Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, July 21st, 2026 - 27 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
Which bunch of political activists is scarier? https://edition.cnn.com/2026/07/20/politics/democratic-socialist-candidates-polling
This ratio suggests political activism is disliked generally, regardless of whether it is leftist or rightist. That could be because the kind of turkey who joins a political party usually doesn't have much of a clue about what's going on. Folks prefer a clued-up candidate. Interesting how those numbers match our current ratings of the Nat/Lab equivalents, eh? Almost a mirror image.
Neolib Cling-ons are obsessed by their internal vision of the growth engine. Mythos has had tremendous cultural influence for millennia, and the dream of perpetual motion hasn't faded far (nuclear fusion power supply). https://unherd.com/2026/07/wheres-the-economic-strategy-andy/
The writer's faith in the dream of private sector investment is touching. Yet it may not be touching enough. Andy may be dimly aware of this – it would explain his lack of economic strategy. When things are contingent upon circumstance, strategy can become plastic quite fast. To get a politico hip to this, utter the word neuroplasticity at them.
If that doesn't work, try "Darwinism, you know? Survival of the fittest. Now! Get it?" May have to jab them in the ribs if the glazed look in their eye persists.
We have to get to a system where all people are aware that they are working for each other, the virtual cycle. Some are doing business for profit, some for a business non-profit model, some are fulfilling a basic caring and upkeep of community facilities role. Get used to it or die.
I have just watched Alan Curtis's BBC documentary series Shifty on youtube. It interweaves doco clips from the late 70s to 2000 onward to show the effect of neolib policies in handing over power from the State to private interests. It's there that I learnt of Thatcher's disastrous monetarist policy.
"British economic history is studded with macroeconomic bungles, from the return to the Gold Standard in 1925 up to Liz Truss’s tragicomic 49 days in power in 2022. It is strange that Thatcher’s first two years, when she pursued her monetarist philosophy with the greatest determination, is generally missing from the list…
[By the end of her first two years] unemployment had doubled to more than 10 per cent, where it stayed for most of the 1980s. The steepest recession since the 1930s saw manufacturing collapse, losing a quarter of its workforce. The scars affect UK politics to this day."
https://www.ft.com/content/e38aa236-ffeb-49bc-af16-8ac41cce4535
The Curtis series lays out strong resonant economic and social themes very relevant to the UK today. It’s very much 'History doesn't repeat, but it does rhyme'.
The UnHerd quote "The City of London was the gift that kept on giving" is incomplete, because it only kept on giving to a small proportion of Britain's population, Un Herd’s usual readers.
Yes, London vs the rest seems a substantial differential wealth flow. Shifty is derived from eye/gaze effect of evident duplicity. Neolib faith got more traction from enterprise mythos than deceit though. I always expected the left to go for ethos & equity to provide a positive alternative (so copying the right made them look dumb).
Yesterday Bomber staked out political terrain as a list of necessities: https://thedailyblog.co.nz/what-needs-to-go-right-for-the-left-to-defeat-the-wrong-this-election/
I'd be interested to see your take on it from a younger generation than me. I was pleasantly surprised to encounter nothing to quibble about in his 10 points…
The TPM-Greens strategy seems sensible, but won't appeal to Labour, who want those seats.
Bomber wrote: "Fourth wave feminists, non-binary activists and middle class Wellington Woke drove so many male voters into the arms of the reactionary right with their woke over reach. This spastic pure temple politics over Broadchurch solidarity has poisoned the electoral well."
What a load of crap. When males stop watching rw looksmaxxing influencers who push zero-sum positions (you, the male, lose when others win), then perhaps you will see a shift. It's not for parties to dial it back. The humanist position is a powerful political tradition, it's nothing new.
As for abandoning "Fourth-wave feminism [which] focuses on sexual abuse, sexual harassment, sexual violence, the objectification of women, and sexism in the workplace" wiki. Yeah, if a party supports manosphere views on sexual violence to win back some men, then it will lose the far larger group of women who vehemently disagree.
LW youtubers like NZ's Big Hairy News, who do attract a younger male audience have no issues with wokeness and they're pretty damn blokey. Neither do younger voters. It's the old farts (and Bomber is no spring chicken, 40 years ago he’d be propping up the bar in the RSA) who cuddle up to their outrage, and are too dumb to notice they're being played by the right.
For Trotter it was more the Treaty activism and UNDRIP, for Bradbury it was the growing influence of feminists in the Labour Party.
Broad church being an euphemism for ignoring minorities/feminist concerns (while, unlike Trotter, showing solidarity with Maori men/Treaty).
Thanks for that clarification. I was right, both Trotter and Bomber are propping up the RSA bar.
There is another feature of Margaret Thatcher's time that had an important long-term effect. Leslie Chapman had noticed a lax, wasteful and unproductive expenditure by government that needed reining in. But when revealed there was resentment not reorganisation. From what I have read it seems that Margaret Thatcher didn't utilise Mr Chapman effectively, his findings used to destabilise not changing with rational efficiencies.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/10299926/Leslie-Chapman.html
…He went into the Ministry of Works after leaving Bishopshalt school, Uxbridge, then, when war broke out, joined the Army. Invalided out with leg wounds in 1945, he returned to the ministry, rising through the ranks. In 1967 he was appointed its southern regional director, with a £10 million budget for maintaining government and military buildings across five counties.
Suspecting that the job could be done better, more cheaply and by fewer people than his staff of more than 4,000, Chapman asked for a report on the organisation’s effectiveness and was told that “not a penny” was misspent….
…large stocks of expensive equipment were being held for tasks seldom undertaken; and hundreds of stokers were employed to fire boilers that were not needed in summer, or at all.
Working with the unions, Chapman cut staffing by 55 per cent and costs by more than a third. But he found his superiors strangely unenthusiastic, and adamant that only “local circumstances” had enabled the cuts to be made…
The book [1978 Your Disobedient Servant followed by Waste Away 1982*] indeed made uncomfortable reading: 12 dockets having to pass through 82 bureaucratic processes before a tap could be mended; the use of ministerial cars by junior staff when taxis would have been cheaper;…
Sir Horace Cutler, the maverick Tory leader of the Greater London Council, installed Chapman on the London Transport Executive with similar intent. Chapman arrived in January 1979 with an axe slung over his shoulder, and that December sent Cutler a memo highlighting “disgraceful” waste and extravagance, with senior officials sharing 26 chauffeur-driven limousines and dining free of charge. In all, he reckoned, £50 million could be saved…
A further report from PA Consulting declared LT’s top management “weak in the skills required to run a large business”…early in 1981 Chapman was ousted for refusing to keep silent about continuing extravagance...
*His two frustrating years with the LTE were described in his second book, Waste Away, published in 1982. He was less than favourably impressed by the five-course lunch which was served on his first day in the executive’s dining room…https://www.thetimes.com/travel/destinations/uk-travel/england/london-travel/leslie-chapman-v7mwgz0md3q
The 'Yes Minister' and 'Yes Prime Minister' series were probably close to facts. The tv series started in 1980 and No. 3 episode is titled 'The Economy Drive'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Yes_Minister_and_Yes,_Prime_Minister_episodes
On Margaret Thatcher's effect on UK: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/how-thatcher-transformed-british-politics/
We should see AI, for what it is. Another theft and fencing of the commons, for the benefit of a few wealthy people.
The collective knowledge and work of millions of skilled and creative people stolen, without compensation, and rented back to us.
In today's ODT the question posed is:
"New Zealand’s first mega AI data centre will use mega power that it says will be renewable — but does that mean less cheap, clean power and more expensive, polluting fossil fuel for the rest of us?"
The answer is a resounding yes. The commissioners that gave consent for this non-publicly notified proposal were dumb enough to swallow the line given by the data centre developers, Datagrid, that they would use renewable power to power the proposed data centre. (They called it a data factory)
But Datagrid are not providing the renewable power they say they will use. This renewable power could instead be used for productive things like industries that (unlike data centres) provide a lot of jobs, or for powering residences.
Effectively, if NZ permits lots of massively power hungry data centres such as the Datagrid proposal (this will consume two thirds of the power produced by the Clyde dam) we will have to import masses of very expensive LNG to power them.
Of course the CoC's position ignores climate change effects. As the article says:
"The government has been encouraging overseas firms to build here, citing New Zealand’s ‘‘abundant’’ green power."
The answer is that data centres must pay for and provide all of the power needed for data centres, and this power should be renewable, probably solar. The Australian government is already processing legislation to this effect, though it is not insisting on renewables.
Labour should be campaigning on a platform to introduce legislation where all data centres must provide, at their own cost, renewable energy in order to gain consent.
Paywalled: https://www.odt.co.nz/southland/ai-data-centres-powerhouse-or-drain
https://vote.nz/
The nACTf CoC is 'govt' by and for the sorted – a ‘dropkick’-suppression machine. Move-On!
Gold$smith says this is "necessary change", and his self-serving stance makes perfect sense in the light of concerns raised last year by then NZ attorney general Judith Collins.
Oops, that should be The Guardian, 28 July 2025.
Last night on The Hui Marama Davidson discussed the Greens' policies and that many people feel powerless to influence change, in light of the socioeconomic damage caused by the Coalition's policies. https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/361008594/hui-green-party-co-leader-marama-davidson
Paul Goldsmith's comments about Chris Hipkins' concern re people now being unable to enrol and vote in the two weeks before and on election day, are disingenuous, condescending and snide. …"It seems odd for him to suggest his own voters are inherently more disorganised," he said."…
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/politics/754445/voter-enrolment-changes-an-indictment-on-coalition-hipkins
Goldsmith and his cronies know that thousands of people are living in precarious situations, that enrolling to vote might not be a priority in the weeks leading up to the election, and if they do vote they are more likely to vote for the Opposition parties. He is doing all he can to limit their opportunities to do so.
On the Citizens' Advice Bureau website there is clear, concise information about the voting processes. Hopefully this is provided in various community organisations and in prisons.
https://www.cab.org.nz/article/KB00001062
For people who don't have a permanent home or are homeless, the information includes how to provide an address. There are details of the rights of people in prison and who is eligible to vote.
…"If you have no fixed address because you are experiencing homelessness, you can still vote…
If you are in prison for a sentence of less than three years, you can vote if the offending happened before 20 December 2025. You can also vote if you are on remand or serving a community sentence or home detention"…
Find out more about voting if you are in prison
CAB advised that if people don't have access to the internet, they can complete a paper enrolment form at a CAB office.
An Electoral Commission staff member advised that libraries also have these forms and that people who don't have an ID can still complete an enrolment form. The EC contact number is 0800 367656.
People in vulnerable situations might not prioritise voting. However, they could feel mobilised to vote when they know their rights and see a chance to end this destructive government.
Thanks Vivie for that detailed voting info. Imho, the CoC nACTf 'govt' is fueling and exploiting societal division by marginalising women, Māori, 'Lotto winners', 'bottom feeders', 'dropkicks' and homeless Kiwis, among others – Move-On!
https://www.helenclark.foundation/research/social-cohesion/Social-Cohesion-in-New-Zealand_2026.pdf
Can politicians that fuel and exploit societal division really ‘lead’ New Zealand Aotearoa to a better future? I don’t believe so.
Every now and then I check out Jesse Wells. One of his recent releases has a classic line that reflects what many of us are feeling right now.
"Nightmares are dreams too" and a referential doff back to earlier days of protest songs- "I know a fortunate son when I'm looking at one, he’s in a house living up on the hill”
The Americanisation of NZ sits on top of neo-liberalism both feeding each other through acolytes of prosperity type religion and Atlas type think tanks. New Zealand is a country small enough that they, the very well-off, think they can make into the first world paradise they desire. Some of what Jesse Wells sings about you can see being pushed here.
In the same way that anyone who watched The Florida Project when it came out could see it as a pre-cursor to the well-off capitalist class making money from the poor in motels here.
If only we had parties that would say enough and campaign on winding back the shitified models being introduced bit by bit.
DoS Good points. About music with barbs – Bob Dylan is still good – 'You Have to Serve Somebody'.
You’d think that National would trailblaze transport transformation to support economic growth, but the National-led Coalition can’t even roll out the bare minimum of public EV charging points. They’re dinosaurs fed on a diet of fossil fuels (and tobacco) that’re stuck in the past and incapable of planning for the future.
https://theconversation.com/electric-vehicles-are-built-different-australia-needs-better-data-to-get-the-most-out-of-the-shift-287070
In NZ, the stalling is galling. When it doesn’t suit its agenda and narrative, the Coalition refuses to collect data and rejects sound advice & strong evidence; it has repealed initiatives to lift NZ up into the reality of the rest of the world. Being conservative is one thing, but being stubborn luddites because of their ideological dogma is plain stupid and counter-intuitive to their promises of ‘unleashing NZ’s enormous potential’. The latter is a cheap euphemism for plundering this countries natural wealth & riches and selling it to the lowest bidder, which is exemplified by easing the selling off land & other assets to overseas interests and an export economy with a backbone made up of primary products – such has been the case for many decades now and which will be the case if the Coalition dinosaurs have their way. Of course, there are benefits to this, but those are short-term, short-sighted, and for selected people and groupings, who, funnily enough, vote for the Coalition parties out of short-sighted self-entitlement and self-interest. If you wear one of those fine-leather shoes, then your congruence bias likely is higher than average.
Luddites were not active because they were bent on sticking to ideologies but on sticking to known good methods and skills of manu-facture in which they were proficient and earned their living making things that were useful and likely to be good for the community. That is not a description of most our pollies and certainly not the 'conservatives' in government.
You might want to consider, for a brief moment, the contemporary meanings of the word. Or you could comment on the gist of my comment. Or both.
I know that the meaning of luddite has warped over time. It is a signal point to remind all how our best ideas if not kept spruce can end up being rubbished. As someone says about our necessary ferries becoming privatised. We are just impotent under our great political system; less use to our wellbeing than those that many lesser animals follow.
Also you have good ideas and pushing them all into one large para is unfair to lesser tireder mind;, can you go to two at least, with a break for a breather.
Oppos are being funded by kiwi music tech entrepreneurs, yet so is the GP. So we have a Green/Bluegreen thingy a-happenin', likely to confound activists all over the show.
Changing his name to that of the ole Coro commune was a smart career move, huh? https://consciouslyliving.co.nz/listing/wilderland/
So both of them have proven inventive expertise in arena of complex systems. That could enable them to get cut-through with economists.
I'm of the opinion Dennis that we need a circuit breaker.
Imagine nine years of labour,greens an op.
a circuit breaker
I have a hunch that the electorate has this scenario very much in its mass mind, thus the rise of the oppos is a symptom more than causal influence…
OP have zero political depth. They do not field candidates with years of experience in local body politics. They're running on a narrow manifesto so far from other parties that as a minor coalition partner, they will be unable to deliver.
We've seen Peters and Seymour continually run rings around Luxon, the C-suite recruit, because of his political inexperience (and lack of talent). OP, so much less politically equipped, will end up a dangling useless bauble in any coalition. Their leader, in an interview on BHN, more or less admitted that they’re looking to learn by doing. A wasted voted.
Don't forget the Greens got into Parliament on the back of years of national grass-roots activism. ACT were built on the rump of Roger Douglas's organisation, with access to ATLAS tricks and rich-list funders. Even so, both parties took years to build parliamentary credibility and gain more seats. Even Social Credit had their cultish base of die-hard supporters across NZ. That's what I mean by political depth.
In comparison OP's primary canvassing approach seems to be to mob (or bot) any political discussion on social media. And shamelessly beg for Labour to cede Mt Albert to them in an Epsom deal. I found that hard to choke down, as they seemed to launch the idea publically before any actual approach to Labour.
And, while they disagree with NZF’s rather smellier positions, they will hold their noses and work with them if needed. Yuck. OP: Opportunist Party.
As a farmer twig I don't entirely trust green politics. And I've voted for them atleast twice in the past