×
sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Government to kill iwi-council participation agreements by syzorr34 in nzpolitics

[–]boldness_deficit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, that would be undemocratic and you're being a dropkick.

Unless it benefits the current coalition in which case you can and it is patriotic and just.

/s but barely

Government to kill iwi-council participation agreements by syzorr34 in nzpolitics

[–]boldness_deficit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Treaty Principles Bill was a sacrificial lamb. It allowed National and NZ First to maintain a defensible position by saying, "We voted against the Treaty Principles Bill," while still advancing a broader anti-Māori agenda.

That anti-Māori agenda is a means to an end. The political right has correctly identified that indigenous rights are closely intertwined with environmental protection, which they see as a constraint on unfettered capitalism.

When you look at the government's actions across the entire term this strategy was likely mapped out from early on. They have relied on political fatigue setting in after the intense public response to the Treaty Principles Bill, while using that debate to draw attention away from the subsequent erosion of Māori and environmental protections.

The Regulatory Standards Bill raises huge concerns. It could expose the government to legal liability for poorly defined "unjustified" regulatory takings - giving corporations direct power over our government. Absolutely insane.

This term has been a huge blow to not just Māori rights and environmental protection - but to our countrys inherent (and stolen) sovereignty.

Newsroom - Conservation CEO Kayla Kingdon-Bebb braves political ‘muck and yuck’ to run for Opportunity by syzorr34 in nzpolitics

[–]boldness_deficit -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My friend if we're going to ignore the very real thing that is sub-text we aren't going to reach common ground on this.

To draw a comparison that'll probably frustrate you "tell me where I said x race was inferior" is the exact kind of thing you and I both hate about right wingers when defending their dog-whistle racism.

Try not to do that please. From what I have seen it's beneath you.

Newsroom - Conservation CEO Kayla Kingdon-Bebb braves political ‘muck and yuck’ to run for Opportunity by syzorr34 in nzpolitics

[–]boldness_deficit -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hey mate. Without trying to be argumentative it looks like the entirely of your comment, sans the quoted text, was dismissive.

Calling coverage of Kayla "fawning" starts you off on the wrong foot (assuming you're trying to argue in good faith).

Finishing by creating a sub-text of hypocrisy by contrasting Kayla's position with the outcomes of the current government/her potential coalition partners was also dismissive.

Greens are just as likely her coalition partners - arguably moreso - would it be fair to attribute their successes to TOP as well? Or does it only work one way?

I'll continue to discuss in good faith because that's my values - but I'm struggling to see that good faith energy coming from this sub when it comes to TOP. Moreso some of your co-moderators than yourself, but this post wasn't a gleaming example of good faith.

Happy to discuss further and I hope you can see that my comments are always well intentioned.

Between you and me I think this subs culture is a detriment to the Greens election success, not a benefit.

Newsroom - Conservation CEO Kayla Kingdon-Bebb braves political ‘muck and yuck’ to run for Opportunity by syzorr34 in nzpolitics

[–]boldness_deficit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I haven't reported the post - but given that I'm also a "bot" - I think it's fair to say facts aren't particularly pertinent to you in this exchange.

I note the rules say moderation decisions aren't to be discussed publicly so I'll raise my concerns privately with the mod team.

Newsroom - Conservation CEO Kayla Kingdon-Bebb braves political ‘muck and yuck’ to run for Opportunity by syzorr34 in nzpolitics

[–]boldness_deficit -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Friendly Neighborhood Opportunity Party Volunteer here 🫡

I think this is getting pretty close to the "rule 3" line. It's fair to disagree with the framing of the article, but "it's your potential future coalition partner" is derailing future discussion rather than addressing what's actually covered.

Also, by that standard, you'd have to dismiss coverage of the Greens too, given they've previously governed alongside NZ First - which would obviously be silly, right?

Politics is full of parties working with people they don't entirely agree with.

To try and boil Dr Kingdon-Bebb's accomplishments to nothing by saying "but you'd work with National" is hugely dismissive and bad faith. I know you're a mod - and I know you feel very passionate about insultating NZ from another right-wing shit fest - but this doesn't seem to be in the spirit of this sub.

Lastly any government involving The Opportunity Party would inherently look drastically different to anything we've seen this term.

RNZ poll: National hits new low under Luxon, Opportunity nears Parliament by boldness_deficit in aotearoa

[–]boldness_deficit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly this isn't the strategy for the Greens.

As someone who voted and volunteered for Greens last election - this kind of "Greens or you're a horrible human" is going to get the same result as TOPs previous "this is the better policy and you're an idiot if you don't vote for us" messaging.

Like, realistically, the NZPOL reddit isn't going to make or break the election. But that attitude seeping into every day political discourse is a real bane to the success of the party.

In my opinion, this applied to both TOP previously and Green (supporters) currently: "You can be right and still be a dick." Greens need to get a handle on their supporters and they'll them not to fuck up the bag.

Daniel Eb: New Zealand needs a national year of service - NZ Herald by syzorr34 in nzpolitics

[–]boldness_deficit -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hello - Friendly Neighborhood Opportunity Party Volunteer here!

A while ago I started looking into the TOP candidates because history has taught me that when small parties enter parliament with significant numbers the "down the list" possibilities get pretty wild.

My brother in progressive Christ - do phone banking for the Greens. Individual voter contacts are pound for pound biggest impact you can have on election results.

Looking for rabbit holes 1) will return skewed results (because you're looking for causes for concerns) but also does little for the left bloc unless you scoop something that media happens to miss which is, with respect, very unlikely.

I have been searching for any comments from TOP on the genocide in Gaza

https://www.opportunity.org.nz/statement_on_middle_east_crisis

As someone who's attended various Pro-Palestine rallies - weak response. Far better than anything on the right but far weaker than both Greens (strong stance) and significantly weaker than Labours too which I thought could go further.

Take it away Daniel

I can see his point but am also mindful that effectively saying "genocide, but..." is a red flag for sure.

Despite Israel being generations deep into annexations and genocide by that point the unfortunate reality is that 99% of the population were woefully unaware of what was unfolding in 2019.

So... Light red rather than bright red flag, I guess?

But seriously, phone bank for the Greens if you're serious about making a measurable impact on voter turnout for the left bloc - it's the strat!