Iranian Elections

It looks like Ahmedinejad has won.

This election reminded me of a book I read recently -"The Future of Freedom", by Fareed Zakaria, which talks about how liberalism (the rule of law, free markets, free speech, etc) leads to democracy, but how democratic elections in countries without those institutions often leads to dictatorship and the complete abrogation of rights.

Ever since the Iranian election and the rise of Islamic theology, this has been the case in Iran. In times gone by, I've posted pictures here of Iranians accused of being homosexuals being hanged, not an uncommon practise in Iran. The West needs to learn that the rise of Islamic ideology in Iran has led to this, and the continuing descent into absolute dictatorship in that nation.

Zakaria talks about how liberal institutions can act as a deterrant to the rise of extreme Islamism. Although in the short term this can be true, the introduction -by some miracle, no doubt- of liberal institutions in Iran would simply be showing a practical side to Persia. But at the end of the day, Islamic extremism will rise again -no country can be based on a contradiction for too long, and as political institutions merely express an underlying philosophy, they will be the ones to lose out.

This is what I fear is happening in the West, and Western intellectuals need to take note: with the philosophy of altruism still present in every part of Western society (art, politics, and religion being just a few examples), the West is also based on a contradiction, which has nearly spelt its end, in World War II, for instance. Although we are lucky to have survived for so long, we need to be very cautious, especially with economic crisis on our hands, where we tread.

Four More Years of Statism

The hype around Barack Obama reached new highs yesterday during the inauguration, when hundreds of thousands of people filled the streets of Washington to see their new President. Now, after the glamourous celebrations, reality is going to start to bite.

During his campaign, instead of outlining policies backed by evidence to tackle the current economic crisis, Barack Obama raved on about "change we can believe in", that we need to get through it "together", etc. Instead of appealling to reason, he simply used a good speaking voice to great effect, appealling to emotion.

Unfortunately for him, he's now the person people look to for leadership and guidance, and expectations are incredibly high. What happens when a man with no clue of how to lead, no rational policies and principles based on "feeling", has his finger on the button?

He cashed on the failure of Bush to extremes -he made himself look like a new hope, a new way forward by simply using the word "change". What he's been advocating is more government regulation, based on collectivism. Bush was one of the biggest spenders in US history, so where's the "change" in advocating big government?

Then of course, there's the race issue. Leftists intellectuals have been raving on about how Obama's election victory is proof of "post-racial America". They're forgeting something -a "post-racial America" would not care about race!

Barack Obama won the Presidency through appeals to emotion, not reason. Given expectations, I expect the next four years to be... hilarious, if not outright scary.

Phil Goff: John Key

Helen Clark resigned on election night, and promised that "a new leader will be chosen before Christmas". Looks like it was already pre-chosen -Phil Goff is Labour's new leader, with Annette King taking Michael Cullen's place.

Phil Goff is on the right of the party (despite still being leftist nonetheless). After seeing John Key's win on Saturday, Labour was out looking for pragmatism, so Phil Goff was the ideal candidate (and was from the start). After all, he is not too different from John Key. Fundamentally, there is no difference between the two. Labour was merely looking for a candidate who hadn't fallen out of favour with the middle class (as the election result shows).

And where's Don Brash when you need him?

Election '08: Reflections

Finally, the effort of campaigning for the 2008 election is finally over. We have a new Prime Minister and new ruling parties. Helen Clark has resigned from her position in the Labour Party, as has Michael Cullen. Winston Peters is finally out of politics. The good thing about the large gap in the party vote (which did actually reflect the polls!) is that, even with Maori, Progressives, and the Greens, Labour could not get to the magic 62 seats needed to rule. National, however, needs only ACT to get that number.

Libertarianz got 1,070 party votes. However, as traditional supporters of Libertarian ideals wanted to vote the Labour Government out of power, we got more votes for single electorate candidates, including Richard McGrath in Wairarapa who got 419 votes -we're planning to get even more next time!

I'm pleased to see that Simon Bridges in National got such a large number of votes over Winston Peters -Bridges got twice the votes of Peters, which shows us that Tauranga is now firmly behind National. Not that anyone who turns up to his functions are under 80, anyway.

It's also good to see that ACT got a good result, to place Sir Roger Douglas and John Boscawen in Parliament -so hopefully, we can see the end of the Electoral Finance Act in the next three years, hopefully sooner rather than later.

And although he'll provide some support for the new government, I'm not particularly happy to see Peter Dunne back again -those votes should've gone to Katrina Shanks.

Also, I wasn't happy to see Central Wellington go to Grant Robertson, when it should've gone to Stephan Franks -a much better choice.

So, apart from those two gripes, I'm happy to say that this election has delivered a pleasing result. Finally, Aunty Helen is out of power -lets see if Uncle John does a better job of delivering freedom and capitalism to NZ.

Politically Incorrect Guide to Politics

Some sense on the US election and politics in general today comes from John Stossel, who does hit show "20/20" in America, from his Politically Incorrect Guide to Politics:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6

Hope you enjoy 'em! (first three from Not PC)

Don't tell me ...!

According to the latest 3 News poll, yet another term for the corrupt, socialist Labour government currently ruling the country is looking ever-more likely.

National hadn't changed its place since the last poll, polling at 45%, and Labour went down to 37.5% -however, the real problem is the rise of the Greens, who polled at above 8%. So, given that National has a coalition with ACT and United Future (providing both parties stay in parliament), Labour and the Greens have between them only one less seat, but given the extra three "overhang" seats, neither coalition will be able to rule.

Therefore, the Maori Party chooses who will be the next Prime Minister. And although they've said that they could work with National and form the next government, they could more or less goes anywhere.

Which, in effect, means that New Zealand government for the next few years will go to whoever promises the most handouts to Maori, and all the PC stupidity that comes with modern policy surrounding race, regardless of who wins the next election.

Which, in effect, really peeves me off. MMP for you -the most power goes to the small third parties who make up for numbers with, perhaps, only one or two MPs!

Corruption of Democracy

A lot has been said recently of Labour's universal student allowances scheme, and it has been thoroughly debunked. The economics behind it is stupid, and so is the justification of "equality", "fairness", etc. So, I have nothing more to add to the general debates -apart from the fact that government hand-me-outs always work to destroy democracy and the political process.

Under a libertarian government which doesn't redistribute wealth, there is little incentive for different special interests and lobby groups (such as unions, businesses, organisations representing different groups of people) to heckle the government for cash -as the government recognises that it is not its job to hand out wealth. "Getting into bed" with government is a waste of resources. Similarly, in elections, the votes of a vast number of people don't go to whoever is promising the most benefits, as is the case today.

However, we have a government which is active in the redistribution of wealth -and when the government has money to give away, there's always going to be fighting about who should get it. Suddenly, it becomes worthy to try and get government to swing your way. The only problem is, that money could've gone to any other group, so different politically -minded groups start competing for money, and the end result is that whoever promises the biggest payouts gets the vote.

This is exactly what we're seeing today in New Zealand, and this "universal student allowance" is simply the latest bribe. And until government gets its hand out of our pockets, we'll continue having different lobby groups fighting and bribing politicians for resources.

Poor Candidates For the US

With Rudy Guiliani slipping further in the polls and Hillary Clinton winning every primary in the US minus Iowa, the US election at the end of this year is shaping up to be one of the worst yet:

-The Republican nomination is a toss up between Mike Huckabee, an evangelist who promises to deliver America back to the time when Christianity was taught as the true religion and to give in to God, Mitt Romney, a mormon who thinks he did wonders for Massachusetts (the most socialist state in the Eastern US), and John McCain, who continually votes for bigger, more intrusive government and one of few senators to vote against the Bush tax cuts TWICE. McCain won the South Carolina seat, which almost always determines who gets the nomination.

-Hillary Clinton, self-described "government junkie" and all round totalitarian collectivist worshiper has won all primaries minus Iowa for the Democrat nomination, and shows no sign of abating. One of her principles, "there's no such thing as other people's children" is far removed from the true American principles of the founding fathers.

-Guiliani's policy of appealing to the states further down hasn't worked, and his consistent showing of 4th or 5th place in most state's polls won't help come Super Tuesday, when 20 states vote.

So, whoever gets the Republican vote may be just as bad as Hillary, or worse. Once again, a less-of-two-evils campaign. In which case, it may simply be best just to vote for the Libertarian Party after all.

First Casualties of the EFB/A

The Electoral Finance Bill/Act came into effect two days ago, meaning that any voices who oppose the government can effectively be silenced by the power of the gun, the government deciding who's fit to receive money to campaign and who isn't, and who is allowed to donate money and who isn't (all the while supporting the ideas of those who they don't support with their own tax money).

The first casualty on this war on free speech, ironically, is Helen Clark. At the start of the new year, a group called "People Power" threw a rock through the window of her electoral office in Mount Albert, to protest the act. It wouldn't be the first time someone has vandalized Helen Clark's electoral office; the first time, however, the offender was charged with sedition (!).

Tim Shadbolt, the usually Labour-leaning and provocative mayor of New Zealand's southernmost city Invercargill is now touting the opposition to the Act, telling his citizens and those of the entire country to not vote Labour.

To protest this act further, Cameron Slater of Whale Oil and Andy Moore of The Section 59 Blog have started up www.dontvotelabour.org.nz, and they could be the first people brought to court under the new law.

...but where's their $1200 that supports claim that the Act will stop? Maybe they should realize that the $1200 cap on personal anonymous donations is truly pitiful compared to the $4.8 million of public money Labour spent on election campaigning in 2005. But which party received the most anonynous funding last year? ACT!

Or perhaps you'd like to do a Chris Trotter, getting quickly off the actual issues to do a bit of scaremongering non-existent concepts in his twisted, Marxist view of reality.

Labour's Public Beheading

If there's any better argument against the Electoral Finance Bill, it'll be coming next year. As I've discussed below, the Electoral Finance Bill is the primary reason for Labour's recent slip in the polls -and the rise of National so that it can govern alone.

Democracy isn't perfect, but when it comes to legislation like the Electoral Finance Bill, voters can use their power to oust the government that enacted it, and, at the least, influence future governments to repeal it. In a free and fair democracy, regardless of how much advertising is put up to influence voters to change their minds, truly terribly acts like this will never keep any government in power for long.

The Electoral Finance Bill won't destroy Labour because it'll lose support from the centre, it'll destroy Labour because of loss of support from the left. Hone Harawira, a hard Maori Party leftist who detests anything white in NZ, has come out in direct opposition to the Bill. Tim Shadbolt, the mayor of Invercargill, has done the same thing, promising to break the law. The Maori party, who generally vote with Labour on most issues, stands in the opposition. Unfortunately, the Greens who generally have a good track record on issues of free speech, have followed Labour like the headless chickens they are. The Human Rights Commission, the Law Society and even Greenpeace (!) have voiced opposition to the Bill, although whether Labour will be hypocrites when it comes to leftist violations it yet to be seen (which it probably will be).

Add on the complete lack of support from the middle class, and you get a beheading spectacular in nature.

The EFB's Impact on Polls

The recent controversy surrounding the Electoral Finance Bill has had its impact on the most recent public opinion poll, and it's hurting Labour severely:

-Labour slips to just 35%, one of its lowest for a long time.

-John Key is on 35% for preferred PM, Helen Clark is at 30%. (the other 35% is made up of various third-party candidates)

-National is in the fifties, which means it can govern alone.

-NZ First and the Greens dip below five percent, which means that, providing the pools are accurate, they'd need to have an electorate to stay in parliament (which hopefully they won't have).

Lindsay Perigo discusses the implications of this poll on SOLO. With any due luck, the results will stay like this during the election -the one poll that truly matters.

Hugo Chavez NOT "Dictator Perpetuus"!

In a smart move to combat Hugo Chavez's dictatorial ambitions, the Venezuelan people have voted in a referendum against Hugo Chavez being named "dictator for life" in Venezuela. Even so, those are still his ambitions. But still, a good step away from socialism and the trash heap of the world, in a nation that prefers capitalism more than the US.

I can imagine why. With the country being the incredibly dysfunctional, corrupt and dangerous it is (its murder rate is nearly 7 times that of the US), it's just not a place you want to be.

Petition to the Governor General

The Electoral Finance Bill, opposed by the Human Rights Commission, the Law Society and even Greenpeace, is set to pass before long. However, there is one way we can stop it dead in its track, without Helen Clark being able to do anything: that thing is to get the NZ Governor General, Anand Satyanand, to not sign it. A petition has been put forward to make him refuse to sign the bill, by the tireless freedom fighters on Kill the Bill! So do so, before it's too late!

~Callum

At It Again!

Auckland has staged its second march against the Electoral Finance Bill, which took place yesterday. And a much larger crowd turned up, matching the 5,000 that John Boscawen, who the organizer of all of these marches, wanted. Keep up the good work, guys!

Rudd's Victory a Step Back for Oz

Rudd's victory in Australia-purely on the grounds of appealing to the lowest common denominator-is a step back for Australia, one of the better countries in this irrational and inconsistent world. At SOLO, Hilton Holder, the Australian co-coordinator, discussed the results and what they mean for Australia.

And it ain't good.

Aussie Election '08

The Australian election is upon us, and in a matter of hours the final results will be in.

John Howard has been in for a good four terms, and if he gets in for another he will be tied for the title of longest running Australian PM. Meanwhile Kevin Rudd, who is expected to win, has only been in with Labor for 12 months. He is campaigning on the premise that he and his Labor party are new faces in Australian politics, which don't change a lot. John Howard isn't campaigning for any changes, as Australians have never been richer and, to the annoyance of our government, about 40,000 Kiwis moved there last year.

Kevin Rudd is a new face, and plans to make changes, despite what his campaign suggests. However, Australia is doing fantastically at the moment, and John Howard is more capitalist (although Rudd is probably more socially liberal). So I'm supporting Howard, but he's hardly incredible.

Marches Against the Electoral Finance Bill

John Boscawen from Kill the Bill! is organizing two marches against the Electoral Finance Bill. Please note that we have less than two months from 1 January, under the Bill, any political speech WILL BE ILLEGAL. For you jafas, the march is tomorrow (Saturday) from 10am onwards, from Town Hall to Queen Elizabeth Square. For people in Wellington such as I, the march will be on Wednesday at 12:30, marching from Lambton Quay to Parliament.

Unfortunately I have school that day. However, I could always fake sickness. :-)

Also, there will probably be marches in other parts of the country. Keep an eye and an ear peeled for any local marches in other cities.

The Death of the Death Penalty?

I see that Helen Clark is throwing herself behind a UN resolution which would have the death penalty banned internationally (at least in Western countries; I don't see how, for instance, African or Arabic dictatorships would abide) Although the resolution isn't something I am overly concerned about, I don't support the death penalty for the same reason as Sus at Sus's Sound-Bites: I simply don't trust the government with that much power, and mistakes can always be made.

One of my concerns though is that the US will use its veto power in this instance. Despite the fact that most American states have abolished the death penalty, Texas, which is the state George W Bush was once governor of, executes as many people as Iran (which is stupid and downright inhumane in a Western society). At least they're not for political reasons, even though the American Justice System seems more content at putting a black man in jail for a crime they have no proof he committed, than a white man who did commit the crime.

The death penalty debate is reminiscent of the slavery debate a few hundred years ago. This time, however, hopefully Americans are too civilized to start a civil war over the death penalty.

Ironically, Venezuela was the first country to abolish the death penalty about a century and a half ago. It'll probably become the latest to re-enact it, as well.

And with all the general Leftist bias, I wouldn't be surprised if they counted Cuba as a nation which has abolished the death penalty, despite the obvious claims to the contrary.

Kill the Bill!

David Farrar , Bernard Darnton and Cameron Slater have started up activist movement "Kill the Bill!", designed to oppose the Electoral Finance Bill which will ban free speech for one-third of your lifetime, and is proving incredibly unpopular amongst anyone who isn't an MP. You can find Kill the Bill! at www.killthebill.org.nz.

The Republic of New Zealand

There has been some firing up of debate recently, especially in the Dominion Post, over whether NZ will be a Republic one day. Although 55% of NZers are still against it (why?), top Kiwi politicians have said that New Zealand will be a Republic eventually-just not today.

But why not now? The British Monarchy is symbolic of an Empire long gone. The Queen, although she holds a lot of theoretical power, actually has very little say in the day-to-day running of things, in both Britain and here. Essentially, she is a figurehead, and little more.

A Republic means that NZ can self-govern itself. We are a mature nation, and no longer dependent on Britain for everything. The head-of-state will no longer be a foreigner living half way around the world, but a Kiwi who was elected in by popular vote.

Becoming a Republic can also put NZ on the path towards Libertarianism, as it implaces the belief (well, actually, the fact) that we are a mature people and can make decisions for ourselves-and can stop living off someone else. Plus, there's always the sense of freedom going around...