Skip to main content

Trotter Not Sorry

Chris Trotter's hate-filled column last week [Trotter's Hate Speech] generated a lot of 'robust feedback' in response, so he's decided to spend some time repairing his damaged brand. His latest column explains why Chris is such a nice guy. It's a nice fluffy piece that stays general, and is notable for what it doesn't say.

It doesn't, for example, say "sorry" for his recent tirade against large sections of New Zealand. He doesn't say "sorry" for painting National voters as the face of evil. Chris, when are you going to learn - verbal violence is not OK!

All Trotter can manage is "I'm not a communist, I'm a social-democrat." Well, that explains it then?

He starts off: A column entitled From the Left conjures out of its readers imaginations a veritable phantasmagoria of political misconceptions. The most common of these is that, being "From the Left", I must favour the policies Joseph Stalin and Mao Mao Tse-tung.

There were no misconceptions about the vitriol leveled at the 35% of New Zealanders who vote National. He mostly saw these as farmers, people on a high salary and people of faith. With such bigotry on display from an avowed "lefty" it is easy to suppose Trotter's policies would be in alignment with other failed (redundant?) communists. So what are his policies?

Problem is, I rejected their credo of Marxist-Leninist communism long ago.

Yes, die-hard communists faced with the failures of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Mao and others finally understood that to change society and to embrace left wing ideology, the changes must be more subtle, the people more patient.

Trotter's occasional outbursts are simply a sign that his patience slips. Power held at the whim of a fickle electorate requires much more sophisticated strategies, and the communists of yester-year have adapted.

Overt communism was dropped for subtle social change and a new product to market - Socialism. Although Trotter prefers in this article to speak of Social Democracy - because somewhere, the people should have a say. Although whenever the numbers get up around 35% or more, this apparently becomes debatable.

So, what do I believe? Chris asks.

The rest is pure fluff. As you read how much he values Social Democracy, keep in mind what he said in last week's article. He doesn't resile from this here, and such sentiment from last week's article makes a mockery of his personal PR campaign this week.

Perhaps we could go back further in time, when he suggested that he doesn't actually believe in democracy at all as he applauded Labour's electoral fraud as "courageous corruption": "Social peace for a paltry half-million dollars? Strikes me as the most courageous and forgivable kind of corruption."?

Then again, there was this one time he recognised the left had gone too far ignoring the "will of the people":
This legislation [s59 repeal] needs to be withdrawn, immediately. And its supporters (among whom I include myself) need to acknowledge their failure....By refusing to recognise the sheer magnitude of the opposition to this bill, the Left has forfeited the electorate's trust. Sadly, withdrawing the legislation is now a necessary precondition to rebuilding public confidence in progressive politics...

Passing this legislation now, over the objections of four-fifths of the electorate, will not settle the matter. The people will punish the Left and themselves by voting the far Right into power.
Well Chris, the far Left ignored your advice and this was only one instance of many where they have ignored the feelings of those they supposedly represent. Unless you once again promote courageous corruption at the expense of representative democracy, you might have to acknowledge that there are many New Zealanders out there who have become very suspicious of your Jekyll and Hide routine. With no hint of an apology, they have little reason to trust you.

You've outlined the importance of social justice, social interdependence, and the balance of nature. Many would agree with the broad principles, and of course, those principles can be achieved in many ways.

Your article this week set out to explain how your policies differ from Communists. It did none of that - you kept it too general. The main point you've made is that the State must be all powerful, and is there to enforce collectivist decisions. Until you actually mention policy, we have little to go on other than some fluffy statements this week, with lashings of vitriol against 35% of New Zealanders from last week, and a nod to a bit of courageous corruption when things aren't heading left.

Does your white middle class background prevent you from apologising Chris?

Related Link: Chris Trotter - A vote for Destiny

Related Posts: Barnsley Bill - Trotter's part time job

Comments

  1. Often a simple 'sorry' will suffice when we say dumb things.

    Maybe people like Trotter are so self-absorbed they cannot bring themselves to admit being in error.

    See that nutter who opened fire in a church in the US - during a kids concert production - because he hated Christians, gays and liberals. The intolerance is getting out of control.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Actually Ruth, I think the intolerance has not peaked yet. In fact I could see my intolerance increasing enormously if I ever actually meet the self loathing whitey onanist Trotter.

    ReplyDelete
  3. my take on trotter;
    http://barnsleybill.blogspot.com/2008/07/is-chris-trotter-house-nigger-for-evil.html

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.