Marxism, New Zealand Style

As you may or may not be aware, New Zealand is to host the Rugby World Cup next year, and the food and service workers' union, Unite, is going to use the event as a political football, pun intended. I have heard their president, Matt McCarten, on the radio quite often, and he is an unabashed, dyed-in-the-wool leftist, obviously.

Union threatens action during Rugby World Cup

Unite union is threatening industrial action to coincide with next year's Rugby World Cup.

The union's general secretary. Matt McCarten, said the union is planning "a big push" on behalf of its members in hotels, SkyCity Casino and other entertainment venues.

Interviewed for TV3's The Nation, he said current employment agreements had been "lined up" so they were due for renegotiation at about the time of the World Cup.

"We don't want to wreck the World Cup, of course not. But we certainly are going to be lining up the employers at that time and saying: 'Well, you're going to make a lot of money, what's going to be the workers' share?'."

Mr McCarten said he expected employers to be "more focused" ahead of the World Cup.

Unite hoped to be able to convince the public that it would be unfair for foreign-owned hotel chains to charge between $1000 and $2000 per night while continuing to pay workers the minimum or minimal wages.

The union said it would be unacceptable for people to work for less than $15 per hour, and in addition it wanted 10 percent of higher room rates to go into a special fund to be shared amongst workers.
Mr McCarten said millions of dollars of taxpayers' money would contribute to the World Cup's success, and it would be wrong for all profits to go offshore.

Now, those of you in the US need to know that the minimum wage in NZ is already $12.75 per hour, and that is still not enough to get a good number of people off their ass to get a job because in many cases one can get more money by being on a welfare benefit.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need, indeed.

Paul Henry: Public Enemy #1?

OK, I know most of you are asking yourselves, "Who the fuck is Paul Henry?" For the record, he is NOT Taliban or Al Quaeda; he is NOT a pedophile or a serial killer.

Paul Henry is the co-host of the Morning Breakfast show on TV NZ Channel One. Although not a regular viewer, I think he can be quite funny, and, because he isn't a lefty, Paul is quite refreshing with his mince-no-words, call-it-like-he-sees-it style and good use of sarcasm. But NZ is so PC that, it just seems like the guy can't cut a break because he is always allegedly offending somebody. All the liberals hate him and want him fired from his broadcasting job. That's good enough reason for me to like him.

Here's the latest "offense" that has too many people's knickers in a twist.

BSA complaint over Henry's 'schizo' call not upheld

NZPA March 29, 2010, 1:53 pm

 Controversy-baiting broadcaster Paul Henry has escaped another broadcasting standards complaint -- this time over his use of the term "schizo".

The Broadcasting Standards Authority has declined to uphold a complaint relating to his use of the term on an episode of TV One's Breakfast show last September, while interviewing an employment relations expert about different personality types.

Though the complainant alleged the term was unfair and derogatory to people with schizophrenia, the authority found Henry's use of the term was deliberately ambiguous.

At least most of these complaints have not been upheld. Here's one that was, however, followed by the offending segment. Keep in mind that Paul was merely commenting on what a viewer had written in an email.

Earlier last year, the authority upheld complaints against Henry for his comments about Greenpeace spokeswoman Stephanie Mills' moustache.

I'm tellin' ya, these thin-skinned, perpetually offended, liberal PC assholes just need to STFU and get a life.

Here's the thing. I'm sure this broad knows she has a moustache, and she obviously knows she's going on TV. If she was worried about it, she would have shaved it or waxed it or something, but, I'm willing to bet she keeps it around just to get a reaction, like she's daring you to notice it and say something. I'm sorry, but like Paul, if I see a chick with a "mo" I'm going to notice it; hell, I'll probably make a comment about it...especially if she's a fucking greenie dyke. I don't avoid the big elephant in the middle of the room.

The way I see it is you have the right to say or do what you want to do and be what you want to be, but I ALSO have the right to say what I want to say. This PC, hate speech bullshit has to stop. You cannot legislate "niceness." Sure, it would be great if everybody was "nice", but I believe that people have the right to be assholes, too. If they offend you, you avoid them.

It seems so simple to me. I just don't get it.

A Tale of Two Ironies

This from the Southland Times:

Invercargill, New Zealand

Sisters Natalie Bennie and Tamara Shefa were upset after being booted out of the Mevlana Cafe in Esk St yesterday by owner Mustafa Tekinkaya.

They chose to eat at Mevlana Cafe because it had a play area for Mrs Bennie's two children, but they were told to leave before they had ordered any food, Mrs Bennie said.

"He heard us speaking Hebrew and he asked us where we were from. I said Israel and he said 'get out, I am not serving you'. It was shocking."

Mr Tekinkaya, who is Muslim and from Turkey, said he was making his own protest against Israel because it was killing innocent babies and women in the Gaza Strip.

"I have decided as a protest not to serve Israelis until the war stops."

He said he had nothing against Israeli people but if any more came into his shop they would also be told to leave, and he was not concerned if he lost business.

After my initial reaction of disgust, I found it highly ironic that here's this muslim Turk banning an Israeli in protest of Israel's actions against the Palestinians in Gaza when, until 90 years ago, his native country occupied that same area (and then some) for hundreds of years. I wonder how he feels about that and how he would have felt were he alive then. Something tells me he would not have given a rat's ass about the plight of the Palestinians, but now that non-muslims are in charge - Jews, no less - well, that's different.

That's irony number 1. Here's irony number 2.

When this incident happened last week, I was going to simply write about how the Middle East mess has tentacles that reach even here, to New Zealand, a tiny little country at the bottom of the world with no dog in that fight and of little significance in affecting any meaningful change there. Then, as I began doing a little more sourcing, I found this blog entry and began reading the comments. As I read through them (all 180-something at the time), an interesting issue came to the surface: Property rights. One commenter stated that, although he found the cafe owner's behavior appalling, he finds the anti-discrimination laws more appalling, and on that basis he had to side with the cafe owner. I have to agree. Let me explain.

First, consider this statement from Race Relations Commissioner Joris de Bres:

"Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation in Palestine, it is simply against the law for providers of goods and services in New Zealand to discriminate in this way."

Respect for private, individual property rights are at the foundation of Western civilization. ANY move away from that principal is a step toward a more collectivist, communist society, and that is more of an affront to human or civil "rights" than is being denied service at a private establishment. It's his property, and he should be able to deny service to anybody for any reason. Any law that contradicts that right flies directly in the face of respect for private property rights. The only thing that matters is that the buyer is willing and able to pay for the goods and/or services, and the seller is willing to provide them. Now, if you believe that racial, religious or any other kind of discrimination is morally wrong, then vote with your wallet and choose not to do business with that establishment. If enough people feel the same way, he will either have to change his tune or face going out of business. That, I believe, is the way to affect change - NOT by demanding that government enact laws that prohibit certain behaviors or actions which, however reprehensible, do not deny others their rights.

One does not have the "right" to walk into a private establishment and demand service, but the current law in New Zealand and most elsewhere in the West has made it so. We have betrayed one principal for another, denied one set of rights and granted another set. The equation is out of balance. Where these civil and human rights laws go wrong is that they don't just stop with regulating how government institutions and agencies - those in the public sector - conduct themselves. They go that one step too far into the private sector.

I know this is a difficult concept for some to grasp, but it really is simple. Is racist behavior wrong? I believe it is, but as long as it does not deny somebody their right to life, liberty, or their own property, it should not be illegal. Do I think the guy is a complete asshole? You bet. But I believe he has the right to be an asshole, the right to be wrong - and suffer the consequences for it; not by government mandate, but by the people themselves in any form that does not involve violence, coercion, or destruction of property.

Help Wanted

Vilmar sent me this the other day:



OK, for those outside New Zealand, I'll need to clue you in on a few things. Ponsonby is a yuppie district in Auckland about 5-10 minutes (traffic depending) from the city center, full of upscale, European wannabe coffee houses, overpriced cafes and restaurants serving underportioned meals (you know, where the "presentation" is excellent, but there's more empty plate than food to cover it), and, of course - LIBERALS. Lots of 'em. That's why I don't go there often.

There are also lots of "niche" places, and this "Murder Burger" looks like an attempt to be another one. They appear to be trying to use the same controversial "shock and awe" marketing tactic used by the now very well established nationwide Kiwi pizza franchise, Hell Pizza. Hell makes a damn good pie and is second only to Dominos in that segment of market share. Hell is doing so well that Pizza Hut, like Starbucks, may soon be extinct on the New Zealand food and beverage landscape.

You may be wondering, "What the hell is 'P'?" "P" is what they call crystal meth down here. Don't ask me why; I have heard several explanations saying that it stands for "pure" (yeah, like pure battery acid) to "phosphorous". Doesn't really matter. Meth heads or (as we call them in the States) "tweakers" suck.

Now, the ad itself. I'll overlook the redundancy in the header. Looking for "Arts, Architecture, and Humanities students." Hmmm, liberals? Also looking for "student nurses and student teachers" because as Geordie, the apparent proprietor (or at least the one in charge of hiring staff) has dated them in the past and found them not only "awesome" but "more awesome" than he (she?) - so much so that the relationships failed. Hey, if at first you don't succeed, try, try again, right? You have to admire the tenacity. With that kind of perseverance, Murder Burger just might make it - or at least Geordie might get laid.

As for not wanting "politics students" because "we just don't understand you" that could go either way. Conservative thought may be so foreign to them that it defies all comprehension. Liberal thought might do the same because the liberal arts types are perhaps more of the feeeeling type - any mention of Marx and questions about Groucho and Harpo are raised.

Regarding the cat in the photo, all I can say is that I'm a cat person (which, according to Michael Laws, means I am gay), so I hope they don't actually plan on serving cat meat. I realize that the Free Trade Agreement with China goes into effect soon, but, again, I hope that the acceptance of cat meat isn't one of the residual "benefits" we have to look forward to. Fur burgers have their place; just not on a food menu.

Anyway, if Geordie or anybody else from Murder Burger reads this, please don't take it personally; no malice is intended. It's called satire, and I'm just having a go at the ad. Besides, if you make a good burger, I'll stop by on the way home from my office in the other yuppie district, Newmarket.

I truly wish them luck because I am a "buy New Zealand made" kind of person, and I'll pay a little more for it (as opposed to the cheap garbage that comes from Asia).

News From New Zealand

Have look at a bit of what's happening in the People's Socialist State of New Zealand.

Greens Vote To Support Labour's Carbon Trading Scheme

On Tuesday, the Greens decided to throw-in their support for Labour's bill they hope to pass before the elections coming up soon; a bill that will tie Kiwis to the ridiculous, asinine Kyoto Treaty. New Zealand contributes 0.02-0.03% of total global greenhouse gas emissions, yet Prime Minister Helen Clark and her apparatchiks want New Zealand to lead the world by example. This is a prime minister who signs on to a UN or just about any other international agreement that binds and obligates Kiwis to foreign whim (like accepting, for example, a UN quota for taking in refugees from third world countries). Collectivist asshats like Prime Minister Queen Helen see themselves as citizens of the world community, and she often justifies herself by saying that New Zealand is obligated to do such and such because of this or that international law or agreement. One Australian foreign ministry assessment recently referred (and then redacted the statement as being "outdated") to her as a "left-wing control feak". I don't disagree with that at all. But I digress.

Helen Clark and Labour still need support from her other main coalition partner, the New Zealand First party. They have it. So much for New Zealand First standing up for Kiwis. But, hey, with NZ First's party leader, former National MP, Winston Peters, being the Foreign Minister, I guess that it was bound to happen. Isn't coalition government grand? The average Kiwi is now fucked, and the farmers - dairy farmers in particular - are really fucked.

Here's some more background on the Emissions Trading Scheme.
*************************************************************************************

Labor Union Stands Down Member Because of Party Affiliation

The short story.

ACT list candidate Shawn Tan will not know if he will keep his job with the Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union until Thursday.

The EPMU has suspended Mr Tan, who works in support services for the union, for failing to get permission to stand for the political party.

Apparently, this union, like many others, is a big supporter of the Labour Party, and there are very strict rules here about campaign finance and disclosure. One way around it is to register as a party and you can spend more money than you could otherwise by donating money to a party or a candidate (or even spending money on fliers or DVDs promoting a party or candidate without directly donating the money). That is what this union wants to do, and presumably the money they would spend would go towards helping Labour retain power.

National wants the High Court to overturn a decision allowing the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union to register as a third party.

A judicial review has come to a close in Wellington today, following a decision by the Electoral Commission to approve the EPMU's plan to spend up to $120,000 during the election campaign.

National's lawyer Peter Kiely says the commission has misinterpreted the law, and has not asked itself the right questions. He claims it did not take into account the EPMU's involvement in the Labour Party, and its involvement in the administration of the affairs of the party.

So when Mr. Tan wanted to run for office as a member of a party other than Labour, like all good and tolerant liberals, they basically threw him under the bus.

This Kiwi blogger nails it perfectly (and read the comments, too - they're a hoot!)

New ACT candidate Shawn Tan is finding out today what it means to turn class traitor. You get ostracised.

The EPMU has suspended Shawn. For stealing? No. For sexual misconduct? No. For violence? No.

He has been suspended for daring to stand for a political party other than Labour.

The EPMU stands guilty of rank hypocrisy. It is ok for Andrew Little to contemplate standing for Labour, it is OK for the President Don Pryde to seek nominations for Labour but Shawn Tan seeks to stand for parliament for the ACT party and that is NOT OK.

Suspended for his political affliations. Disgusting.

*************************************************************************************

Judge Orders Name Suppression Only For Online Media in Hapeta Murder Case

It is a strange concept they have here in NZ, even though it is sometimes used in the US. I am still trying to get my head around this name suppression thing. Sometimes it's a famous person; sometimes it's an average citizen; but it is used quite a bit. It's done, of course, in the name of getting a fair trial. To me it smacks of secrecy, and it just doesn't sit well with me. I have no lost love for the media, but these suppression orders and black-outs and bans that prevent even discussing certain things in a public forum like talk radio just smacks of censorship and tactics of fascists and totalitarianism. Maybe I'm wrong here, but my gut tells me different; and my gut is usually right. What really surprises me is how many people see nothing wrong with justice being done behind closed doors.

The short story.

A judge has today taken the unprecedented step of banning news websites from naming two men charged with murder while allowing newspapers, radio stations and TV networks to reveal who they are.

Judge David Harvey said online media could not use the names, or publish images of the accused, to prevent the public searching for the information when the case comes to trial.

He said he was "concerned about someone Googling someone's name and being able to access it later".

He was also "concerned about the viral effect of digital publication".

Judge Harvey ruled in Manukau District Court that it was OK to report the names and publish the images in print tomorrow or on tonight's 6pm television news but not on news websites.

To find out who the men are you can buy tomorrow's New Zealand Herald.

Now, this is just stupid, and overseas bloggers are already scoffing at the ruling because it is not binding to those outside New Zealand. One such blogger is in the US.

One blog has today boasted it is written by an American, hosted in the United States, and subject only to the jurisdiction and laws of the United States of America so is publishing the names of the two.

The blog says:"In protest Im asking bloggers around the world to join me in posting these names - bypassing the New Zealand court order and showing the Judge the true power of the internet! "The post shows a photograph of the two men and dubs Judge Harvey's decision an "oppressive ban".

"You may ask why Im posting their names, why Im trying to break a New Zealand court order, why Im making a bit of a fool of myself.

Well, the answer is simple: I am a staunch supporter of free speech and cannot stand the prevalence of pointless and suppressive limitations on speech, especially on the internet."
- (snip) -
Another website initially published the names but has since blanked over them. It now refers to the two by nicknames.

"His (Judge Harvey's) demonstrable idiocy is the new media equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition," the second blog says.

This is a good op/ed analysis of the issue.