Wednesday, 8 November 2006

What's with the 'we,' Brian?

Two good posts from Rodney Hide in the last two days criticising Bryan Gould (far left), erstwhile leader of the British Labour Party and now the self-important vice-chancellor of the University of Political Correctness in the Waikato.

Gould expressed the view
that “We” should control our own economic destiny, not foreign executives in a globalised world, to which Rodney replied (in part):
Given the choice between having someone else control your destiny, or for you to control it yourself, the answer is simple. We want control for ourselves.

But that’s not the choice that Mr Gould is referring to. He fudges the real choice he’s presenting. It’s easy to see why.

The real choice is about people making choices themselves in a free market versus government making choices for us. For Mr Gould the “We” he refers to is government. But what puts us most in control of our own destiny? We as individuals deciding how to spend our own money or governments doing it for us? Whenever you hear socialists speak of “we” be afraid. Be Very Afraid.
Too true. A respondent however criticised this response in these terms:
The political debate is now shaped and constrained in the interests of a small, self-interested and ideologically unrepresentative group of immensely powerful investors who could never have secured support for their extreme positions if they had had to seek a democratic mandate.
"But just how powerful are these investors?" responds Rodney far more politely than I might have, offering four points in response. "First, they only have money to invest if savers provide them with their money, i.e. they have to satisfy their customers. They have no power to make people invest with them—it’s all voluntary. Second..."

Well, read on here for all four of his points. He deserves a visit for his display of good sense.

LINKS: Economic destiny - Rodney Hide
Economic destiny II - Rodney Hide
We? - Not PC

RELATED: Politics, Economics


  1. Rodney Hide gives a good argument & it does make sense.

  2. Nice to see a politician that is in parliament speak good sense for once. That is so rare we porbably won't see one until 2165 now. Shame the good ones like, Libertianz don't do better. As soon as I have the time and resources (among other factors) I am going to be actively promoting the Libz. That won't be for a while though as I have not meet all of those factors yet.

  3. Kane said...
    [As soon as I have the time and resources (among other factors) I am going to be actively promoting the Libz]

    No, you should be promoting Rodney Hide, because the ACT party will have a chance to get to parliament, next time. Rodney promote things which are similar to the Libz.

  4. Nah, Rodney and Act has said things that I do NOT support, while Libertarianz have said only things I support, so to support Rodney and Act would be to act contrary to my beliefs and one should never act contrary to my beliefs. And of course by support I mean more than just vote for them. I mean donate money and promote them at the bare minimum. To do that for a party I don't like just because they have a chance to get into parliament would be wrong of me since I don't like them.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.