Monday, 11 July 2011

DOWN TO THE DOCTOR’S: On non-“Maorification” and beyond

_McGRathLibertarianz leader Dr Richard McGrath invites you to come on down to his surgery for an inoculation against this week’s stories and headlines on issues affecting our freedom.
This week: A tale of two Ansells

  • NZ HERALD: “Act ad man quits after blasting 'apartheid'”:  Former ACT marketing 'guru' John Ansell has been sent packing by Don Brash following his airing of outspoken views on pre- and post-European Maori and the government's attitude to Maori cultural values…

THE DOCTOR SAYS: John Ansell is perfectly entitled to hold opinions of any kind. Whether he should have shared these in his previous capacity as a representative of the ACT Party is a matter for ACT leader Don Brash to decide - which he did. Rightly.So, what does the Libertarianz Party think about Ansell's comments? Initially, Mr Ansell's name rang a bell, and a quick online search reminded me that one Colin Ansell (formerly King-Ansell) had been the leader at various times of the NZ version of Britain's National Front.

John Ansell has no connection to Colin Ansell beyond his name. But in perusing the websites of the haters while pursuing the bell-ringing, I noticed a few interesting things that strongly distinguish intelligent libertarians from the shaven-headed race-baiters.  A perusal of the NZ National Front's policies, for instance, as outlined on Wikipedia, reveals just how different far-right parties are from the libertarian ethos of small government and maximum freedom:

    • There are a few area of commonality - the fascists want abolition of the Waitangi Treaty; Libertarianz would respect the Treaty as a historical but outdated document which should not be the basis for assigning rights and responsibilities. These should be based on a constitution that champions individual rights and does not allow for race-based legislation.
    • And they claim to want the abolition of institutionalised political correctness - as does Libertarianz - but I wonder if instead the fascists want to replace the current multicultural form of PC with their own white Anglo-Saxon nationalist version.
    • The fascists want a ban on foreign ownership and control of New Zealand assets. In this, they would of course have the support of Jane Kelsey, John Minto and the other CAFCA xenophobes. The Libertarianz Party believes in free trade and would welcome investment from overseas, just as it would push for New Zealanders to be able to invest in foreign markets.
    • The fascists want government to enforce the maintenance of Western Judeo-Christian morality and values; Libertarianz believes Government should not be endorsing any particular cultural values, and just as it would not promote "Westernisation" neither would it promote "Maorification."
    • The fascists are opposed to the immigration of people with non-Western values, and advocate the deportation of Asians, Africans and people from the Middle East (which would no doubt include Jews). Libertarianz would welcome the arrival of anyone willing to obey the laws of the land. In a society with a privatised welfare system, immigrants would not pose the sort of threat to the economy that currently exists when the newly arrived are corrupted by the availability of unconditional money obtained from other New Zealanders by force.
    • The fascists want an apartheid arrangement where "Maori" and "white" cultures enjoy separate governance. Impossible without a partitioning of races/cultures. The Libertarianz Party want the opposite - a blending together of all New Zealanders with mutual respect by all for the (individual) rights of others.
    • The fascists want State acquisition of the Reserve Bank - Libertarianz utterly oppose state ownership of any banks, believing in free banking independent of political interference. The Reserve Bank would be shut down by a Libertarianz government under which there would be no such entity as a central bank. Interest rates and money supply would be determined by allowing a free market in banking and by prosecuting counterfeiting of the type practiced by our Reserve Bank.
    • The fascists want a withdrawal from free trade agreements - in fact from all international trade! Yes,a fortress New Zealand, as favoured by Jim Anderton. A recipe for stagnation, poverty, starvation, famine and death.
    • The fascists want organic farming supported by state subsidies - the Greens would love them. Libertarianz would call a halt to political interference in the farming sector and in research and development. Organic farming would have to stand or fall on its own merits. There would be no favouritism toward any particular business model.
    • The fascists, in line with the Catholic church and conservative lobbyists, oppose women having control over their bodies and being able to procure safe, legal abortions. The Libertarianz Party believe a woman's body is her own and as such should have total ownership and control over everything within it.  
    • The fascists, like the left wing of the Labour Party, Minto, Kelsey et al, want New Zealand to withdraw from ANZUS. Actually, that may not be a bad thing given President Obama's past links to communists and racists, and signs that Julia Gillard's premiership may be brief due to her abandonment of rational thought.
    • The fascists want to reintroduce capital punishment - the Libertarianz Party opposes capital punishment, believing that governments should not violate the individual rights of their citizens by killing them, instead enforcing restorative justice.
    • And of course the fascists want compulsory military training, as trumpeted by the Winston Peters Party. Lots of young people marching around in brown shorts carrying huge flags and saluting The Leader. Fortunately, because it opposes slavery of any sort, there would be no CMT under a Libertarianz government. The army would be small during peacetime and made up of volunteers.
    • I would wager the fascists would also advocate the prosecution of anyone self-medicating without Nanny's permission, just like National, Labour, the Greens, Maori Party, the Anderton and Peters Parties, Peter Dunne-Nothing and even ACT. They would probably want homosexuality recriminalised. Libertarianz believes the sovereign is individuals and thus that adults should be able to make decisions for themselves about such things as medication and sexual preference. The other parties don't trust New Zealanders and want to treat them like children.
      Only the Libertarianz Party believes in treating New Zealanders aged over 18 years as adults. Under a Libertarianz administration, the only activities that would be banned are those that cause harm to others. Anyone got a problem with that?

John Ansell did get two things dead right.

First, Prime Minister John Key is an incompetent economic manager - Bill English is still borrowing a billion dollars every three weeks.

Second, the National Party have abandoned - betrayed - their stated values. Key, English and most, if not all, of the National Party caucus are quislings, interested only in the retention of power at any price. Disgusting specimens of humanity, corrupted by the baubles of office. Why anyone would waste their vote on these cockroaches is beyond me.

The alternative to choking down the bile as one ticks the box next to your local National drone this November is to vote for a Libertarianz candidate. There is a candidate in Epsom who left Auckland ratepayers with a debt equal to what Bill English borrows every fortnight, and he may just find himself reminded of this as election day draws closer by someone from Libertarianz. Watch this space.

And, before anyone takes umbrage, I don't believe John Ansell is related in any way to the former leader of the far-right lunatic fringe National Front head cases.  But what I found when I confirmed the lack of connection was interesting enough to comment.

See you next wwek
Doc McGrath


  1. Where have the libertarianz been this past twelve years? Had they stifled the rhetoric and put candidates in the electoral ring they may have gained a better appreciation of their perceived value to the voting public.

    Talk has always been cheap and unless matched with actions is completely worthless.

    So what about it Doc. Are you going to front up on 26 November and present a worthwhile alternative to the present set of drones? Or are you going to be content at sniping from the sidelines?

  2. Doc, John Ansell is quite correct in his article. I made some comments on Kiwiblog about it. I pointed out Peter Creswell's (@ Solo) excellent article on Kiwiblog:

    'One-Law-For-All' Day

    Some of what John Ansell had said in his article are the same points that Peter highlighted on his blog article. I suspect that John Ansell had read Peter's blog article prior the one ACT (by Ansell) published in the Herald last week. Look at the similarity of the points made by John and what Peter said.

    If you think that Mr Ansell (or ACT) is fascist, then why don't you point your finger at Peter, because Mr Ansell said exactly what Peter thinks (which are factual correct). Libz should come out and support Ansell/Brash/ACT and company.

  3. If John Ansell is a fascist (and I doubt it) then so are the huge swathe of Kiwis who agree with him.

    Your arguments are ad hominem and fail to further he country's political discourse.

  4. But what I found when I confirmed the lack of connection was interesting enough to comment

    And what is this? A new standard in intellectual rigour? Geez mate...!

  5. Richard McGrath11 Jul 2011, 20:36:00

    @peterg: Libz have put candidates up at every election since 1996 (except for 2002). I am standing again in Wairarapa, in fact this was announced some time ago.

    I will therefore be sniping from the front line, confronting our National MP on his party's betrayal of principle. Sound OK to you?

  6. Richard McGrath11 Jul 2011, 20:39:00

    @FFF - I didn't call John Ansell fascist, but rather allowed myself to become sidetracked in the interests of showing why Libertarianz are not "right wing" or "fascist".

    I have quite a bit of sympathy for John Ansell's views, as will many New Zealanders.

    Libz will support ACT (or anyone else) when they make a stand in favour of greater freedom. We always have, always will.

  7. @PeterG... Libz have been there for 12 years. Peter's been there. Doc's been there. I'm struggling to understand your point? Do you think that Libz don't present a worthwhile alternative?

    Libz are always well represented in the electoral ring, by smart people who give up a great deal of time and energy wihtout a hope that they will be appreciated by the voting public.

    Your comment is very insulting.

    **Geez, what was it with the comments today?

  8. Richard McGrath11 Jul 2011, 20:41:00

    @Dave Mann - yeah, OK, it was written in a hurry and PC did a fairly good editing job but some of the grammatical errors made it through to the final copy.

  9. Richard, I wasn't referring to grammatical errors... I was referring to your wild and intellectually suspect linking of the words Ansell-facist-Ansell when you know that no actual connection exists beyond the coincidence that these two people share the same surname.

    Your disclaimer at the end of your article does nothing to alleviate the fact that your whole article was based on fatuous bullshit, frankly.

  10. Off-topic: I have to say I find the picture that goes with Doc's posts disturbing. Is it some kind of in joke? I'm much less inclined to read his posts because of it.

  11. Richard McGrath13 Jul 2011, 20:20:00

    @Dave Mann: Point taken, Dave. It was stretching things a bit. However as you say I did put the disclaimer in at the end. In my experience you can never point out the distinction between the far-right mentality and libertarian thought too often. Libz are still dismissed by people as extreme "right wingers", and I was trying to put that right.

    Anon: The picture is a Normal Rockwell classic. Not to everyone's taste, but I'm not exactly sure why you're offended. It was, after all, deemed suitable for public viewing.


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.