David Cormack
patreon
Who's afraid of the big green wolf?
🕑 Added 2023-04-10 21:19:52 +0000 UTCRemember 2014? It was an eternity ago. But National had that ad with the rowers. It's lasting legacy would be that it used the Eminem-soundalike that saw National sued.
But the ad's message was that because National was a slick, streamlined unit, it would be a better Government than the shambolic coalition that was the alternative - as depicted by a bunch of losers in red and green unable to get their dinghy going in any direction.
Great ad. Very powerful. Probably unnecessary mind, Labour was led by Cunliffe that year. Things didn't go great.
But my point is, coming up to 2023, we're faced with the likelihood of of a National-led government with a very large ACT party bloc, or a Labour-led government with a very large Green party bloc (and a much smaller Te Pāti Māori bloc.
So at this point it's worth asking, who is going to be scarier/worse for NZ? A large ACT, or a large Green Party?
We have some data for the Greens. It was a confidence and supply partner for the 2017-2020 government. Which by all accounts did pretty well on most metrics. Unemployment down, the economy growing, child poverty down, etc etc. But we've never had a large ACT bloc in power.
Which means when ACT pumps out shit like this
we should be very afraid.
I think we can sum up ACT's list with:
- Screw the workers.
- Burn the environment.
- Help the rich.
- Help landlords.
- Cut government services.
- Give racists a better platform.
- Ignore bill of rights
The quirk of this election is that we have National and Labour both desperately clambering into the middle, which is going to result in the most left-wing or right-wing government we've ever had.
Except that when the Greens get into power it becomes somewhat neutered. Despite NZFirst repeatedly forcing Labour to renegotiate policy after policy because Labour + Greens didn't equal more than 50%, the Greens never extracted the same concession despite Labour + NZF also not equaling more than 50%.
I expect ACT would be more like NZFirst than the Greens when it comes to extracting policy concessions. Already Seymour has demanded that a referendum on te Tiriti is held. Which is fucking bananas for a Party that supposedly loves contract law (I suspect they love contract law when it benefits white people).
Yes people gnash their teeth about some of the stuff that comes out of the Green Party, but it's proven itself a trusted and stable coalition partner. Probably the most stable of any coalition partner with more than one MP we've ever had (and the only support party to get more than 5% the election after being in Government)(and also increased its vote in an election that Labour hoovered up more than 50% of voters).
Labour and the Greens would do well to start carving out some united policies, and then painting a picture of the counter-factual: that National would need ACT and ACT is a bunch of a goddamn psychos.
But no doubt that won't happen, because left-wing parties are famously shit at boiling stuff down to simple terms and communicating them well. So, good luck I guess.
Anyway, the sum total of all this is don't vote National, because we'll get ACT, and if you look at that list above and think "Yes, I'll vote for that", then I don't know what to tell you, because those are some of the most vile, self-centred policies I've ever seen.
Comments
David Cormack
Really good question. And I can only speak to my own experience (which was very brief at only 6 months!); left wing ideals usually require nuance to explain the point of them. The thing is we don't need to explain policies because people don't care. What we need to do is focus on the outcomes - what would the outcomes of our policies be? But we get caught up explaining all the mechanics of our policies which becomes boring and people tune off. But also conservative policies are usually trying to stop things which is super easy to explain - CGT is a good example - National won that debate conclusively by scaring everyone that Labour was coming for your bach. That was it. Labour couldn't explain that it was only when you sold your bach and realised gains that you'd be taxed on those, and even then there were exceptions.
Jem Traylen
Genuine question - you say left wing parties are "famously shit at boiling stuff down to simple terms and communicating them all" Don't they have friends who work in PR/comms etc?
Maxine Gay
The prospect of ACT any where near the levers of power is terrifying
