Classic Luna-tarians- Responsible for the demise of ACT and Libertarianz

I suspected there were internal problems within ACT and the Libz, but the true extent of those problems has not been apparent until after the recent election, where a lot of dirty linen has been washed in public.

I’ve long complained about the existence of a core of looney doctrinal idiots running the Libertarianz, and I see now that a part of this group have infiltrated ACT and it is this group who are most likely responsible for that party’s like disintegration.

Now I see they are discussing the establishment of a new party. Leaving aside that his seems a tacit admission that the Libertarianz will never amount to anything again, then I suggest this new party is actually quite a good idea.

If all of the Luna-tarian white ants who destroyed ACT and the Libz are isolated in their own little telephone box sized focus group that will be a good thing, for it will keep these nutters from similarly destroying any other parties.

ACT once attracted significant electoral support as a party that promoted free market economic policies. It was not, as is widely misrepresented by the luna-tarians, a “classic liberal” party. At its height in pursuing these ECONOMIC policies it won nine seats in parliament.

As ACT became infiltrated by the Luna-tarians, so its political status subsided and internal bickering increased, culminating in the debacle of Epsom this election and leaving it with one MP. ACT is unlikely to last the distance to the next election.

Likewise the Libertarianz, who initially focused on the message of small government, attracted almost 6000 votes in the second election they contested, but like ACT dropped off in popularity as perceived “homosexual rights” issues weakly camouflaged as “classical liberalism” became its main focus.

A new party where these destructive small minded fools can gather and endlessly bicker among themselves is a great idea, and they can bounce their daft rhetoric (wherein they portray their present status as akin to being inmates in a Nth Korean concentration camp) off each other until their “classically liberal” hearts are fully content.

Of course if their liberty was as constrained as they allege, what are they doing voluntarily living in this metaphorical gulag? They could easily escape and travel to a country that does not keep them behind such walls and watch towers. That they do not go elsewhere (or even take up arms) is proof that their wild claims are merely the self serving rhetoric of a collection of childish selfish narcissistic brats.

They have a lot to answer for in respect of the unnecessary destruction of two political parties that once offered NZers a clear path away from socialism.

18 thoughts on “Classic Luna-tarians- Responsible for the demise of ACT and Libertarianz

  1. Why the fuck do they want ANOTHER party for ? What will they call it this time ? The Party Drugs & Butt Sex Party? The LIbertarianz could be boosted overnight by booting out the nutty objectivists and making Ozzy to run the damn thing – if he’s still a member.

    Like

  2. I commented on that thread by Liberty Scott, I encouraged them basically to drop the crazy and focus on “true” right wing objectives, i.e. less tax and government departments and businesses. It’s quite obvious that Joe Average NZer doesn’t care about issues outside of helping his wife and kids get ahead in relative freedom, is sick of PC nonsense and social engineering. Look at Damien O’Connor in West Coast, the only Labour member who did exceedingly well was the one who stated publicly that the Party was controlled by a bunch of unionists and a gaggle of gays.

    Like

  3. The primary reason Libertarianz gained the vote it did in 1999 is because it was led by Lindsay Perigo, who had a high public profile and he had a nationwide radio talkback show. There was a platform and a communicator with a profile, so votes came in. The radio show disappeared, he stood down and so the publicity platform was gone. If you look at the leaflets and material circulated then and since, you’ll notice next to no difference. I can’t remember the last time homosexual rights were actively pushed in a press release or any other way, but if you can give an example feel free. None of the Party Leaders since Perigo have been gay.

    I think ACT went wrong when it first faced competition from National in 2005 when Brash took votes by pushing “one law for all” and being tough on crime, ACT had nothing to offer and its “liberal party” slogan seemed meaningless to voters. Since then it lost its way completely, being all over the place, and being in government has been a disaster as Hide was complicit with the mega city, yet ACT couldn’t capitalise on voluntary student union membership as an issue.

    I agree the rhetoric in past years has been excessive, but it existed with Libz in 1999. The term Nazis on Air saw the TV licence fee gone, but I don’t think that talking as if NZ is a fascist state is helpful. I’m quite open to ideas and impressions about what to do. However, although I haven’t been actively involved in Libz for 6 years, I gather the party has not been divided internally in that time.

    Pinkofreezone – I agree the focus should be simple, uncomplicated, pushing less government spending, lower taxes, less regulation and moving public services out of central control (e.g. more autonomy for schools, education vouchers or whatever).

    Like

  4. I think Liberty Scott has come up with some good suggestions.
    However, it may well be that two parties are needed, perhaps as part of a new Freedom Alliance.
    The could be Colin Craig and His Conservatives, perhaps with Banksie, as the new Conservative Party.
    Then the sociallly-liberally minded small-staters could be in a new Freedom Party.
    Alas, it does seem that ACT is finished.
    Surely, this ‘alliance’ could top 5%?

    Like

  5. “The could be Colin Craig and His Conservatives, perhaps with Banksie, as the new Conservative Party.”

    “Banksie” is yesterday’s man, he should’ve just strolled out to pasture when he allowed himself to be outfoxed by a despicabe leftist like Len Brown. The Conservatives don’t need this grubby opportunist in their midst.

    “Then the sociallly-liberally minded small-staters could be in a new Freedom Party.”

    These “social-liberals – classical-liberals” already have a party, the Libz, and it’s a fuck up. How will a new badge ameliorate the dire situation they are in?

    Like

  6. Would these be the same libertarianz’s who in the election before last received fewer party votes than The Bill and Ben Party?

    On this basis these folk seem to me to be a waste of time and oxygen.

    Like

  7. In my opinion the Conservative Party needs to remain pure and true. No social-liberal Libertarians, no Banks types, but rather genuine conservatives ONLY. What’s that quote … “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump”. And this one, too, “Be ye not unequally yoked …” The term ‘compromise’ should not be part of the vocabulary of the CP.

    If they stay true to this principle the CP support base can only but grow. 56,000 votes after only a few months since its conception sends the message that a large minority want to see a genuine conservative and family based party in the political fray. Go you good thing.

    Like

  8. “The term ‘compromise’ should not be part of the vocabulary of the CP.”

    Would that make them the sort of coalition partner any major party would want?

    Like

  9. O/T I know, but it seems the secondhand rent-a-pom Barnsley has just admitted to censoring Redbaiter’s comments in No Minister.
    What price the moral high ground now, eh? Christ, that blog has become a cesspit…

    Like

  10. “Would that make them the sort of coalition partner any major party would want?”
    No, but it might just make them a major party which an awful lot of Kiwis would want.

    Like

  11. Chuck, the watermelons don’t compromise. The apartheid party don’t compromise. ACT will compromise, selling its principles for a seat at the big table. Guess which ones tend to get what they want? That’s right, it’s the ones who stick to their guns. The watermelons have their Emissions Trading Scam, sitting waiting for them to ramp right up when they next get their grubby mits on the levers of power. The apartheid party has been given more than any other minor partner could ever hope or want for. And guess what, Mebbe if ACT had stuck to its original principles based around small government and minimal taxes, kiwis would by now have a flat tax fixed at 20% instead of a soviet-style super city with an openly communist mayor.

    Like

  12. I don’t visit that blog any more because I couldn’t stomach the constant key-fellatio. As to deleting Redbaiter’s comments, I’m disappointed but not surprised. It’s one of the left’s standard tactics; suppress dissent and claim consensus. By deleting Redbaiter’s comments they don’t have to acknowledge the truth they contain, and everything can be well in New Key-land, where the children play under candy rainbows and swim in rivers of chocolate, and there is no underclass and all the races play merrily together.

    Like

  13. Thanks guys [KG & Gantt], you covered all the bases and reflected exactly my views on the issue. And Chuck, I’m really surprised you’re still trying to flog that old nag – the ACT Party. Might be time to find a new mount lest your current ride throw you at the next hurdle.

    Like

  14. As to deleting Redbaiter’s comments, I’m disappointed but not surprised.

    I’m not surprised either. Barnsley has never amounted to more than a dirty little culturally Marxist coward.

    He’s a really good example of the truism that there is really very little difference between the socialists of National and the socialists of Labour. All possessed of the same Marxist amorality, they merely differ on the finer points of policy.

    Like

  15. “Christ, that blog has become a cesspit…”

    Yes, secretly deleting comments he disagreed with would be about what you’d expect from yellow backed scum like Barnesly. No integrity, just another amoral POS.

    Since Sir Humphrey’s split into No Minister and NZ Conservative, its easy to see where the good people went and where the lowlife went.

    Like

Comments are closed.