Mysteries, Chemtrails, Aerosols :: Mysterious NZ New Zealand based Discussion Forums The strange & mysterious, archaeological anomalies, modern oddities... Current affairs, health & medical issues, Aerosol Spraying in NZ... ...and general interest: ARCHIVES
...Green politics is unique in that its values can apply across the traditional political spectrum. Environmentalism is ubiquitous, crossing social, economic and cultural boundaries, but the Greens court only a subsection of environmentalists.
Today it is a no-brainer to be an environmentalist - this was not the case 30 years ago when we were still largely ignorant of our impact on the environment.
But the Green movement has not caught up with the fact that its cause is now in the mainstream. The look, feel and indeed policy of the Green movement still looks like something from the 70s fringe...
We went along to Paul Buchanan's book launch last week and got the chance to have quite a long conversation with Green MP Keith Locke about this very issue. Understandably, he seemed a little defensive on the subject. It wasn't our intention to attack him or his politics but we were expressing what has become a growing feeling within many voters - that the Greens need to lose the wacky/fringe reputation and develop a harder edge. And indeed if they didn't alienate voters so much, many more New Zealanders would more readily relate to what they stand for. I've seen numerous ocassions recently where columnists and cartoonists mock that 'organic lentil-eating luddite' stereotype that the Greens not only cannot seem to shake off, but it would seem, don't particularly want to.
The Herald article also makes an excellent point also about how the "party marginalises itself" with "its stance on the decriminalisation of marijuana".
Locke spoke at some length about the frustration he feels working within the parliamentary system, particularly with respect to some of the civil liberties issues and the 'anti-freedom' legislation rapidly coming into being. He gave the example of some piece of legislation that will be tacked onto some child protection or anti-peadophile law. If he votes for it, he compromises himself - if he votes against it, he's seen as supporting something heinous in society. I can certainly appreciate the dilemma there.
We were able to express to him the deep concern felt by many of us about the surveillance society and the increasingly invasive technologies being introduced into our communities and hope that he took this on board.
But he also made no secret of the that he had been rather scared the Greens wouldn't reach the 5% threshold this time. And that should be of very grave concern to the party.
NZ Herald wrote:
...The Green Party remains the only party that is thinking about the sort of world our children will inherit - both major parties in New Zealand pay lip service to this while offering voters instant gratification.
It is for this reason that the Green Party needs to do a better job of focusing on why it exists, and a better job of widening its support base.
We are Green and we demand a mainstream voice.
* Daniel Batten is chief executive of Auckland-based bioinformatics company Biomatters, and a member of the Thinking About Tomorrow Society.
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 266
Location: Christchurch
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 11:06 am Post Subject:
hi mel,
totally agre!! it's unfortunate that the greens have positioned themselves on the lunatic fringe. one thing they need to drop asap is the decriminalization of marijuana, imho. this one policy keeps many mainstream folks from taking them seriously.
medical marijuana use is a totally different kettle of fish.
i've been to amsterdam, i would not like auckland to become it.
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 140
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:37 pm Post Subject:
I would like to voice my agreement here.
I even heard Sir Bob Jones commenting on the radio last week saying something like, "everybody is a green - it's a no-brainer."
And he is right... But it can be difficult to take some of the people involved in the NZ Green Party seriously and that has to affect the electorate's propensity to vote Green.
Would more people vote Green if Rod Donald stopped wearing 1970's braces to hold his trousers up?
Would more people vote green if Nandor Tanczos had a shave and combed his hair?
I suppose Keith Locke fronted up over his bet with Rodney Hyde... but the whole episode hardly gave a serious, statesman-like impression.
Perhaps this personalises the politics, but whether we like it or not, politics IS about personalities and how people perceive their credibility.
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 266
Location: Christchurch
Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:49 am Post Subject:
Colin wrote:
I would like to voice my agreement here.
I even heard Sir Bob Jones commenting on the radio last week saying something like, "everybody is a green - it's a no-brainer."
And he is right... But it can be difficult to take some of the people involved in the NZ Green Party seriously and that has to affect the electorate's propensity to vote Green.
Would more people vote Green if Rod Donald stopped wearing 1970's braces to hold his trousers up?
Would more people vote green if Nandor Tanczos had a shave and combed his hair?
I suppose Keith Locke fronted up over his bet with Rodney Hyde... but the whole episode hardly gave a serious, statesman-like impression.
Perhaps this personalises the politics, but whether we like it or not, politics IS about personalities and how people perceive their credibility.
colin, extremely well said!!
think they need some "queer eyes for the "green" guys" :lol:
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 173
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 3:16 pm Post Subject: the problem
I think there problem is they have to many conflicking ideas.
They should just campaign on a few ideas that are all heading in the same direction.
Educate the voting public more on a smaller number of issues so they get more coverage(=better informed public), electtions can be won on one issue alone.
they should stay way out of anything to do with drug's because that just bring's to much money against them and it's just to much of a leap for people to understand that most things they know are wrong(and you'll never sell anything by telling people they are wrong and stupid even if they are).
then the ising on the cake is things like 'yeah no nukes' ' save the whales' you know.
