Letters:

Colin James (Management, August 2002) charts bright future for party that learns to respect the young electorate’s suspicion of centralisation, and its demand for diversity and customised social services. Then he makes puzzling mistake. He identifies the Greens as the party doing it – “individualists themselves they also value the individual”.

The Greens have been absolutely predictable on every vote between centralisation and customisation, between conformity and diversity, between more rules and individual freedom.

They always vote for the state, and only the all-knowing, all-providing, one-size-fits-all state.

Nandor [Tanczos] and Sue Bradford both saw the paradox when I challenged them on their first major decision against institutional biodiversity. They voted to exterminate the hundred flowers blooming in the short spring of the ACC reform, and to reinstate the state monoculture. Given choice they always choose socialism.

Only ACT predictably respects individual freedom and choice. Student enthusiasm for ACT during the election campaign showed how many could see the reality past the dreadlocks.
Stephen Franks
List MP, ACT

Colin James comments: Mr Franks mistakes lifestyle for policy. Greens are individualistic in their conduct, as an hour or two at Greens conference would demonstrate to him. They are no more herdable than ACTivists – perhaps somewhat less. That the Greens in Parliament have often voted for statist measures does not belie that.

Visited 12 times, 1 visit(s) today
Close Search Window