Libertycaroline

The Blanket Man

2012-01-16T18:04:00.000+13:00

Ben Hana, the Blanket Man, is dead. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10779014

And whaddya know! Out come all the bleedling heart do-gooders, the politically-correct attention-seekers, national and local body politicians, and the left-wing media. All saying that 'something should have been done to help this poor,homeless victim'.

Interesting, innit! They're all saying how Ben Hana has been failed – failed by everyone else except themselves, of course! They give people like the Blanket Man a benefit and a state house, and are never seen again. But very quick to say that 'government should do something about it!'.

What they ignore – of course – is that Ben Hana made choices. Granted, he had mental health issues, BUT, like many other homeless folk, he chose to live on the streets. He was connected to a central Wellington community of homeless people, and had been offered housing by the council and state on a number of occasions.

And where were members of Ben Hana's iwi during his time of illness and homelessness? No doubt expecting government to help him out.

It's a load of f***ing bollocks, of course.

Pitcairn trials

2011-12-12T20:35:00.000+13:00

NZ is currently hosting the trial of the mayor of Pitcairn Island. He's charged with possession of kiddi porn. It's a reminder of the trial of the other Pitcairn Islanders on sexual abuse charges several years back.

Interesting that we should see this sort of behaviour in a christian community. For that's what Pitcairn is – its entire membership is seventh-day adventist. Gotta ask how their community can justify this sort of behaviour.

Of course many good christian folks – of differing persuasions – would say that the behaviour exhibited by the mayor and other men of Pitcairn is not christian. I would disagree. Consider these examples:

A NZ church advising – less than 100 years ago – that female genital mutilation is necessary. They go on to say that if a woman protests against it, she should have it forced on her as she deserves it!
A widowed NZ pastor whose sexual relationships with his 4 daughters is justified by family members on the grounds that 'he needs someone to act as a wife to him'
Graeme Capill, former leader of the Christian Heritage Party – charged with sexual abuse, while complaining about the immorality of the churches who are 'sexually permissive'!
And don't forget the number of Catholic priests guilty of abusing boys, over decades.

The bible supports abusive behaviour towards women

After Eve's 'sin', god punishes half the human race – all women! - over thousands of years. Billions of women. How bloody inappropriate is that? Particularly after Eve was simply using the brain god gave her!
Mary is raped and impregnated by god,who then disappears post haste, without sticking around to advise her of her fate as the mother of the messiah. He simply sends one of his tame flunkies along to deliver the bad news. And like other women who have been raped, Mary is aware she has had no choice in the matter
And Lot's wife, turned to a pillar of salt because – like any good woman – she expressed concern for her community.

I do have to ask how women in the churches can accept this sort of bollocks! Not only does it make the churches unsafe places for women and children, but shows god up for the asshole and sociopath he is.

Email to Michael Laws on talkback radio

2011-10-17T20:52:00.001+13:00

Hi Michael

listening to your discussion about clothing on Friday, I got to thinking about fat chicks. (Yes, I know, it's not PC to use the word 'fat', but that's never stopped me.)

I'm always surprised at how fat chicks seem to like dressing in sacks. They dress up in just about anything at all – horrible, drab, OLD stuff that should never have appeared on their bodies. Styles that look good on skinny chicks but only show up a fat chick's rolls of lard. They seem to have no pride in themselves at all.

They use the excuse that there's nothing nice out there for fat chicks. Or they say that what there IS is too expensive. So they sit at home feeling sorry for themselves and don't bother to find out what they can do to improve things.

Well I'm SORRY but it just doesn't cut the mustard! There ARE nice clothes out there – even at places like Farmers and the Warehouse, not known for haute couture! Budget stuff, wisely chosen, can make a HUGE difference to the way a person looks. But it MUST be wisely chosen – not just something picked because it's in fashion. I'd like to see fat chicks have a little pride and try just a wee bit to look better – get familiar with what colour and style suit them. They can then develop some self esteem and have people treat them better.

Have a good day

Caroline

Early menopause

2011-10-13T19:56:00.002+13:00

Menopause is a bastard at the best of times - the hot flushes, night sweats, mood swings..........and on it goes. Anyone whose been there will get what I'm talking about. But when you go menopausal early it can be even worse, causing a number of health issues and putting an end to any family dreams one might have.

I've discovered the NZ Early Menopause group. If you're interested, check out their website http://www.earlymenopause.org.nz/. Coordinator Nicole has been there herself, and knows what she's talking about. She also has lots of knowledge and connections, so don't hesitate if you or someone you know has been there.

Mentoring

2011-05-14T18:04:00.003+12:00

Recent good news is that my masters thesis was published as an academic text just before Xmas 2010.

It's entitled Mentoring and Self-directed Learning: Issues of Leadership, Power and Ethics and is available here
http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Mentoring+and+Self-directed+Learning%3A+Issues+of+Leadership%2C+Power+and+Ethics+&rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3AMentoring+and+Self-directed+Learning%3A+Issues+of+Leadership\c+Power+and+Ethics+&ajr=0

Needless to say, I think it's a fantastic piece of work! But check it out for yourself. It looks at the mentoring relationship, and analyses how leadership, power and ethics can influence the learning outcomes for the client. It also makes recommendations as to how the learning outcomes can be enhanced.

THE FOREX REVOLUTION

2011-04-20T21:20:00.004+12:00

Here's something that came across my desk a few days ago. Forex on autopilot.

The amount of money traded on the wholesale forex market is billions of dollars a day. Now. YOU can become finanically secure from the foreign exchange markets in a very short time....And do it on autopilot!

Check out this link:

http://cf414hnf8zwq1p843itot99w0k.hop.clickbank.net/" target="_top

REVENGE OF THE FAT BRIGADE

2011-04-19T16:16:00.000+12:00

Funny, innit, how fat folks get treated out there. Bullied, pushed around, abused, ignored. Treated like social pariah, called names. And people trying to 'help you' clean up your life and get healthy, because all that fast food is bad for you.

No matter what fat folks do, it's wrong. They are, after all, greedy lazy slobs who have nothing better to do than spend their lives eating burgers and fries. Unlike everyone else, fat folks should stay away from fast foods, because fast foods have made them what they are. Maybe they just can't help themselves. Yeah right.

Then the do-gooders and PC crap-artists and 'nice' people will say it doesn't matter what you look like – that even fat folks are beautiful. And most fat folks see it for what it is. Patronising BS.

And a lot of fat folks just seem to accept the crap as okay. It's as though they believe that 'normal' folks have very good reasons to continue acting the way they do. Amazing how many fat folks spend their lives apologising for everything, for simply being alive. Dressing in sacks, walking with a perpetual slump, trying to hide away from the real world and the pain it inflicts. But of course the result is more of the same ill-treatment.

But there's a surprise in store. A few fat folks who don't accept the crap that's dished out. They fignt back, refusng to be invisible, bullied, beaten up. maligned. They dish it right back, start treating the 'normals' in the same way they've been treated.

Just watch the reaction of the normals when this happens. They don't like it one little bit, and actually seem surprised! As if those far lazy cunts out there should just accept what's dished out to them! And stay away from McDonalds - leave that for the skinny folks.

In the meantime I'm off to McD's for my third meal of the day......... and let the skinny buggers envy me!

Some thoughts about ENTPs

2011-04-18T22:18:00.003+12:00

From www.entp.org/

Clever describes ENTPs best. They deal imaginatively with social relationships as well as physical and mechanical relationships. They are alert to what is apt to occur next, and sensitive to possibilities. ENTPs are the engineers of human relationships and human systems.

Verbally as well as cerebrally quick, ENTPs enjoy arguing: for its own sake, and to show off their impressive verbal skills. They often have a perverse sense of humour, and play devil's advocate regardless of consequence. They sometimes confuse, even hurt, those who cannot understand the concept of argument as a sport.

Innovative and ingenious at problem-solving, they sometimes manage to outsmart themselves. ENTPs have been known to cut corners without regard to the rules if it's expedient – or it might be the collapse of an over-ambitious juggling act.

ENTPs are optimists. They tend to regard problems as personal challenges, and have little patience with those they consider wrong or unintelligent. However, they are often extremely genial and quite charming, when not being harassed by life in general.

Good at analysis, especially functional analysis, ENTPs have a tolerance for, and enjoyment of the complex. Enthusiastic, ENTPs are apt to express interest in everything, and thus unwittingly inspire others who find themselves caught up in an ENTP idea. The ENTP is the most reluctant of all types to do things in a traditional manner.

Non-conformists, ENTPs enjoy outwitting the system and use rules and regulations within the system to win the game – whatever it may be. ENTPs are good at innovative projects and can administer them well if dull routine is not involved. For ENTPs to be manipulated by another is humiliating.

During youth, the ENTP may be diagnosed with a variety of ailments and conditions which often emerge as a lack of intellectual engagement. Boredom is the bane of the junior ENTP. Generally immature until their late 30s or early 40s, the young ENTP is a socially awkward animal since they rarely fit in with the herd, and require 40 years to comprehend why this is and what to do about it.

Great friends or silent adversary; Court jester or Builder of bridges, the ENTP is difficult to overlook.

From groups.yahoo.com/group/entp/

ENTPs are innovators, explorers, entrepreneurs and visionaries. Always looking over the next horizon, trying to push the edge of the envelope and trying to do what other people say can't be done. What is – is never good enough. Our vision of What Could Be and a powerful drive turn our visions into reality. Explaining everyone and everything... it could almost be the ENTP mission statement. It is our goal to understand people and things.

We are not bound by our generalizations, nor are we necessarily committed to them. We simply want to comprehend. This group is a forum in which the members can boldly advance any idea, theory, perspective or triviality that suits their fancy. We tend to be tolerant, challenging, entertaining, stimulating, unorthodox and sometimes just plain off the wall. It's our playground.

Designed to be a place we can be free to be ourselves, to enjoy one another, to engage in lively conversation, expressing thoughts and feelings, where what we say counts but is not life and death, where real life consequences are remote, where we can get into the essence of what and who we are by seeing ourselves reflected somewhat accurately in the other people on the list. But please note that not all who post here are ENTP. There are cuckoos in the nest and you should check before assuming a poster is of the ENTP type.

We are here to enjoy the company of Tribe ENTP. People having a great time ... letting our hair down in company we hope will have some understanding of our point of view... and allowing self expression in more creative ways than we may have had the opportunity before.

From www.facebook.com/

ENTPs are nothing if not unique. A rare personality type, they comprise approx. 3-5% of the total (American) population. They have an enthusiastic interest in everything and are always sensitive to possibilities. Known as the inventor, they are non-conformist and innovative, self-confident and competitive.

ENTPs are known to be verbally as well as cerebrally quick, and generally love to argue – both for its own sake, and to show off their often-impressive skills. They tend to have a perverse sense of humour as well, and enjoy playing devil's advocate. They sometimes confuse, even inadvertently hurt, those who don't understand or accept the concept of argument as a sport. They get pleasure and intellectual stimulation from arguing both sides of a subject, or from doing something unusual or unexpected just to get a reaction.

ENTPs are as innovative and ingenious at problem-solving as they are at verbal gymnastics; on occasion, however, they manage to outsmart themselves. This can take the form of getting found out at sharp practice –ENTPs have been known to cut corners without regard to the rules if it's expedient – or simply in the collapse of an over-ambitious juggling act. Both at work and at home, ENTPs are very fond of toys – physical or intellectual, the more sophisticated the better. They tend to tire of these quickly, however, and move on to new ones.

Like most Extraverted-Perceivers, they are more excited about pursuing a new idea than about following through on an existing one, which can be a cause for frustration and anxiety – both for themselves and those around them. To the ENTP, all the world is a chessboard whose places must be moved in such a way – by the ENTP – that all the players will get the best and most out of life.

ENTPs are basically optimists, but in spite of this (perhaps because of it?), they tend to become extremely petulant about small setbacks and inconveniences. (Major setbacks they tend to regard as challenges, and tackle with determination.) ENTPs have little patience with those they consider wrongheaded or unintelligent, and show little restraint in demonstrating this. However, they do tend to be extremely genial, if not charming, when not being harassed by life in general.

In terms of their relationships with others, ENTPs are capable of bonding very closely and, initially, suddenly, with their loved ones. Some appear to be deceptively offhand with their nearest and dearest; others are so demonstrative that they succeed in shocking co-workers who've only seen their professional side. ENTPs are also good at acquiring friends who are as clever and entertaining as they are. Aside from those two areas, ENTPs tend to be oblivious of the rest of humanity, except as an audience -- good, bad, or potential.

Even though they are extroverts, ENTPs may demonstrate a subtle tendency towards reservation. Those who have had problems establishing friendships may manifest a quiet nature and a lack of general outgoingness, one day appearing social and friendly only to be indifferent or avoidant the next. Over a period of time specific social patterns may develop, appearing unfriendly and reserved to some and friendly and open to others. With their sporadic nature, they may unwittingly convince others of a general dislike and social discontentment, even though it is not their intention.

ENTPs do not readily follow social norms. They do not like to have their independence threatened by unnecessary rules, and they can appear expedient and out-of-place in a society that values any various forms of unnecessary subjugation. While ENTPs may have a healthy respect for rules when they are necessary as a guideline or are necessary and good for the well being of people, they do not readily tolerate intentional subjugation to any type of rule or method that they consider to be out-dated or harmful to the well-being of individuals. ENTPs tend to look down on people who do so, considering them to be childish and lacking of confidence.

The main peculiarity of ENTPs behaviour is an incredible absent-mindedness. They usually leave items where they used them and have a tendency to constantly lose smaller objects. ENTPs work place and personal belongings are often kept in disarray. They invariably forget what they have already done and what they need to do. However, they are quick and shrewd in day to day matters, taking advantage of every opportunity that arises. Because of this others may consider them to be crafty or shifty.

ENTPs are actually pretty positive people, who enjoy life greatly. Unless circumstances prove it necessary, they rarely find reason to think negatively about people. They seek to accept and to understand people for who they are inside. They do not like to condemn people for their personhood, and they can often be sought out by others for matter of practical solutions to common every day problems. People typically have respect for the intuitive understanding of ENTPs towards them and appreciate their loyalty in personal matters. It is not like an ENTP to betray a friend in need.

A further challenge to feminist ideology

2011-04-12T16:55:00.002+12:00

Scarlet soles are a red rag to feminists' ideology

The last piece of human architecture to be colonised, sexualised and merchandised was the hard-working, taken-for-granted, out-of-sight sole. The humble base of the shoe. Then Christian Louboutin, looking for an edge in a field already crowded with look-at-me gimmicks, began to paint the soles of his hand-crafted shoes with a glossy red lacquer.

Now, the signature flash of rich red beneath a towering pair of Louboutins has elevated the French designer from fashionable to cult. You want the Louboutin power strut? Don't expect any change out of $800. Millions of women pay, or would like to pay, to join this cargo cult. They see that flash of red as a flash of power.

is as big a commodity-maker as Manolo Blahnik was before his wave crested Christian Louboutin with the tacky embrace of Sex and the City. The red flash is as big as the Jimmy Choo fad, which peaked a decade ago, and sexually more potent. Louboutin is even suing Yves Saint Laurent for trademark infringement after the YSL fashion house introduced red-soled stilettos in its last collection. Red soles are hot.

The pervasive power display of women wearing stilettos, despite the style's innate and obvious potential to damage the wearer, is not an evolution that feminists of the 1970s might have expected. But the world is an infinitely more complex place than the one laid out by Jurassic Feminism. Anyone who still wants to see the world through the prism of gender fixation, where women are structural victims and men are structural oppressors, is locked into a fusty bigotry that the stiletto generations are walking away from.

All the great recent advances made for women have been made by people – men and women working together. Most of the legislation that seeks to advance the progress of women has been passed by legislatures dominated by men. And no amount of government social engineering is going to stop women behaving badly to women, which happens all the time. Women bully women. Women block women in the workforce.

It's not all sisterhood. Often it is competition, exclusion and ridicule. This can apply with even more Darwinian brutality among teenage girls. Teenagers are also the most vulnerable to the Great Insecurity Machine, and that machine will crank into action in all its glory on May 2, the first day of Australian Fashion Week.

Already, the giraffes are beginning to gather. Soon they will be strutting and pouting down the runways in the tents at Circular Quay. The giraffes are the models with the one-in-a-hundred bodies used to project not just the clothes but the ideal of what a woman should look like. And they are so very young.

That's the foundation lie fed to women, largely by women, via the Great Insecurity Machine, the commercial fashion industry. It is the lie fed by women's fashion magazines – the most corrupt genre of journalism – and fashion designers and fashion retailers. The fashion industry may have a noble goal – to give people pleasure, make them more appealing, and more confident – but even more important is profitability and cash flow. Along with the accelerating speed of online commerce and social networking, the fashion cycles are quickening. The energy required to stay sharp and current is becoming more acute. Commercial survival trumps consumer pleasure.

Reality also trumps ideology. Which is why academic ''feminism'' is ageing so badly. The entire edifice of classic feminist ideology, and gender studies, is devolving into an intellectual artifice as grand as Marxism or complex financial derivatives. Academic feminism in the West has turned out to be little more than another flag of convenience for the left, in the way the Greens use environmentalism.

The most totemic book of the 1970s wave of feminism, The Feminist Mystique, by Betty Friedan, was written 50 years ago and published in 1963. It became the paradigm of the dubious methodologies and victimologies still being marketed on university campuses under the brand ''feminist''. Friedan was not a scholar; she was a journalist. She was not oppressed; she was privileged. She was not rigorously impartial; she was a hardline leftist. She was not honest, and sought to cover up her early work for the largest Communist-led union in America. She also mined the work of Simone de Beauvoir for her book but gave no credit. Above all, Friedan was a navel gazer. Her feminism was about middle-class, middle-brow white women.

These flaws were not hers alone. They can still be found embedded in feminist ideology. We are living in the middle of a massive global struggle over the rights and freedoms of women, a life-and-death matter for a billion women and girls, and secular middle-class Western feminism is proving irrelevant.

What drove the great changes now – called the feminist revolution in the West – was not a wave of brave and articulate women activists, though they had a role, but something far deeper and more significant: the vast demographic deformity caused by World War II. It took two generations to unwind this deformity. Part of that unwinding was the liberation of women from the expectation of domesticity. It happened because of the actions of millions of people, men and women.

Society is still trying to reconcile the distortions caused by the most important difference between the genders: the mothering drive. This is the bedrock on which family and culture is built. Yet women must assume all the risks of fertility. It is a fundamental inequality.

It makes today's fertility and power displays, all those flashes of teetering red, even more loaded with density of meaning.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/scarlet-soles-are-a-red-rag-to-feminists-ideology-20110410-1d97i.html

This article appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald this week. It appealed firstly to my sense of humour, but as I ready further I found I agreed with uch of what it says.

The writer suggests that traditional feminism has failed, as women still compete with each other in the beauty stakes.

But has feminism failed? I don't believe so, entirely. Second-wave, Jurassic feminism, as painted by the writer of this article, HAS failed. Spectacularly. Women are still attracted by the promises of the beauty industry. Still competing with each other, in search of the ideal. Still being raped, and our children abused by our boyfriends. Nothing has changed, except legislation and affirmative action programmes.

What Jurassic feminists don't tell us is that women ARE more free than ever before. But no thanks to them. We are more intelligent than ever and able to make free, informed declsions about what we do with our bodies.

Men have been part of that process. Not all men are bastards (Shock!! Horror!!) As the author of this article points out, men have been integral. While many women have felt it important to challenge male stereotypes, some men do actually act as if women are their equal. And no legislation, or bullying by the sisterhood, can account for that.

What can women do if they are still dissatisfied with what they see? They can try the traditional approaches used by the Jurassic sisterhood, and force/bully/legislate their way into power. It's not real power, however, for attitudes can't be forced/bullied/legislated. For this reason, the collectivist approach used by the Jurassicists is doomed to failure.

Any woman will be free when she chooses to be. Free from the slavery of collectivist nonsense, and free from any ideology that chooses to keep her dependent, abused and second-class. It doesn't mean that she will never be forced, bullied, abused. Or miss out on that plum job when a man got it because he has a penis. But we don't need those patronising affirmative action programmes, that promise us the world and don't achieve anything except to leave others feeling left out in the cold. When we have personal power, we can do things for ourselves that the sisterhood can only dream about.

And for those who seriously want to drool over Louboutin shoes, check out the website: http://www.christianlouboutin.com/#/intro

ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO BUY VOTES IN ELECTION YEAR

2011-04-10T16:55:00.000+12:00

NZ's Police commissioner Peter Marshall was interviewed by Paul Holmes on TV1's Q+A this morning.

He mentioned, in passing, a demand for more women police officers, and improved promotion opportunites for women within the police.

This demand has, of course, been made on behalf of those members of the human race who have titties and cunt. Those special cases who could never get jobs, money and promotion on their own merit. It's sexist in the extreme, assuming that women could never achieve anything without those same tittles and cunt. It's also bloody patronising.

Where has this BS come form? Since when was CUNT a qualification for a job ........... outside a few necessary job sectors such as women's refuge? Even in these occupations, however, jobs and pay must earned.

Is it simply another attempt by the left to gain votes and political power in election year? I note that the Politically Incorrect Guide to Teenagers is still on tv in its regular spot. Funny how the PC brigade have not publically asked for this show to be canned.

In response to the demand for affirmative action programmes for women in the police, Commissioner Marshall argued that these programmes are not needed. And rightly so. Huge numbers of women have achieved much in their careers, developing skills and credentials that make God look like a loser.

And if women choose to leave the paid workforce for love and children, they have no recourse to special treatment when they decide to return. Neither should they blame you or me, or anyone else, for the choices they have made.

Jobs and promotion must always be on merit, based on skills and experience, not whether the employee has titties and cunt. As attractive as that person';s titties and cunt might be.

MULTICULTURAL RACISM

2010-10-02T21:44:00.000+13:00

I was called a racist again recently, by a person who didn’t like being challenged on her bad behaviour. In the politically correct climate in NZ, anyone who speaks out against the dubious actions of an individual is automatically viewed as making negative statements about a whole race of people. Somehow it’s easier to label someone a racist, than to discuss the issue rationally.

Many of us would agree that racism is an attempt to vilify a person or group on the basis of their skin colour or ethnicity. This differs from what the Left identify as “racism” – something that is structural, rather than attitudinal. If you’re born white, you’re racist, and automatically benefit from a social and political system that gives you lots of stuff, like political power, money, prestige. Alternatively, according to the Left, Maori can’t be racist, because they are the victims of white racism. Maori are the needy alternative – poor, oppressed, sick, victims, jobless.

This is bollocks. It’s a collectivist viewpoint, and as such does not take individual behaviour and beliefs into account. It labels all white folks as racist, and ignores those that aren’t. Even the white radical friends of the Maori radicals are defined as racist, by this definition. It’s a definition that defines all Maori as low-status, regardless of those who have made a success of their lives. It is a culture of blame, hatred and lies, turning people against each other. And theft is the final outcome, as Maori swell the welfare lines, and Maori authorities make huge benefits from the treaty gravy train.

How does that work? It’s a pretty lame effort to justify government stealing my money to appease a vocal minority. But what about the behaviour of people like the Harawiras? Using racism as an excuse it just not acceptable. And I can’t help wondering whether Hone’s kids have any real choice about who they date.

The Left agrees that racism is not okay, but plays the politics of blame. It focuses it work on what it calls Anti-racism – another word for anti-white activism, guilt-mongering and theft of taxpayer money. And nobody wants to be labelled a racist any more. Why? Because the label racist is divisive, turning people into social pariahs and ruining reputations and careers.

There are plenty of examples of how the Left uses its definition of racism to the detriment of all of us.

Government-funded courses for the unemployed offer programmes in bone carving, Te Reo and Tikanga Maori, but their outcomes are dodgy. We need to question the number of course participants who get jobs immediately upon completion of a course like this. But the Left would tell you that these courses promote culture. Right. A culture of intergenerational welfare dependence, ghettoisation of the poor, and the weakening of mana. How does that work?

Degree courses across the board now require students to regurgitate politically correct anti-racist nonsense, without a corresponding understanding of alternative viewpoints. I’m sure Anna Penn, and others who have left NZ looking for a career, would question how cultural safety is more important than basic nursing skills.

The charity and NGO sector has also been infiltrated by this nonsense. A women’s centre I once worked for had a room defined as women-only. What I couldn’t swallow was that Maori men were encouraged to enter and use the women-only space, on the basis that “they are oppressed people too”. Huh? How does that work?

Literacy Aotearoa, NZ’s leading literacy provider, began life in the early 1980s under another name, as an umbrella organisation for literacy schemes all over NZ. Government funding was originally split equally between Pakeha and Maori, regardless of the relative membership numbers. Under that system, Maori tutors and students gained more, per head, than their non-Maori counterparts.

Maori and Pakeha anti-racist activists decided they wanted to make it a “Treaty-based” organisation. Which they did, creating an organisation based on maori culture and refusing funding to those schemes who disagreed with the new way of working. This meant that many clients missed out on the literacy assistance they needed. A number of staff refused to work with the new organisational structure and left, their characters assassinated and careers in literacy gone.

The obscenity is clear. And the public sector is no better. While the government spends millions on the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, Josie Bullock lost her job as a probation officer because she challenged Maoridom’s sexism, and ended up driving a bus in Wellington. Talent wasted.

The Treaty of Waitangi allows Maori equal rights and status with Europeans. No more, no less. It does not excuse the misuse of taxpayer money, however that misuse might be “justified”. Neither does it excuse the use of taxpayer money for weight-loss surgery in the name of Maori education, overseas holidays with your missus, or expensive underpants.

Clearly the anti-racist definition doesn’t cut the mustard in terms of providing a real solution to racism. Not all Maori are racist, and not all Maori support the radical fringe. What is clear is that the Left, in its quest for political power, has infiltrated many sectors of public and private life, and has an agenda based on lies. It undermines traditional decency and morality, replacing it with its own victimology and legislation.

So is there a solution? I believe there is. In my ideal world, entrenched guilt will no longer an issue. People will be free to challenge bad behaviour, without the risk of losing their career, or being labelled a racist.

Clearly legislation hasn’t fixed anything. “Hate crimes” still happen. Sexism and racism are still rife. And in the meantime there is no accountability from a system that allows these abuses to happen.

The solution to racism is for people of intelligence to see that racism is collectivist nonsense. It is systematic and allows all means of evil, aided and abetted by government. By contrast, individualists are not racist, rather choosing to see each person as a self-governing individual, responsible for his or her own actions.

Rights go hand-in-hand with responsibility. It’s easy to demand free access to welfare, but welfare on its own fixes nothing. The Ratana people got it right – take responsibility for yourself and your own people first. When communities work together to create solutions to problems, there will be little need for excuses and name-calling.

Will anyone take notice of my idealism? I would hope so. But I have to ask whether Helen Clark really appreciated being bullied and silenced by Titewhai Harawira. Somehow I doubt it.

The Disability Industry

2008-11-13T22:40:00.000+13:00

I’ve recently been doing some contracting work in the disability sector, ‘supporting’ a young man at university. This guy has a neurological problem that supposedly prevents him from being able to plan his day, or to manage his time. As time went on it appeared to me that the problem was not so much his ‘disability’ but more his lack of enthusiasm for his study, and general lack of life skills. He spends his time internet gaming all night, and is then unable to stay awake to attend classes and complete assessment tasks.

It got me thinking about the whole disability industry. The industry is based on what it calls the social model of disability – a model that blames society for disabling people. It says that a blind person is NOT disabled because he/she is blind – he/she is disabled by the evil people in society who hate people with disability and make life very difficult for them. What a load of bollocks. A person is blind because HIS/HER eyes don’t work!

This reminds me of an advert that’s been playing on NZ television for some time. An advert about mental health consumers claiming that the only way to recovery from illness or disability is to remove discrimination. Discrimination causes the disability? How bloody ridiculous is that? Surely disability comes from the condition itself. A person with schizophrenia is disabled because he/she has schizophrenia!

Sure, conditions out there in the world can make life more difficult, but the only way to cure the disability of blindness is to get the person’s EYES working!

For people who have physical disability that there is no cure for, getting rid of discrimination means little. You can’t cure the disability suffered by a person with an intellectual impairment simply by getting rid of discrimination.

What do these idiotic types of thinking achieve? It allows my young client to blame his laziness on his ‘disability’, rather than on his internet gaming. It allows disabled people to seek out and obtain (sometimes unnecessary) taxpayer funded services. And welfare benefits. And jobs: public- and NGO-sector jobs doing unproductive stuff like policy analysis.

I know a blind chap who refuses to be part of this idiocy. He insists on achieving things on his own merits. He’s never tried to get jobs by playing on his blindness. Sure, he’s occasionally worked in the disability industry, but only in jobs that he was QUALIFIED FOR. He’s operated his own engineering business in Sydney – obviously with some help with tasks that required eyesight. He’s currently working in the accident insurance industry and is consistently the top performer in his branch. Because he gets the work done, with determination and the assistance of computer technology. He’s no victim. He’s run international marathons, in the open (not the disabled or blind) category, with only a sighted person running beside him to guide him. And made excellent times. Ask yourself.

I’ll stop ranting for now.

Feminism has failed

2008-08-31T21:31:00.001+12:00

The women’s movement has failed women. They’ve spent decades telling us that
 Violence is not okay
 All women are okay, beautiful
 Empowerment of women is important
 The experiences of all women are of equal value and importance.
But nothing has changed.

I regularly visit the local pool, and find that women still mistrust each other. We are still afraid to wander around naked in front of other women. Statistics show that women are increasingly offending in the areas of domestic violence and sexual assault, and this can be seen in the way we fear each other.

Women are still victims of assault and violence by both men and other women. So much for all the talk of empowerment – we still get into violent relationships. Refuges tell us that any choice we make is valuable, even if it means that we return to violent partners with our kids.

Observing other women at the local pool, I see how little we hate and are ashamed of our bodies and our sexuality. We try to hide ourselves from others, fearing that we do not compare adequately with them. It seems we can’t value ourselves for our difference – instead we accept and follow the high beauty standards set by others. Where’s the empowerment and mutual support in this?

It does show that we’re equal with men in some areas. We have discovered the same right as men to abuse other women, and to set high standards for beauty. We have the freedom to return to violent partners, and in doing so put our children’s life and safety at risk

The women’s movement has been hijacked by a belief that some women are better than others. If you’re lesbian, maori, disabled, poor, or politically left-leaning – you get the jobs, the money, the kudos. Everyone else is abused, called names, marginalised.

No doubt I’ll be accused of being anti-women and blaming the victim. Name-calling like this is a good way to shut down debate – it’s worked for the left for generations. But they have yet to convince many people that all women are beautiful, valuable, empowered people.

Treaty of Waitangi

2008-05-18T15:35:00.000+12:00

Kiwis who know anything about the Treaty of Waitangi would agree that the Treaty provides all NZ citizens, Maori included, the same rights, privileges and responsibilities. No more, no less - regardless of racial/ethnic/cultural origins.

Yet too many Maori radicals, along with their bosom buddies among the Pakeha loony left, insist that Maori are being treated badly. AND that this bad treatment is all caused by white middle-class male heterosexual able-bodied christian businessmen.

I'd disagree with these assumptions, and suspect that they're nothing more than political grandstanding in an effort to gain political power and access to more taxpayer dollars.

Where the Treaty is respected and followed, everyone has equal opportunities to better themselves. From my long years of experience in private industry and the public and not-for-profit sectors, I've seen a lot of abuse of the Treaty's principle of equality for all. Little of it comes from the private sector, where all NZers are given equal opportunities to prove themselves, with a focus on the character and skill of the individual worker. People are treated in a colour-blind manner, with no special treatment or favours. Sure, there are exceptions, but exceptions happen anywhere.

On the other hand, government and NGOs are inherently elitist, allowing groups of people special treatment on the basis of their ethnicity, sex, disability or who they fuck. Maori and Pacific peoples get into university on a quota system, not having to meet the same entry requirements as the rest of us. Not only is this racist and a breach of the Treaty, but it demeans the quality of our education system and tells Maori and Pacific people that they're not as good as you and I.

Disabled people don't have to compete equally in the job market. They have special units designed to force public sector employers to give them jobs - which often they're not suited to - and which may force more able and qualified applicants onto the unemployment scrap heap.

Job appointments in the public service are based on knowledge of Te Reo - often not even used on the job - and Iwi affiliation. Now who else can get a job simply by identifying who their parents were? This is name-dropping at its worst, and is again NO qualification for a job.

It's interesting that most of these Maori activists and their Pakeha bunnies work in the public and NGO sectors - funded by tax dollars, naturally! I'd suggest they go get real jobs and start being productive members of society. That will get a large number of their rellies off benefits as well. Gotta be a good outcome, I woulda thought.

And that way the Treaty will stand a better chance of being the living document people want it to be.

Another feminist con-job

2008-05-08T07:10:00.000+12:00

Women were, in most cases, doing fine for generations until the women's movement came along and told us we're all victims of male violence, sexism and oppression. Yep, that's right, all of us - even those who had their lives organised and were happy and contented. Then then offered us a solution, telling us that the way out was simply to be assertive.

Of course it's a trick used by marketers and sales people for years - create a problem or a need, then offer the solution. All we need to do is to be assertive and all our problems will be over. We will get everything we need, men will treat us right, and everyone will love us.

Bullshit.

It's just another way for the feminazis to tell us how bad we are. It's an interesting process, which shows how false they really are. As soon as we become assertive, we get called names like Nasty, rude, offensive, oppressor. The list goes on. We get told to be quiet, be nice, etc. Our jobs are suddenly at risk.

All this by those same people who told us to be assertive in the first place. Ask yourself.

Apologies

2008-05-08T06:58:00.000+12:00

Ive been fairly quiet recently, due to a period of seasonal unwellness. During this time I've had the opportunity to do some serious thinking on the nature of friendship and family, and it's confirmed what I'd suspected for a long time. I now wish to apologise wholeheartedly to anyone listening - apologise for ever believing the myths of friends and family.

How interesting that people will talk freely about the value of friends and family, as though they had some kind of eternal, intrinsic merit. We are expected to buy into the myths - accept 'friendship' when it's offered, and do our duty as a good family member.

Funny isn't it! People will call us 'friend' yet they're never there when needed. In fact they find all kinds of excuses for not being there, and will then run away as fast as they can in the opposite direction. Family members will demand that we conform, and do our duty, but they will also run fast in the opposite direction when the shit hits the fan. They will demand government make laws and give them handouts to propagate their ideal version of the family, and tell us we must all accept this ideal as universally valuable - but where are they when needed?

the evils of government

2008-04-23T13:40:00.001+12:00

It was Proudhon who said 'To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-ridden, regulated, penned up, indoctrinated, preached at, checked, appraised, seized, censured, and commanded by beings who have neither title, knowledge nor virtue'.

This is precisely what we have in NZ today - and in most of the western world, for that matter. Citizens blandly sit back and vote for governments, then complain when those governments act in ways that diverge from what the masses say they want. Democracy in action!

Why is it that most people think they cannot survive without governments? Why do people need to have every area of their lives controlled and taxed to the nth degree? While I'd agree there is scope for limited government, what we have now is a system that has over-reached itself. Governments, MPs, and their employees have become corrupt, bloated parasites, feeding off hard-working people and creating nothing of value in return. Careers have developed at the expense of working people, who continue to be taxed, regulated and treated as though we are morons.

Maybe we are morons, continuing to vote these bastards into power.

You asked for it, NZ. Don't start complaining when you end up in Room 101, with no escape.

The Danger of Environmentalism

2008-04-17T14:40:00.000+12:00

Here's an insightful article on the dangers of the green movement. It's written by Michael Berlliner and is found at
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?a532a6cc-17b3-424f-af03-6fbcc88a699f.

"To save mankind requires the wholesale rejection of environmentalism as hatred of science, technology, progress, and human life.
By Michael S. Berliner, 4/15/2008 2:32:10 PM

Earth Day approaches, and with it a grave danger faces mankind. The danger is not from acid rain, global warming, smog, or the logging of rain forests, as environmentalists would have us believe. The danger to mankind is from environmentalism.

The fundamental goal of environmentalism is not clean air and clean water; rather, it is the demolition of technological/industrial civilization. Environmentalism's goal is not the advancement of human health, human happiness, and human life; rather, it is a subhuman world where "nature" is worshipped like the totem of some primitive religion.

In a nation founded on the pioneer spirit, environmentalists have made "development" an evil word. They inhibit or prohibit the development of Alaskan oil, offshore drilling, nuclear power--and every other practical form of energy. Housing, commerce, and jobs are sacrificed to spotted owls and snail darters. Medical research is sacrificed to the "rights" of mice. Logging is sacrificed to the "rights" of trees. No instance of the progress that brought man out of the cave is safe from the onslaught of those "protecting" the environment from man, whom they consider a rapist and despoiler by his very essence.

Nature, they insist, has "intrinsic value," to be revered for its own sake, irrespective of any benefit to man. As a consequence, man is to be prohibited from using nature for his own ends. Since nature supposedly has value and goodness in itself, any human action that changes the environment is necessarily immoral. Of course, environmentalists invoke the doctrine of intrinsic value not against wolves that eat sheep or beavers that gnaw trees; they invoke it only against man, only when man wants something.

The ideal world of environmentalism is not twenty-first-century Western civilization; it is the Garden of Eden, a world with no human intervention in nature, a world without innovation or change, a world without effort, a world where survival is somehow guaranteed, a world where man has mystically merged with the "environment." Had the environmentalist mentality prevailed in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, we would have had no Industrial Revolution, a situation that consistent environmentalists would cheer--at least those few who might have managed to survive without the life-saving benefits of modern science and technology.

The expressed goal of environmentalism is to prevent man from changing his environment, from intruding on nature. That is why environmentalism is fundamentally anti-man. Intrusion is necessary for human survival. Only by intrusion can man avoid pestilence and famine. Only by intrusion can man control his life and project long-range goals. Intrusion improves the environment, if by "environment" one means the surroundings of man--the external material conditions of human life. Intrusion is a requirement of human nature. But in the environmentalists' paean to "Nature," human nature is omitted. For environmentalism, the "natural" world is a world without man. Man has no legitimate needs, but trees, ponds, and bacteria somehow do.

They don't mean it? Heed the words of the consistent environmentalists. "The ending of the human epoch on Earth," writes philosopher Paul Taylor in Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethics, "would most likely be greeted with a hearty 'Good riddance!'" In a glowing review of Bill McKibben's The End of Nature, biologist David M. Graber writes (Los Angeles Times, October 29, 1989): "Human happiness [is] not as important as a wild and healthy planet . . . . Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along." Such is the naked essence of environmentalism: it mourns the death of one whale or tree but actually welcomes the death of billions of people. A more malevolent, man-hating philosophy is unimaginable.

The guiding principle of environmentalism is self-sacrifice, the sacrifice of longer lives, healthier lives, more prosperous lives, more enjoyable lives, i.e., the sacrifice of human lives. But an individual is not born in servitude. He has a moral right to live his own life for his own sake. He has no duty to sacrifice it to the needs of others and certainly not to the "needs" of the nonhuman.

To save mankind from environmentalism, what's needed is not the appeasing, compromising approach of those who urge a "balance" between the needs of man and the "needs" of the environment. To save mankind requires the wholesale rejection of environmentalism as hatred of science, technology, progress, and human life. To save mankind requires the return to a philosophy of reason and individualism, a philosophy that makes life on earth possible."

Michael sums it up clearly. The green movement is dangerous, and motivated purely by the desire for political power. Sure, we need to preserve the environment, but the solution is not political. It never was.

Mothers disempower their kids!

2008-04-05T08:48:00.000+13:00

One thing I learned during my time as a boarding house manager is that most people today seem to think their mother is still around to do everything for them. While people are individually responsible for what they think, this is still a sad indictment on mothers and on society in general.

Mothers too often spend their lives doing everything for their kids. Cooking. Cleaning everything. Washing. Mending. Ironing. Making beds. Clearing out the garbage. Providing money to pay bills. Paying bills. Ferrying people round in the car. Solving problems. Fixing broken stuff. Buying new stuff. Bailing kids out when they get into trouble. Bathing them. Washing their hands. Doing their dishes. Buying them clothes.

While this is fine when the kids are small and dependent on mum for everything, it's no longer acceptable when kids begin to grow up and can start doing things for themselves. This sort of behaviour totally disempowers kids, and leaves them without any life skills. They leave home totally unable to deal with life in the real world. And the downstream effects on society are enormous, as the rest of us are left to pick up the pieces and deal with the damage these people cause.

Don't give me that bullshit about "I'm doing it for love" or "all lifestyles are valid" or "I have a right to live my life as I choose". Sure, you can do something occasionally as a gift, because you love someone. But don't disempower your kids. Don't inflict your warped values on the rest of us, or expect us to pick up the pieces of your kids' failed lives. You don't have the right to get your own needs met at the expense of someone else's. No lifestyle is valid when it has a negative impact on someone else.

If you want to be a martyr, fine, that's your choice. But do your kids a favour, and teach them some independence so that they can function as self-responsible adults. And give the rest of us a break, so that we're not continually forced to deal with the failure of your parenting.

Miracles do happen

2008-03-31T17:36:00.000+13:00

Many rationalist associates of mine deny the existence of miracles. They seem to accept the popular mythology that miracles can only come from a divine/spuernatural source, and their disbelief in the existence of the divine precludes a belief in miracles. I agree with them in their denial of the existence of divinity, preferring to accept that each of us is the author of his/her own destiny and responsible to no authority external to the self.

However.

Miracles do exist. But let me qualify that.

Miracles exist, but of the sort we create for ourselves.They begin with desire - a burning desire to move from some difficult situation and to change it for the better. Often we find ourselves in pain, whether it's physical, emotional, spiritual, or whatever. Pain is pain, and sometimes there just seems no end to it, not hope of ever getting back to the good life. When things are this bad, we have two choices - we might consider ending it permanently, taking the ultimate step. This will end the pain, but it won't give us our life back. The second choice is much better - a decision to seek answers/help/an end to the pain that will result in getting our life back.

And that's where the miracle happens. We can choose to exit, or move through to a better solution. And when we choose this second option, events and people will conspire to help us reach our goal. The end result - and it may be years down the track - is a miracle because if we are persistent enough we will get our life back.

It's a miracle, because the situation in which we find ourselves can be so bad, without hope - a situation which has been transformed into life and freedom. It's easy enough to dismiss what I'm saying, but if you've never been in a bad place where the preferred option was death, you can't understand how bad that place is. Or how good it is to come out of it.

But what is needed for this miracle to happen? A burning desire to get your life back. A determination not to let them (or the situation) win. A willingness to do what it takes to get your life back, no matter what. A keen intuition, that listens to those small voices and events that seem to come from left field but have the most far-reaching consequences.

It's awesome because when you come out the other side, you know that you've got your life back. It may be totally different to the one you imagined, but never let that stop you. Never ever ever give up.

Health professionals - yeah right!

2008-03-25T20:30:00.000+13:00

Something that's occurred to me over the years is that health professionals too often act unethically. Lack of training, knowledge and skill seems prevalent among many, for whom client capture seems higher on the list of priorities. And even when they do know a lot, non-disclosure of information to clients who could benefit from knowledge is common, and sometimes downright dangerous.

The result? Clients can't make informed choices about their health care in this sort of environment. Their wellness is often compromised as a result, putting some at serious risk of harm.

You've gotta wonder why. It happens in both the public and private sectors, so blame can't be placed at either. Unethical practitioners give the honest ones a bad name.

My suggestions to practitioners: follow the golden rule. Treat others as you'd like to be treated. Get over yourself. Disclose what you know and let the patient have informed consent. Learn more stuff.

To clients, I'd say: don't treat these people like god - they're not god. Get a second, third or fourth opinion - find another practitioner if you're dissatisfied. Tell your friends about the good and the bad. Do your own research, and trust your symptoms. And don't let them treat you like an ignoramus.

Govt stupidity

2008-03-14T19:21:00.000+13:00

Once again the NZ govt has shown how stupid it is, by banning party pills containing BZP.

They can argue all they want that it's 'for your own good', but this whole exercise is nothing more than Big Brother once again asserting his wish to control us. And how easily they forget what has happened countless times before - ban something and it simply goes underground. It gets taken over by organised crime, and people get hurt, seriously. Remember prohibition? Al Capone and other mafiosos got rich, and people died - all because they couldn't access booz legally.

My solution would be to make BZP and other drugs legal. Any adult, as the owner of his/her body, has the right to take whatever he/she wants. Of course that should not interfere with the rights of others, or do anyone else any harm. Use of drugs for one's own pleasure is a victimless crime, and is nobody else's business.

It is particularly important for governments to leave people alone to get on with their own lives. Richard Goode, Libertarianz health spokesman, put it quite succinctly in a press release today. "Unfortunately, it's not just Jim. His power-addled cronies in Labour, National, NZ First and United Future all voted unanimously for this gross attack on cognitive freedom. If I want to take a pill to experience energy and euphoria, that's my business," Goode asserts. "The last thing I need is the mood police mandating how I can feel."

Govt can't even complain about the cost to the health system. Anyone who deliberately harms self - no matter what they've been using - should not be entitled to free care from the taxpayer. That way we'd also free up hospital beds for those who really need them. Granny might finally get her hip replacement.

Interesting feminist websites

2008-03-12T17:37:00.000+13:00

Wendy McElroy is an individualist feminist who has alot to say. Check out her two websites

www.wendymcelroy.com/news.php

www.ifeminists.com

Global warming myths debunked

2008-03-12T09:52:00.000+13:00

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5114

Here's an article by Thomas Sowell, addressing some of the myths perpetrated by the green movement. He's saying that the green position on global warming is no more than mythologising, hysteria, and political posturing.

Global warming is, of course, no more than a naturally occurring process, one that has some benefits for us. Compare this to the clearly-expressed green agenda that wishes to rid the planet of humanity forever, and it's easy to see which side is the more rational.

RANT!

2008-03-11T19:49:00.000+13:00

Readers will have to get used to the fact that I dislike do-gooders and politically correct types. I find them to be busy-bodies, trying their hardest to control each of us and to tell us how to live our lives. Then they tax us for the bloody privilege! Every one of them has an agenda of some sort, and they dish out some god-awful BS that too often contradicts itself.

It seems we can't win, no matter what we do.

If you work, you're a workaholic - if you don't, you're a bludger or a victim
Whether you eat or you don't eat, you have an eating disorder and need counselling. Whatever you eat is wrong, according to someone. You're a victim
Any fun is bad, oppressive. Don't do it. Any drinking is alcoholism or at least problem drinking. Any drug use is drug abuse and a symptopm of addiction. Any gambling is problem gambling and addictive behaviour, and will harm your kids
You must be assertive, but as soon as you do you get told to BE NICE, and to SHUT UP
It doesn't matter what you look like, they say. But then they criticise you for not looking the way they want you to
If you're a woman and fuck men, you're a sellout. Regardless of whether or not you actually LIKE what you're getting!

I hate this BS. Passionately. So please don't dish it out round here - there are plenty of other folks who want to hear it.

As self-responsible human beings, we're all entitled to live our own lives as we choose, so long as we do no harm to anyone else. So I WILL continue to eat meat, drink alcohol, and drive my car when I want to. Take your bollocks and shove it.

Academic cesspools

2008-03-11T19:37:00.000+13:00

ACADEMIC CESSPOOLS
Walter Williams, October 17, 2007
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5042

The type of segregation proposed by the colleges in this article was called Apartheid in South Africa, and has been loudly condemned by many. Why is it suddenly acceptable in other western countries? If these ideas had value, they would not need to be forced on a largely unwilling student body. But clearly they have no value at all, which is why freedom of opinion must be legislated against. While racism is never acceptable, forcing attitude change in this manner is unacceptable. And unlikely to succeed. It will simply drive the bigots underground.

You can’t force change, or force people to comply with your vision of the world. Hitler tried it. The USSR tried it. They tried prohibition of alcohol, drugs, abortion – and failed, miserably. What they DID achieve was that the activities and people they proscribed went underground.

Racism is NEVER okay, no matter WHO the victim is. Banning of ideas – shutting down free speech – will only drive ideas underground. Open debate must be encouraged, so that everyone is free to discuss and to see harmful ideas for what they are.

The self-esteem myth

2008-03-11T12:25:00.000+13:00

Read this article.

The educational, psychological, and philosophical assault on self-esteem
by Edwin A Locke
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2006-winter/assault-on-self-esteem.asp

This is an interesting article on self esteem.It critiques the attitude that says ‘you must feel good about yourself, you need to love yourself’, and says that government programmes to foster positive self-worth (such as those in California) have failed to achieve the desired outcomes.

"What went wrong? Leaving aside the fact that the government has no business creating programs to promote self-esteem, the essential problem was that the task force, in company with most people, had wrong ideas about the nature and causes of self-esteem. These wrong views have been spread most directly by educators and their psychologist mentors. In this article, I will identify the false and damaging views of self-esteem held by those in the educational establishment and by the psychologists who influence them, show how these views undermine both academic achievement and the acquisition of real self-esteem, present the correct view of self-esteem, and reveal the ultimate destroyer of self-esteem: modern philosophy.

Self-esteem is recognized at some level, even by those who fail to understand its actual nature, as a critical psychological need. It is generally viewed as feeling good about yourself. This is superficially true: Self-esteem is a positive subconscious estimate of oneself. More accurately, however, self-esteem is the conviction that one is fundamentally worthy of success and capable of dealing with life’s challenges. Self-esteem is not a causeless feeling or appraisal. It has to be earned by means of specific actions, especially mental actions, but most people have never been taught what these actions consist of."

So essentially for a healthy self-concept needs some foundation. We all have people we admire – people who are leaders or achievers in some field. They are admired because they ARE leaders or achievers. So why should SELF-esteem be any different? While I agree that all human beings have value on the basis of our humanity, a positive self-concept needs to be based on something bigger than that – our achievements and leadership.

Student unions

2008-03-10T19:27:00.000+13:00

'Students lose out as union laws bite'
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/students-lose-out-as-union-laws-bite/2007/10/18/1192300954396.html">http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/students-lose-out-as-union-laws-bite/2007/10/18/1192300954396.html

This is an interesting article on the bullying that occurs by student unions. These groups are funded by theft, and too often choice of membership is not free. This situation is unacceptable, for a number of reasons. Student unions are typically corrupt, and don't represent the views of all students (many of whom don't wish to be members). They're corrupt, because they're financially and politically supported by the institutions they work within - institutions providing them with facilities, money, telecoms and internet access, and representation on committees (all in order to keep them on side). The institutions also steal money from enrolled students and pay it to the unions, threatening not to enrol them if they protest. Independent advocacy cannot be provided in this sort of situation.

Women and feminism

2008-03-10T19:05:00.000+13:00

Too many folks out there think that libertarians are anti-women. It simply ain't true. I’m feminist and proud of it, but I don’t support for a moment the fake sort of feminism that is collectivist in nature and blames all men for the problems caused by the behaviour of a few (and ignores the bad behaviour of some women). The type of feminism that turns women into welfare dependents, and fosters hatred of all kinds. If you want that sort of BS, go somewhere else - you won’t find it here.

My goal is to provide a perspective that can change the way women see ourselves and live our lives – a perspective where women are not treated as stupid, dependent, or powerless.Women who are aware that we have choices, and make the most of the opportunities available to create the lives we truly desire.

I want to spotlight women’s achievements, to celebrate women as we are – strong, independent beings capable of running our own lives without interference from ANYONE else (including other women!).

Men WILL be discussed here, written about, or advertised. If this makes you unhappy, that’s fine, but be warned that it's not going to stop. All issues are women’s issues, and men often have things to say that we can learn from or use to further our own development. I don’t abandon all men simply because of the bad actions of a few, just as I don’t see all women as disempowered victims because some of us have had bad things happen to us.

Chances are you may disagree with things I say. That is your choice. But what I’d like to do is show that women can, and do, think for themselves! And disagreement is part of that.

Welcome to my blog!

2008-03-09T14:57:00.000+13:00

6-7 years ago I discovered the ideas of freedom. I'd been doing some thinking - for quite a number of years before that - on issues of individual liberty, the role of the state, personal responsibility, and the right to live your life as you choose so long as you respect that right in others. When a colleague introduced me to liberty, a light went on. At last there were other people like me, who despised the lunacy of political correctness and the collectivist mindset!

I resolved at that point to start on the path to personal freedom, and that's what this blog is about. To clarify and develop my thinking and talk about options for the serious freedom seeker (myself included).

One thing I have discovered is that the world is a much better place when you own your own life. You DO have the responsibility of seeing your words and actions through to their logical conclusion - and that can sometimes seem challenging - but the benefits far outweight any negatives.