Trying to shut down speech a partisan overreaction

ll media should be considering how to deal with radical and provocative speech, and speech that could bolster extreme views and potentially actions.

But this (and I’ve seen similar elsewhere) is an alarming overreaction.

I have also seem claims that ‘virtue signalling’ is also responsible for various things.

Politically motivated attempts to put blanket bans on speech are not helpful in the current situation.

Leave a comment

97 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  18th March 2019

    Obviously Laura is pretty handy with hate speech herself.

    Reply
  2. Joe Bloggs

     /  18th March 2019

    @PG

    on Saturday you wrote: “So I’m going to do my small bit and promote positive change out of a very nasty negative day in New Zealand history. This will mean challenging and preventing hate speech and division more, and putting more of a priority on safe acceptable speech. That this may reduce the ‘free speech’ of some is a small price to pay for making New Zealand a better place to live.”

    On Sunday Gezza wrote: “There were comments from two people yesterday criticising Jacinda for wearing a head covering when talking to and embracing Muslims in Christchurch because it is tokenism & not appropriate for her culture. Unbelievable. She is effectively being called a race traitor & these comments are similar to what this arsehole is saying in his manifesto. This was her call to make & in the circumstances was the right one.”

    In reply, one commenter wrote that “Islam is a hateful religion… If they stay with Islam they will suffer immensely and may go on with radicalised thought processes… Allah is a god who condones hatred… Muslims blaspheme Jesus Christ and hate Christians”
    and another, that Jacinta Ardern was not showing respect by “pretending to discard [her] own principles and culture” by wearing a headscarf

    So I’m picking up on Gezza’s call: Pete, at what stage will you step up to challenge and prevent hate-speech? Or will you lamely settle back in your armchair and let the shitposters continue their ignorant and evil displays of Islamophobia?

    Reply
    • artcroft

       /  18th March 2019

      I’m still going to criticise Islam. It’s puts forward its claims into the public space, claims I think are just plain wrong, and I will continue to say so. This is part of living in an open society. I think it’s a duty to challenge bad ideas, after all bad thinking leads to bad behaviour. What’s your strategy?

      Reply
      • Joe Bloggs

         /  18th March 2019

        one of my strategies is to call out stochastic terrorism whenever I come across it – like your totalising comments, and like the Islamophobic comments of Mother and AW yesterday – because I think it’s a duty to challenge bad ideas, after all bad thinking leads to bad behaviour.

        Reply
        • artcroft

           /  18th March 2019

          What the hell is stochastic terrorism?

          Reply
          • Joe Bloggs

             /  18th March 2019

            the public demonization of a person or group resulting in the incitement of a violent act, which is statistically probable but whose specifics cannot be predicted

            next time do your own bloody research

            Reply
            • artcroft

               /  18th March 2019

              So my comments incite terrorism in a statistically probable way. You’ve lost me. In what way did I incite violence?

            • Joe Bloggs

               /  18th March 2019

              That’s how it works: Stochastic terrorism lets bullies operate in the open with full deniability, since the random element erases any provable causation.

              trump uses the same playbook when he said last week that “I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump — I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad.”

            • PDB

               /  18th March 2019

              You’ve lost the plot a bit Joe – being critical of the PM wearing a headscarf isn’t hate speech. As for the nutter you also quoted, well they are quite clearly…well…nuts.

            • artcroft

               /  18th March 2019

              Stochastic terrorism doesn’t “work”. It’s a semantic trick used to justify closing down of free speech. I guess I’ll have to be careful in what I say as pretty much any speech incites terrorism now. lol. More accusation no doubt are on their way.

        • Mother

           /  18th March 2019

          I love the Muslim people. More lies from Joe. I am not fearful of Islam.

          Everybody has the right to expose evil as they see it. In listening to others perspectives we can learn.

          Islam hates Christianity because our God provided the perfect sacrifice, the one of Love and of complete commitment to love us to the end. Allah is great! Those who follow Allah work very very hard to be loving. They have to work too hard at it, and something gives way eventually. Then all that is left is hatred and disappointment.

          I’m not afraid of the hate, but I’m saddened.

          You seem to be unaware of the great privilege you have being a Kiwi who lives in a free land.

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  18th March 2019

            ‘I love the Muslim people.’


            ‘Islam hates Christianity because our God provided the perfect sacrifice’,

            ‘Everybody has the right to expose evil as they see it. ‘

            I see you as being quite evil.

            Your attempts to shroud it are not compelling.

            Reply
          • Joe Bloggs

             /  18th March 2019

            this is what you wrote Mother:

            ““Islam is a hateful religion… If they stay with Islam they will suffer immensely and may go on with radicalised thought processes… Allah is a god who condones hatred… Muslims blaspheme Jesus Christ and hate Christians”

            your words, not mine. Call yourself a Christian? You’re as full of hate as the rest of us

            Reply
            • Mother

               /  19th March 2019

              “You’re as full of hate as the rest of us.”

              So Joe admits he is hateful.

              My argument was that PM should be professional. She should not spiritualise her role.

              The haters here could not cope with a practical and secular observation.

              My talk about Allah’s hatred compared with the God of Christianity also riled up the haters. This is my information to share. Take it or leave it, politely if you dare.

              Contrary to strange imaginations, I have no agenda except for free speech. I have told you that before. Again, the haters are out in force, nitpicking.

              If you are hating and bickering now while we mourn, what will you be like when extremism reaches boiling point underneath speech censorship?

            • Mother

               /  19th March 2019

              “You’re as full of hate as the rest of us.”

              So Joe admits he is hateful.

              My argument was that PM should be professional. She should not spiritualise her role.

              The haters here could not cope with a practical and secular observation.

              My talk about Allah’s hatred compared with the God of Christianity also riled up the haters. This is my information to share. Take it or leave it, politely if you dare.

              Contrary to strange imaginations, I have no agenda except for free speech. I have told you that before. Again, the haters are out in force, nitpicking.

              If you are hating and bickering now while we mourn, what will you be like when extremism reaches boiling point underneath speech censorship?

          • Joe Bloggs

             /  18th March 2019

            Mother here are the links to your Islamophobic shitpostings yesterday. You cannot deny they are your words – just grow up and accept responsibility for your abhorrent comments:
            https://yournz.org/2019/03/17/new-zealand-and-the-world-overwhelmingly-defies-aims-of-christchurch-terrorist/#comment-356548
            and
            https://yournz.org/2019/03/17/new-zealand-and-the-world-overwhelmingly-defies-aims-of-christchurch-terrorist/#comment-356691

            and here’s Alan’s little bit of shitposting:
            “Do you think the PM approves of having female dress dictated by religion?”
            https://yournz.org/2019/03/17/new-zealand-and-the-world-overwhelmingly-defies-aims-of-christchurch-terrorist/#comment-356679

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  18th March 2019

              Want to answer my question, Joe? And do you?

            • Mother

               /  19th March 2019

              Yes, I’m happy with my words Joe.

              Your bubble in life has obviously kept you sheltered from diversity.

              Where is your tolerance?

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  18th March 2019

            I don’t love all Muslims; I don’t love all Christians, Buddhists, Hindus….

            I like some Muslims and might like others if I knew them. It’s the same with other people; I like some, but not the ones I don’t know.

            Reply
      • Patzcuaro

         /  18th March 2019

        I see no issue confronting other religions or ideas provided it is done in a thoughtful, civilised way. There may be occasions like now where it is more appropriate, because of events, to pull back out of respect for the dead and grieving.

        Reply
    • Mother

       /  18th March 2019

      I did not say that Jacinda’s scarf is not appropriate to her culture. You have twisted words and mutilated intention.

      I am asking others to consider the ‘sacredness’ of our secular society. We will lose this privilege if speech is censored.

      Jacinda is PM! With the role comes the need for professionalism within secularism in all situations, especially at this time in history when we are hell bent on being such ‘loving’ diverse people culturally.

      I am also asking people to consider whether we really are emotionally mature enough to cope with diversity. Jacinda’s scarf drama shows that she certainly is not.

      Now Joe, don’t carry on twisting. Diversity is not Tolerance. If we were mature enough, our tolerance would carry diversity. I personally like diversity.

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  18th March 2019

        ‘. Jacinda’s scarf drama shows that she certainly is not.’


        ‘ the need for professionalism within secularism in all situations,’


        ‘I personally like diversity.’

        your comedic talent is improving…albeit…very slowly.

        Reply
      • Joe Bloggs

         /  18th March 2019

        no it was Alan Wilkinson who criticised Ardern’s scarf, in his ignorance. You deliberately misread my comment, as you do the comments of most of us here, twisting it into your own perverted world-view.

        Some women wear hijab because they don’t have a choice—their culture or family mandates it. In many Muslim countries, wearing hijab is the law.

        But, often, Muslim women cover their heads and faces because they choose to. Their modesty is an expression of their religious conviction and devotion to God. Other Muslim women choose to wear the hijab as an expression of their cultural identity.

        Most Muslim women agree that it is a woman’s choice whether or not she wears the hijab. Many Muslim and Arab women who have chosen not to wear the hijab are often staunch advocates of a woman’s right to choose to veil.

        Reply
      • adamsmith1922

         /  18th March 2019

        At the risk of lowering the tone of discourse, please desist from trying to impose your peculiar value system on everyone else.

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  18th March 2019

          Many Jewish women choose to cover their hair and wear modest clothes. Their choice.

          The idea that Muslim women are forced to do this is insulting to them. I have known several Muslim doctors who wear the scarf; you can’t tell me that they’re not ‘liberated’, or that the local chemist isn’t.

          Adam, I agree that this is not the place for people to attempt to force religious views on others, or to slag off other religions. I believe in a Creator and my late husband was an Orthodox Christian. I have his icons still. I also have two Hindu statues and some RC ones…

          Reply
          • adamsmith1922

             /  18th March 2019

            I agree at various times in my life I have lived and worked with Muslims and Jews and Hindus. Like all groups there are good people and bad people, but none of them ever tried to impose their views on me.
            This was why I took exception to the comments by Mother.

            Reply
        • Mother

           /  19th March 2019

          If you FEEL imposed upon in a blog conversation, that’s your problem Adam.

          It’s common that people FEEL imposed upon at the name of Jesus Christ. You could try just getting over yourself? I haven’t imposed anything. Sad and weird imaginations again.

          Reply
          • adamsmith1922

             /  19th March 2019

            You are the one with a sad and weird imagination.
            My comment did not say I was imposed upon, I asked you to desist from trying at every opportunity to seek to suggest we should see things through your distorted lens. That is not debate.

            Reply
            • Mother

               /  19th March 2019

              I will not desist from trying to do according to my motive – Free Speech. If you get uncomfortable, that’s your problem. At a time of national mourning?

              I have opportunity to love and respect my fellow Kiwis by embracing free speech here. I will not desist because you tell me to.

              It looks more like your lens is distorted.

              Which is ‘pushier’ – people reacting with hatred, sarcasm, false imaginations/accusations – or my Free Speech?

              Sort it with the host.

              A few here know how to debate an issue, or to leave it alone when appropriate. Try learning from them.

              I’m not full of myself as you appear to be. Your agenda is to shut me down. Why? My only motive is Free Speech and my pride is in the fact of Jesus’ saving grace.

              ‘Seek to suggest…’ Well, dah! Do you say that to every person you exchange ideas with? How about thinking through for debate rather than attacking (like the murderer).

              Jacinda playing dress ups is rather nauseating isn’t it?

            • MaureenW

               /  19th March 2019

              Thing is Mother, you come across as a fake troll a) trying to smear every thread with the nonsense you spew, and b) testing PG’s tolerance in offering a platform for reasoned free speech.
              From the rating your comments get you appear to be being judged as an annoying troll, rather than an indoctrinated simpleton.

          • adamsmith1922

             /  19th March 2019

            Responding to your latest mouthing off. You do nothing to address reality. You spew rubbish as if it was fact. Your final comment about Jacinda playing dress up exemplifies it. I am not interested in shutting you down. If you were not here,where else would I go for quiet amusement. Your intemperate responses only serve to validate my comments.

            Reply
  3. The Consultant

     /  18th March 2019

    Sounds like she’s a big supporter of the US’s Patriot Act and the NSA.

    Reply
  4. alloytoo

     /  18th March 2019

    There is, I believe, an argument to be made that censorship won’t do anything to prevent such tragedies because:

    1. Censorship stifles legitimate discourse on the matters of immigration/refugees and culture (this Is something Laura clearly wants).
    2. Censorship drives the right wing crazies underground where no one knows they’re crazy, I would rather know they exist and be prepared for them.
    3. Censorship will breed sympathy for the far or Alt-right from those who hold quite legitimate conservative right of centre views and may even serve to marginalize them.
    4.The rise of these white supremist groups/Individuals could well be a warning that we need to have a conversation about the marginalisation of certain groups on the basis of perceived historical inequity.

    by the same token from a left perspective:

    1. Censorship stifles legitimate discourse on the matters of immigration/refugees and culture.
    2. Censorship drives the left wing crazies underground where no one knows they’re crazy, I would rather know they exist and be prepared for them.
    3. Censorship will breed sympathy for the far left from those who hold quite legitimate liberal left of centre views and may even serve to marginalize them.
    4.The rise of these extremist left wing groups/Individuals could well be a warning that we need to have a conversation about the marginalisation of certain groups on the basis of perceived historical inequity.

    In short censorship serves no one.

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  18th March 2019

      do your liberal views apply to anti semitism too?

      Reply
      • alloytoo

         /  18th March 2019

        Yes, if the lies are in the public eye they can be publically debunked.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  18th March 2019

          lies!-‘the truth is rarely pure…and never..simple’..O.Wilde.

          Reply
          • alloytoo

             /  18th March 2019

            “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
            ― George Orwell

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  18th March 2019

              ‘Very truthfully, you CANNOT criticize or rebuke Israel or any Jewish act unless you want your political career destroyed or if as a layperson you want to labeled as Anti Semitic and a white supremacist or a Holocaust denier’

              Guido Collaci.-New York

            • alloytoo

               /  18th March 2019

              Are you Anti Semitic and a white supremacist or a Holocaust denier?

            • Blazer

               /  18th March 2019

              NO.

    • adamsmith1922

       /  18th March 2019

      Agree

      Reply
  5. Loki

     /  18th March 2019

    We are going to see any attempts at reasoned debate on immigration shut down.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  18th March 2019

      Dunno. What sort of reasoning would be in your debate?

      Reply
    • Mother

       /  18th March 2019

      When we are upset about other people’s pain to the point of becoming unreasonable, we prove our inability to govern sensibly.

      Individuals who practise mock compassion are on the hate road. When the ‘ideals’ of socialism take over the masses, those individuals become increasingly selfish.

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  18th March 2019

        another motherlode of unadulterated…drivel.

        Reply
        • Mother

           /  18th March 2019

          So which is it Blazer?
          You claim I am quite evil, a comedian and a driveller. All three, or don’t you know?

          Is this abuse the much sort after Kiwi ideology people think is going to pull us all through to the bright side of murderous Friday?

          Blazer’s hatred is not censored. PG has no mandate to censor anyone else.

          How can anyone on the airwaves know how close Blazer pushes me to despair? How do any of you know how close you might be pushing anybody else?

          Why is Blazer not policed until he stops his hateful jabs?

          To my mind, his behaviour is no different to the murderer. He has no idea how many other people he hurts, and the ripples of difficulties he creates in others’ lives, with his hateful behaviour. Not once has he debated the issues I raise. He attacks me instead – a person who for all he knows could be his neighbour. Or the person who serves him in the shop. Or the nurse who cares….

          Our country is in serious need of sympathy for Christianity. Or are you all just too tough and with it?

          Reply
          • MaureenW

             /  18th March 2019

            Get help!

            Reply
          • Blazer

             /  18th March 2019

            ‘physician ..heal thyself!'(hat tip to T)

            Reply
          • Gerrit

             /  18th March 2019

            What Blazer said is not hateful speech. it is his opinion. An opinion he has the freedom to espouse.

            Now you may not like his opinion, but that does not make it “hate” speech.

            Note that the despair you are experiencing is yours to own and deal with. Not anyone else.

            You have demonstrated a perfect example of what may constitute “hate speech” is so open to exploitation. And why we must not allow the adjudicators of what “hate speech” entails, rule what our “free speech” can or cannot say.

            Blazer and I swap criticism and robust abuse at times (well nearly every time) but never in my days would I call for his free speech to be judged as “hate speech” and be restricted. For that would in turn would prevent my free speech.

            Free speech comes with fish hooks. Deal with the fish hooks. Not the “free speech”.

            Reply
            • alloytoo

               /  18th March 2019

              Indeed, I feel it’s easier to deal with Lies and Slander if they’re out in the open, rather than creeping along quietly behind close doors.

              The biggest issue we face it the fact that social media (Facebook especially )is designed to lead one into an echo-chamber.

            • MaureenW

               /  18th March 2019

              Entirely agree, but the discussion needs to be objective.

            • Mother

               /  19th March 2019

              Aren’t you the person who got sick of my posts to the point of saying ‘goodbye’?

              Why are you even reading my posts?

              Menfolk might be relatively OK with the ‘robust’ talk, but many gentlemen and women are not.

              Your condoning the false accusations of ‘liar’ and ‘evil’ toward me is unacceptable.

              I’m just warning that this rudeness online will contribute to more younger moderates going extreme. It would be better to have their rantings in the open online than worsening symptoms pushed into secretive corners.

              Your hatred here will contribute to both extremism at the extremes and apathy in the middle.

          • Joe Bloggs

             /  18th March 2019

            actually Mother, Pete George has a complete mandate to censor what he wants on this website – it’s his property and we are his guests – start behaving like one.

            Reply
            • adamsmith1922

               /  18th March 2019

              Reasoned debate and Mother define Oxymorn

            • Mother

               /  18th March 2019

              I asked PG from the outset whether he minded that I post about Christianity. He said, “Not at all.”

              I have behaved as his guest. He chose to put my testimony on a guest post. I lose again. The hatred is too much for me.

              Jesus Christ is the Victor.
              May God bless you all, especially your families.

            • Discussing Christianity (as others sometimes do) is different to promoting it and trying to convince or convert people, which isn’t really appropriate here. This is forum for discussion and debate, and not for promoting personal agendas.

            • Gerrit

               /  18th March 2019

              What hatred? People are criticizing your one barrow approach to any posting. That is not hatred, that is showing concern for the narrowness and deigned superiority in having all your answers based on your narrow interpretation off christian values.

              Now that criticism may seem hash but that is the kiwi way. We are self effacing and don’t tolerate self righteous piousness.

              Broaden your horizons and join any discussion from other view points , not just a single narrow christian approach.

              Surely you have greater depth than simply being a single cause preacher?

              Looking forward to some non judgemental comments from you.

            • Mother

               /  18th March 2019

              There seems to have been a misunderstand PG. Not once have I tried to convert people. This idea is ludicrous and says a lot about other’s states of mind.

              There is too much supposing/imaginations re others’ intentions and not enough debating of issues.

              I posted about salvation in Christ because it makes sense to me and because it’s positive amidst all the negativity.

              I am well aware that the name of Jesus Christ caused diverse reaction. I am disappointed that YourNZ is not able to cope with diversity.

    • alloytoo

       /  18th March 2019

      @loki “We are going to see any attempts at reasoned debate on immigration shut down”

      I fear you are correct.

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  18th March 2019

        start debating…no shutdown here.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  18th March 2019

          Gezza tried a shut down yesterday. It didn’t work.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  18th March 2019

            I disagreed with your opinion Jacinda should not wear a hijab when comforting Muslims in this situation because it is culturally inappropriate for her. Post me a link to where I tired to shut you down.

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  18th March 2019

              You said I was doing what Tarrant wanted. A clear attempt to shut me down.

            • Gezza

               /  18th March 2019

              You are. You haven’t seen his manifesto. I explained my reasons for disagreeing with your opinion very cogently and clearly, at some length in what another poster described as a good debate. You called it a slur. Absolutely pathetic. A clear attempt to shut down any debate on your opinion.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  18th March 2019

              The other poster agreed with me so your attempt to paint me as a Tarrant apologist and assistant failed.

              At the very least – you are being an insensitive clod

              Moving right on from mere slurs you resorted to full frontal insults.

            • Gezza

               /  18th March 2019

              The other poster agreed with me so your attempt to paint me as a Tarrant apologist and assistant failed.

              The other poster gave his own opinion. He didn’t agree with you.

              “G, good debate. Empathy is arguably the most powerful form of human communication. And when it is genuine it doesnt need a scarf or any form of headgear to convey it. Jacindas empathy and compassion comes across to me as selective and contrived. But hey perhaps its just my inner cynic. Cheers,c”

              There was no attempt to paint you as a Tarrant apologist – I merely pointed out that Tarrant would heartily approve of your opinion that Jacinda’s choice to wear a hijab to show solidarity when meeting with a greiiving Muslim community is inappropriate for your view of what her culture expects.

              You are getting even more pathetic when you completely mischaracterise what I said. I am wasting no more time on your ego. .

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  18th March 2019

              Still slurring then.

            • Gezza

               /  18th March 2019

              Yes, you are. Cut it out.

            • Gezza

               /  18th March 2019

              Moving right on from mere slurs you resorted to full frontal insults.

              Both of those allegations are plainly incorrect. Had either of them occurred they would have been deleted by the moderator and we both know it.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  18th March 2019

              And I didn’t say her actions were incompatible with what her culture expects, I said it was incompatible with her own and our national principles and culture, specifically of female emancipation and equality. It sends the message that the only way a NZ woman can properly relate to Muslims is to wear a hijab. That harms both parties.

            • Gezza

               /  18th March 2019

              It does no such thing. There are thousands of other women relating to Muslims all around the country wearing what they normally wear, heads uncovered, all over the tv news. Don’t be absurd. 1ewes at 6 even showed Kiwi women attending services in a mosque today, heads uncovered.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  18th March 2019

              Precisely. Ordinary women reject Jacinda’s message.

            • Gezza

               /  18th March 2019

              Her message? Have you heard back what it is from your email to her?

            • Gezza

               /  18th March 2019

              Ordinary women know that she is showing empathy for Muslim women victims with whom she has been meeting, Alan.

              They have more emotional intelligence than you.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  18th March 2019

              Ordinary women know that she is going further than they would or are comfortable with. They have more emotional intelligence than you.

            • Gezza

               /  18th March 2019

              Ordinary women know that she is going further than they would or are comfortable with.

              Exactly. And they don’t mind that she has done it because they understand why she has done this as a special gesture.

              She was at the Kilbirnie mosque. When she left the grounds of the mosque she took her hijab off her head and rested it on her shoulders while she answered reporters questions – they even showed the video of her doing this, hijab off, on Al Jazeera tv.

              Average Kiwi women have so much more emotional intelligence than you it’s embarrassing to see how you completely miss that they do and want to carry on arguing pointlessly to score a petty point you haven’t even proven to be correct, but thousands of New Zealand women clearly don’t mind and understand..

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  18th March 2019

              So will she do it now whenever she meets Muslims? Or only when some have been murdered? Emotional intelligence is so confusing.

            • Gezza

               /  18th March 2019

              Who knows? I imagine she met Muslims at the UN and didn’t put on a hijab to talk to them, and that she’s met Muslims before and not put on a hijab, but at those times she wasn’t visiting a Mosque and laying a wreath after 50 of them had just been murdered by an Australian white ultra-nationalist whose avowed aim was to get rid of non-white, non-European “invaders” and says he picked Muslims because they stand out as a different group.

              I expect this is her response to a unique situation when she was visiting a mosque and expressing solidarity with Muslim women by dressing like them on this occasion. But we’ll have to wait and see, won’t we?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  19th March 2019

              As noted before, she wasn’t in a mosque in Chch.

        • Mother

           /  19th March 2019

          You rarely debated me Blazer. You just throw out barbs of sarcasm which of course does shut down debate. People are too busy to cope with that too often. Meanwhile, extremism will fester and you’ll blame everyone but yourself. Censorship is dangerous.

          Reply
  6. Finbaar Rustle

     /  18th March 2019

    After the brutal slaying of 50 innocent New Zealanders
    the truce and calls for unity between political adherents was brief.
    The left saw this as proving right wingers are indeed hate filled vile villains.
    The right responded quickly when only 3 hours after the murders
    an Australian right wing politician claimed all the victims
    only had themselves to blame.
    The right wing commentators on this site were noticeably absent
    in the first 24 hours not challenging the barbs from the left.
    But today they are back bright and bushy tailed comfortable
    in the knowledge that the incident was “quite understandable”
    in fact justifiable.
    Calls for unity, bi partisan commitment to change, flags at half mast
    black armbands at sporting events reverent renditions
    of the national anthem are already behind us.
    Normal service has resumed.
    50 Kiwis slaughtered yet what has changed?
    At the time PG said something along the lines of
    “New Zealand has changed YouNZ will change”.
    While I respected PG’s sentiments at the time I did say
    I seriously doubted any thing would change.
    True to form normal service has resumed.
    Like the man on Friday once you lock into a mind set
    it is very hard to change.

    Reply
    • PDB

       /  18th March 2019

      Being more ‘right-wing’ than ‘left-wing’ in one’s political views and condoning ‘far-right wing extremism’ are two totally different things – to smear the many on here considered ‘right-wing’ (which in our country includes many centralists) is low.

      Unfortunately the one thing that hasn’t changed on here since this terrible event is the nonsense you speak.

      Reply
    • adamsmith1922

       /  18th March 2019

      You really are an irritating piece of excrement.

      Reply
    • Sunny

       /  18th March 2019

      Right wing in NZ means supporting just right of centre political parties that believe in a slightly smaller state (ie slightly smaller as even our right still believe in free healthcare, education, and welfare), and that a slightly more free market will lead to a more prosperous and democratic outcomes for all NZers. “Far-right” as it’s being used in the news is not even talking about economic policy. It’s talking about white supremacy, racism and hatred of immigration . In NZ the parties that are more conservative on immigration were not the right. So I think the label far-right is grossly misleading. And I don’t think it belongs to the left either. The label should be racist extremist.

      Reply
      • Griff.

         /  18th March 2019

        The meaning of far right does not change just because you dont like it .

        Far-right politics
        “Extreme right-wing” redirects here.

        Far-right politics are politics further on the right of the left-right spectrum than the standard political right, particularly in terms of extreme nationalism,[1][2] nativist ideologies, and authoritarian tendencies.[3]

        The term is often used to describe Nazism,[4] neo-Nazism, fascism, neo-fascism and other ideologies or organizations that feature ultranationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, racist, anti-communist, or reactionary views.[5] These can lead to oppression and violence against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority, or their perceived threat to the native ethnic group,[6][7] nation, state[8] or ultraconservative traditional social institutions.[9]

        So the shooter meets the definition of far right .

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  18th March 2019

          It might meet the definition but that doesn’t mean it has any connection or relationship with normal political views or entities.

          Reply
          • Griff.

             /  18th March 2019

            Alan
            You are gibbering fuckin nonsense ….again.
            It is called a spectrum for a reason and yes your “liberation”* views are very clearly more on the way towards the fuckknuckle shooters from that of say a social liberal .
            Just because the right wing does not like being linked to the far end of their political ideology doesn’t make that link go away.

            *If you openly support an authoritarian protectionist whacko named D Trump You are not really a libertarian except in your own overactive imagination.
            ,

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  18th March 2019

              B.s. Griff. Calling it a spectrum doesn’t make it one.

        • Sunny

           /  18th March 2019

          @Griff…..”particularly in terms of extreme nationalism” .And further down wikipedia your definition continues, “Right-wing populism, a political ideology that often combines laissez-faire capitalism, nationalism, ethnocentrism and anti-elitism, is sometimes described as far-right.[14][15] Right-wing populism often involves appeals to the “common man” and opposition to immigration.[16][1] ” Hmmm who in NZ ran a populist “common man” campaign based on anti immigration, hint, not the nz party promoting free market capitalism and business. . And it’s not just in NZ, but the most famous globalist, Angela Merkel, right of centre, is very pro immigration. So no longer do right free market capitalism go hand in hand with anti- immigration. The definition isn’t consistent with modern examples.

          Reply
  7. NOEL

     /  18th March 2019

    National Front NZ and Aussie white supremacy Facebook pages gone.
    The cleansing begins?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s