Posts by Sacha
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to BenWilson,
So everyone brings a different meaning to the table, and angry fights happen over which is right, because discussion will continue, using these terms, whether it is a good way of doing it or not. It's the way we're stuck with, unfortunately.
I reckon we're at an interesting point where the underlying models are actually changing. Influenced by things like MMP and worldwide waking up about the limits of capitalism and environment. The rise of systems thinking over black/white binaries. And the inevitable process of this young blended nation of ours growing up.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Tom Semmens,
So Labour is a wicked party because it is full of professional Bowen triangle types obsessed with issues marginal to the day to day life of most New Zealanders
Sigh. Where did anyone *here* actually say that? May be a comforting mantra that helps avoid dealing with any need for change, but it's pretty schoolyard stuff.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Islander,
can FIRST provide
Bart would be proud that I instinctively read that as the late Foundation of Research Science and Technology.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to giovanni tiso,
identifying progressivism or the Left with Labour/the Greens means reducing the aspirations of anybody below the middle class to whatever those two parties define as thinkable and achievable in real world terms. This is incredibly limiting.
Please do suggest which other significant political movements/actors you believe we're overlooking. The thread was pretty clearly focused on political parties, and you mentioned unions earlier but if there are others then name them so we can better understand your despair.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Bart Janssen,
It may be that the public didn't understand or weren't convinced well enough by the message.
Isn't it standard comms wisdom that the conveyer of the message is responsible for success rather than the receiver?
somecombination failed content and failed ability to engage voters
Agreed (I think)
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to martinb,
Is that a fair characterisation of what is happening specifically with Labour though?
I believe Lew's point was fair about the tone of some of the online discussion. I don't know much about Labour's innards, though others here do.
-
Hard News: The Public Address Word of…, in reply to Jackie Clark,
you did get the film reference, eh
-
Hard News: The Public Address Word of…, in reply to Rich Lock,
Groin
Containerpoints for the gratuitous cricket reference, but
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Russell Brown,
another part of the jigsaw falls into place about why you reckon the Greens have libertarian tendencies
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to martinb,
how it can include and attract those time-poor and poor-poor people who are highly skeptical of what value they would be allowed to add. Or have no history of political engagement personally or in their family.
Those are precisely the type of people who will not stick around if the most extreme 1% of the party are loudly complaining that the glories of communism are still not manifest, comrade.
Any political movement has to moderate its extremes somehow, even the small ones. Or be resigned to a tiny but pure niche that never attracts enough support for even one seat in parliament. Not to say there aren't other ways of influencing change.