Greens continue to flirt with National - why the left can't vote Green
The Greens may be saying no, but their eyes are saying yes, their dance of the 7 hemp veils continued this week with glad eyed comments from the Greens as to a flirty date with John Key in the middle of the election similar to Don Brash's 2005 coffee date...
Earlier today Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei said it was possible her party's leadership could meet with National at some stage during the election campaign - a version of then National leader Don Brash's café meetings with minor party leaders during the 2005 election campaign.
As someone who has voted Green most of my adult life, the idea that my party vote could go to propping up John Key makes me gag, I criticized this strategy of cuddling National when it was launched to the screams of 'unfair' by former Green comrades and even had Nandor responding with what I think was the most ridiculous piece he's ever written, let's have a wee gander at this defense for flirting with John Key shall we?
The Greens can be described as 'left', just as the colour of a puriri tree can be described as 'dark', but not adequately so. The Greens have an uncompromising commitment to fairness and equality. They also have a commitment to individual rights and to limitations on the power of the State, but I wouldn't describe them as 'rightwing' either. What I would say is that by rejecting the left / right dichotomy as inadequate to describe Green politics, the Greens become free to adopt what is valuable from either end of that spectrum and evolve it in accordance with their own philosophies. Some people on the left would say there is nothing valuable to be found on the right, and vice versa. That kind of locked-in thinking is exactly the problem. Being 'green' identified provides room for finding creative, holistic, solutions to current social and environmental challenges.
This defence is so over simplified, I'm embarrassed for him - we are not talking about taking the 'best' from the left and the 'best' from the right and knitting together an organic flax bridge here, we are talking about the most hard right privatization, borrowing for tax cuts for the rich, ramming through more erosion's of civil liberties under urgency ever seen in our political history outside war time, with real poverty rates spiralling, quarter of a million children in poverty while 150 of the richest families made $7 billion in one bloody year right wing political party! THAT is what Nandor and the Greens are talking about cuddling up to, THAT is what they want to cut a deal with - to claim it is some bullshit selection of the best from the right misses the fact that John Key represents the Death Star and there is no negotiation with the Death Star.
My call for loyalty from the Greens was not to the Labour party as Nandor claims, because let's face it, Labour have shat on Green aspirations since day one, my call to loyalty was to the political philosophy of the left, by flirting with National and actively attempting to form a relationship with a party so single minded in its transfer of wealth to the already wealthy, the Greens simply become the next Maori Party, a convenient relationship that makes the National Party seem much more moderate than they actually are.
If the Greens lust for power is so all consuming that they are prepared to be used as National's new camouflage of moderation, then they will suffer a backlash schism post 2011 that they will never be allowed to live down.
That only Catherine Delahunty was prepared to say that she would quit if a deal was cut with National, and not one other Green MP joined her speaks volumes of how real such a deal actually is.
What the Greens are saying is that if you despise John Key, then the only way to make sure your party vote won't go to propping up his unjust policies, is not to vote Green.
When you dance with the devil, the devil doesn't change, you do. Despite this, the Greens seem to have booked and paid for dodgy Ceroc lessons.