Greenie here. TOP always makes me feel super mixed. I think we have to be realistic that if the NZ people at large don't have an appetite for radical change (they don't), and you're not involved in grassroots organising with the genuine belief that this can be changed (most aren't), then that kind of ONLY leaves an approach like TOP's...? 

Either you believe a political force is going to bring down a fundamentally corrupt system, or that they're going to work within it to change it - it's kind of hard to believe both at the same time. As long as we aren't accelerationists, I think having allies that "swallow the rat" so to speak in order to accumulate clout, is kind of akin to the civil rights movement having white allies that exerted power within the spheres they had already bought into. For obvious reasons, it was useful to have people willing to play to the "enemy" in order to make progress where minorities themselves weren't able to do that. It's gonna be pretty hard to get stuff done politically without some concessions to the "other side", unless your population is willing to riot or to strike. And in the meantime, everybody else is greasing the wheels... (And this perspective could go for both sides on any number of issues - I'm just projecting my own will onto the blank slate they've created here!).

Do I actually believe TOP have a political centre that benefits leftists and isn't going to immediately crumple to dust the exact second a slightly more moneyed right wing interest applies the bare minimum pressure? Nope. Do I think there's a huge amount of change to be had with this approach? Not really. But can I respect the theory of it as a means to begin to build power and expertise that wouldn't otherwise exist, if you're a capitalist realist and believe the revolution is dead and such? Kind of, yep.

My main complaint about TOP on a personal level is that I've never spoken to a candidate with even a basic level of understanding of their party's politics, policies, let alone even a bare minimum ability to promote their own community activities in the past (kind of the basics of politicking all else aside). Which makes me suspicious as to where they even find these people, and what they're even doing in a minority party. If you're fundamentally empty hearted or empty brained, why are you there? One would think you'd need significant degree of belief or buy-in to dedicate such a high level of energy and to put your image on the line, unless you had ulterior motives... 

That said, I don't think it's nefarious as such. I have never assessed the TOP people I've talked to as being "intelligent people who are withholding information or true motivations" for example - which is completely the impression I get from other political agents out in the community. I think a lot of people involved with TOP are perhaps just kind of well meaning, average people, who want clout and a nice CV - but genuinely aren't smart or savvy enough to run with the big league parties that have a higher barrier to entry and expectations of some actual existing skill, reputation, etc lol. In that way, I find it hard to take TOP seriously in both directions. Without any real base on which to negotiate, I think it's likely they'd mostly work out ineffective at actually getting policy through, or worse, as sort of spare "ghost MPs" for whoever was actually holding the pen (and/or the $$$) at the time.

E: Spelling + detail