for the big payout lotto tickets – because you can’t retire off a scratchie’.
And her answer was quite something. ‘I won $50K and it’s now up to 85K’. Wow. Yeah, ok. That’s meant to stop you dead in your tracks. But that’s where the training took over – because without too big a delay I replied ‘well there you go then, you didn’t retire’. Hahaha – prick.
So, the Maori Party says that ‘Sugar is the food of colonisation’.
Actually, that is something they might want to keep quiet about. There is a school of thought, and some pretty strong evidence suggested by a guy called J. Robyt, that suggests the origins of sugar cultivation was most likely from North East India, and the South Pacific where evidence of sugarcane cultivation was found dating back to 6,000BC. In India it was dated back to 10,000 BC.
SO … before it becomes a treaty claim, it might pay for them to do a bit more research!!!
They have to be because the gun culture in the usa means you don’t know if a simple crim will have heavy assault weapons or worse. cracks me up you can buy a barret 50 in the states no problems but you can not even make or own a silencer for a slug gun.
Read and laugh. Someone called Colonial Viper, a moron and Silent T arselicker, comments at The sub-Standard: National are reaching and desperate. Dredging up a standard, 11 year old form letter instead of engaging with the issues which are of concern to many NZers. And the electorate sees that quite clearly.
I don’t care about the media polls. The tide is going out on National and it will be very obvious on E-Day. National have overplayed a weak, dirty hand.
ignorance of fact
PCP air rifles are noisy
Silencers in the states are illegal even if only built for air guns
Airgun Silencers – A Hazard to Your Legal Health? by Robert D. Beeman, 2002, Airgun Illustrated October 2002: pg. 100-102. http://www.beemans.net/silencers_on_airguns.htm