Tuesday, 30 January 2007

Libertarian Crusade: Libertarianz looking for more members

Sorry to sound like an advertisement, but Libertarianz is snooping around for more members. For any of you not familiar with the party, Libertarianz is New Zealand's only Libertarian party. It focuses primarily on Libertarian issues facing New Zealand, like Jim Anderton's crusade to ban party pills-which, as research has shown, actually lowers consumption of harder drugs.

If you feel New Zealand has strayed too far into Authoritarian, big-government ideas and is in desperate need for a radical change away from these ideas, Libertarianz is the party for you.

You can join Libertarianz over the net here. If you wish to join in writing, please contact your local Libertarianz candidate for a form. You can contact your local Libertarianz candidate using the information provided here.

19 comments:

Rick said...

Libertarianz is New Zealand's only Libertarian party

Isn't it great how New Zealand has not one but two libertarian parties?

Callum said...

Who's the other one? If you think it's ACT, ACT is only a soft Libertarian party at most. Although their policies are better than those of other NZ parties, they're by no means a true Libertarian party.

Rick said...

Whatever you mean by 'true Libertarian party', ACT are doing a damn sight more work than your lot- concerned as you are with your own hands-off purity.

Could it be Libz are too insecure to make the admission that NZ is twice blessed?

Callum said...

So, would you care to enlighten us on how Rodney Hide sued Helen Clark for-as one of top civil servants has shown-entirely legitimate reasons?

James said...

Libz is caused by having Perigo as guru.His alcoholism combined with his violent narcissism drives many of Libzs best away.If you really want to up the membership get rid of him...but its probably too late.

Callum said...

From what I'vw heard, Lindsay's going to America. But I don't entirely know, I've only met him once at a monthly Libz meeting.

libertyscott said...

Oh bleh, let's be grown up about it.

1. Libertarianz is more libertarian than ACT, which is frankly the most libertarian it has ever been. I would say that ACT is, post 2005 election, starting to look like the classical liberal party it has claimed to be in recent years. There is hope, but ACT is not driven YET by advancing freedom as a primary goal, but it is certainly a goal. ACT deserves credit for this, and it is largely because of the purge of many MPs last election.

2. Lindsay Perigo hold no office in Libz and Libz is actually well governed by confident and independently minded people. The past couple of years have been about picking the party up after two disasters - one being the 2002 election, the other being the ILV/Libz factional war. I'd suggest people now outside the party haven't a clue how it is.

It would be too easy to relitigate the battles between ACT and Libz (which are history) and what could shortly be called ILV and Libz. I'd rather move on... more has been achieved in the past year and a half than has been for some time.

Rick said...

Scott, I disagree that ACT is less libertarian. Maybe you rate things on theory without weighing in the taking of action also? That's where ACT makes up its ground. But in any event you seem to be tacitly admitting Callum has it wrong. There's two in town.

James, you've got to get over it. How do you expect others to believe you're a super-genius and benevolent lover of liberty while you hold on bitterness toward those who know not what they have done? If you can't do that then at least do the Kiwi male thing and pretend you don't have a chip on your shoulder.

Callum said...

Rick, if you really think ACT is just as/more Libertarian than Libertarianz, please show me an ACT policy that is more Libertarian than Libertarianz policies.

Rick said...

My philosophy is that activism counts toward libertarianism. If you just sit on your duff how libertarian are you? Even a mainly libertarian person who makes some effort will run rings around the pure guru of libertarinism sitting in the lotus position atop mount 'perfect'.

Understand that?

Callum said...

Since when has ACT sued Helen Clark?

Rick said...

Wanna play a game of oneupmanship do ya? You'll loose.

Callum said...

Rick, please leave if all you're going to do here is argue. I don't like telling people that, but if all you're going to do is argue all the time, in this case irrelevant to the original topic (Libertarianz looking for more members), I will do so. This is MY blog, and I don't go around trash-talking on your blog.

And where's Kane Bunce when you need him?

libertyscott said...

Rick, you may as well argue that the Labour Party is more communist than the Socialist Unity Party because it does more to promote socialism....

nonsense.

Any objective assessment based on what they stand for and propose for voters is that Libertarianz is more libertarian than ACT. National is to the left of ACT, even under Brash and after that you find United Future/ NZ First etc etc. You argue about efficacy, you can argue about tactics and results, but that is subjective.

I'd suggest that Libertarianz has punched beyond its weight on more than one occasion lately.

Rick said...

Callum, you made it the issue not me.

Scott, I don't find your analogical test to make nonsense of my premise. The respective THEORETICAL purity of the Soc and Libz parties is not in question- but these are hononymous titles if you refuse to admit ACTION as evidence. That being said, I've picked the wrong week to be critical of your Libertarianz capacity to act.

Callum said...

"Isn't it great how New Zealand has not one but two libertarian parties?"

Nope, looks like you did.

Rick said...

"Libertarianz is New Zealand's only Libertarian party" was the point made by Blogmaster Callum. I was glad he raised it but seemingly he is not- to the point of denial.

Callum bad; Rick angel.

Callum said...

Rick, according to your logic, Labour is more Communist than the CPA and National is more fascist than the National Front-because they advocate their centre-left and centre-right ideas, respectively. What you're saying is that activism pushes you around the political spectrum depending on what of your current ideas you're advocating (aka Libz have a current "don't ban bzp" campaign). This is not true, as Libz already got to their position on the spectrum by having that as one of their policies. Therefore, they remain on the same position on the spectrum (or whatever word you want to use for it).

If ACT were advocating-and using activism-to further their ideals of the abolishment of the state and for all security to be provided privately than yes, they would be more libertarian than the Libz. But those aren't ACT's ideals, and they certainly don't advocate them. ACT's only advocating their current ideals, and therefore advocating those ideals and using activism to further them does not make them anymore libertarian than they currently are.

Understand that?

Rick said...

I understand you perfectly well. You're as one of those passive gurus on the mountain top who meditates in perfect purity all the most libertarian policies in the world.

But I believe in actions, as I think I've made clear. You don't agree, but you can see my point of view which is that the true test of convictions are spoken of in deeds. And that is why ACT is rightly called a libertarian party. Might not be as liberal as you lot but we're in the game and deserve to have that respected.