Why Is NZ Initiative Writing To Everyone*?
Libertarians, Free Speech & Freedom.
Opinion and analysis
The Libertarian Dream
Donald Trump’s second term in office was introduced with a lot of libertarian, billionaire-driven, junk tank drivel and slogans.
One of them was “free speech and personal liberties”.
To that effect, Trump signed an executive order promising to restore “free speech”, and end “censorship”.
It was a familiar ring to a man supported by libertarian donors, the first US President to attend their National Convention, and who allowed indiscriminate and harmful cuts to the public service1 in typical free market idealism.
Unironically, for those who are familiar with the modus operandi of his Administration, the effect of his term has been a trampling of free speech - in other words, severe, imbalanced crackdowns on the type of speech his Administration dislikes e.g. Palestinian activists who are calling for an end to genocide in Gaza, acts to chill opposition and intimidate critics, unconstitutional attacks against universities that won’t toe the line etc.
In mid-May, Trump announced:
“One thing I do is, any student that protests, I throw them out of the country. You know, there are a lot of foreign students. As soon as they hear that, they’re going to behave.”
Does that sound like free speech advocacy?
Or could free speech advocacy in certain hands be about allowing hate speech, misinformation, miscontextual speech, or just the speech these groups benefit from, while cracking down and intimidating speech they dislike?
Billionaires In Concert
This brings to mind Jeff Bezos — the world’s first centibillionaire — now overtaken in wealth by a man widely criticised as a Nazi sympathiser, conspiracist, and advocate.2
Post-Trump Win II, Bezos migrated his Washington Post paper from one espousing “Democracy dies in darkness” to single-handedly painting his corner of the media empire with dark, dripping, gooey, black paint.
Hence forth, Bezos announced, his opinion section would spend every day defending “free market and personal liberties,” and “viewpoints opposing those (under-served) pillars will be left to be published by others.”
Incidentally, the updated Bezos Version 7.25 ideal echoes Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal which slogans with: “free markets, free people.”
Oh, the beauty of high minded values and ideals in the lands of the uber-wealthy. Oh, the virtue of letting us think it’s going to be good for us, even.
High minded ideals, masked as good for everyone, but secretly only serving unique, vested, typically uber-wealthy, interests.
And by the way, when we’re talking about wealth, I’m not talking minor wealth.
We’re talking the type that eclipses Presidents, nations, governments. We’re talking power of the type that rivals kings and empires. We’re talking the type that makes Prime Ministers and Presidents the world over.
Vance mentor Peter Thiel once wrote “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.”
The reach is global. Many values often appear to support pro-market, pro-liberty, anti-taxes, anti-regulation, pro-free speech (for their ideals).
Fox News was a vocal critic of Ardern
The emotions palpable, the hate visceral, the contagion widespread.
But if you are on their side…well things are looking up —
Luxon presented as an "inspiring, a positive guy, with a familiar CEO manner of directness and can-do optimism." in Murdoch’s Australian papers
Did you know: Fox News was a mammoth Covid vaccine critic, yet their boss and owner Rupert Murdoch was one of the first to line up to receive the shot.
Back Home in Aotearoa New Zealand
I was thinking of the general topic this morning, when it also occurred to me that NZ Initiative, and Jordan William’s affiliate organisation, Free Speech Union, are also huge free speech advocates.
With many titles and fan fare, they’ve been waging a “free speech” advocacy here at home.
I was also reminded of conservative commentator Robert MacCulloch’s3 reaction from NZ Initiative, when he penned a column for The Post, called, “The Core Reason The Coalition Is Failing”.
The punchline is Luxon and Willis are clueless and incompetent and they have a laughable reliance on NZ Initiative figures for economic ‘expertise’.
The paragraphs are too good not to bring in full:
Libertarianism and classical liberalism, which mean nothing to the average Kiwi, also gained traction with National, but behind the scenes.
PM Luxon's economic adviser, Matt Burgess, who worked at the NZ Initiative, adheres to these philosophies, as do Luxon's other advisers, Oliver Hartwich and Roger Partridge.
And there you have it. National and ACT (and so now the whole New Zealand Government, bar NZ First) acquired an empty, non-economic growth policy stance which has little to do with economics and everything to do with philosophy.
It is why Finance Minister Willis is lost, with no answers to the nation's stagnation. It is why she has no plan.
It is why she ran to Business NZ last week asking them what to do.
It is why she runs to the NZ Initiative asking them what to do.
It is why the PM runs to his economic adviser Burgess asking what to do.
It is why they get no practical answers.
Then, MacCulloch, in his now defunct blog space, published an email that NZ Initiative’s Executive Director Oliver Hartwich sent him in response to that Post article.
Dear Robert,
I've been following your posts about the Initiative with increasing fascination. What a remarkable talent you have for transforming mundane policy disagreements into epic battles between virtuous crusaders and nefarious monopolists!
Your latest email was particularly entertaining. The revelation that "the original founders of the roundtable cant (sic!) stand you anymore" was quite the bombshell.
I wasn't aware you were the designated spokesperson for these individuals – what an honour that must be! Though I must wonder how you communicate with many of them, given that they're deceased. Perhaps you've discovered some metaphysical channels the rest of us lack?…..
Your ability to misrepresent even the simplest details is truly remarkable – a special talent that sets your blog apart from those tedious fact-checkers who obsess over accuracy……
Do keep writing these posts, though. They provide much-needed entertainment around the office. We've taken to reading them aloud during morning tea, right after our daily ritual of collecting "big fat membership fees" from our supposed monopolist puppet masters.
With amused regards,
Oliver
P.S. I look forward to seeing this email appear on your blog. Perhaps you could publish it alongside that detailed analysis of your work that's been circulating? You know, the one documenting your factual inconsistencies, ad hominem attacks and unbacked claims with actual citations.
P.P.S. You may wonder why so few people listen to you. It might have something to do with the way you communicate. Just a thought.
P.P.P.S. May I suggest installing a spellchecker? It might help with those troublesome apostrophes in words like "can't" and "doesn't" that seem to have gone missing in your email.
Dame Ann Salmond Also Receives An Email From NZI
This then brought to mind an email NZ Initiative sent to Dame Ann Salmond after she critiqued libertarianism and junk tanks in a Newsroom article called “Hayek’s Bastards”
In her piece, she mentions Dr Eric Crampton from the NZ Initiative —
Eric Crampton, chief economist for the New Zealand Initiative, is a director of the Mont Pelerin Society, for example; Ruth Richardson is a former director; and David Seymour, leader of the Act party, Roger Partridge, chairman of the New Zealand Initiative, and Oliver Hartwich from the same organisation, are all members.
No conspiracy theory is needed to explain these links. At the same time, the ambition of these think tanks and the Act party in New Zealand can be startling.
Clearly affected, NZ Initiative sent a columnist to respond, calling Salmond’s article “narrow and prejudiced”.
But what really caught my eye were comments in that article which showed that NZI also sent an unsolicited email to Salmond.
Salmond writes:
This is a much more thoughtful and interesting response to ‘Hayek’s Bastards’ than the email I received from the New Zealand Initiative (NZI) soon after it was published, complaining that ‘Ms Salmond’ was in danger of defaming members of that organisation.
I found that surprising, given NZI’s role in promoting proposals for ‘freedom of speech’ in New Zealand universities. Freedom for those who agree with them, I thought.
In response to her public note, Dr. Eric Crampton responds in part with:
I think, if I’m interpreting it correctly ?, NZ Initiative is saying,
“We’re not threatening you, Dame Salmond, we’re just showing you we can”.
There are other unsolicited emails I’m aware of, but suffice to say, though metaphorical i.e. NZ Initiative aren’t writing to everyone *- but on the other hand, I wonder, why is NZ Initiative writing to so many Kiwi commentators who mention them?
And in such interesting tones?
Is that what NZ Initiative members like Fonterra, ANZ, ASB, etc. want?
Is this what their Board members, from companies such as Origin Energy, Colliers and NZME, think is part of the strategic remit of this group?
I really don’t know but it’s a head scratcher for sure.
Beware The Free Speech Advocate
My take is hate laws exist for a reason.
It’s not about stopping free speech at all, it’s that all speech has consequences, and the Christchurch massacre was an extreme example of that.
We can also all understand the critical impacts of speech, by studying the rise of Hitler in Germany from the 1920s.4
We as a society generally understand that freedom of speech operates alongside the principles of responsible speech - speech that doesn’t incite violence and hatred, perpetuate lies and misinformation etc.
In general, honesty and context is an important feature of responsible speech as facts allow a people to look at a singular board, and make decisions from there.
If parties are being paid to promote interests, we need to know what those moneyed links are, and allow scrutiny, because as Upton Sinclair said:
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
Yesterday Nicola Willis posted an odd social media post suggesting she is a diligent, responsible Finance Minister versus Grant Robertson, who she suggested, had a “huge money bazooka” which he “sprayed” indiscriminately.
This is the same Finance Minister who is literally out-borrowing Labour’s full term in less time - and with no $70bn Covid package to account for - and sending benefits towards donor groups and preferred corporate lobbyists in a trickle down scam.
It’s not free speech that is the issue in New Zealand, in my opinion.
It’s the lack of accountability and scrutiny.
It’s the lack of public interest journalism and holding misrepresentation like Willis’ to account.
It’s moneyed interests controlling too much.
Integrity and truth matters.
Don’t let the vested interests tell you otherwise.
Labour delivered a $70bn Covid package in its 6 year term. The burden of an aging population, low productivity, record loss of working Kiwis, superannuation payments, and infra-debt, means the time is coming for responsible tax reform.
By a generous account, it appears DOGE cuts have not only resulted in indiscriminate slash and burn, hurting beneficiaries, contractors, and employees, it saves 0.2% of federal spend. Furthermore, many analysts expect it to have long term negative consequences, and may even expand future deficits.
Note: Despite widespread criticism, Elon Musk said it was unfair to call him a Nazi. he said those claims were a “propaganda campaign” against him.
I was sad to see MacCulloch be attacked and close his blog. As I said a few months ago, even if I didn’t agree with all his views, I found many ideas refreshing and worth a constructive look in.
The Nazis were master propagandists and frequently dehumanised minorities e.g. the disabled, and the Jewish people
Since the beginning of 2024 the NZ Initiative have made a large number of submissions to government. Including (from their submissions page https://www.nzinitiative.org.nz/reports-and-media/submissions/):
Bill submissions in support of the Gene Technology Bill, the Regulatory Standards Bill, the Fast-Track Approvals Bill, and the Misuse of Drugs (Pseudoephedrine) Amendment Bill.
A proposal to review the Commerce Act to 'remove barriers', including regulators that "serve as additional enforcement mechanism for anti-competitive conduct".
On Developing an Enduring National Infrastructure Plan Discussion Document, which states that "Greater private ownership and involvement is likely to be beneficial."
On Have your say on Work Health and Safety, which recommends "that the government moves to allow a greater role for individual employers and employees to contract between themselves for the trade-offs between safety and pay" and finds a role for Private Insurance in this scheme.
On the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) on the 2024 ACC Levy Consultation, to make ACC 'more efficient', and introduce competition, namely private insurance.
On the Consultation on the Scope of the Treasury's Long-term Insights Briefing, which stresses a prudent level of public debt but ignores private debt.
On the Resource Management (Freshwater and Other Matters) Amendment Bill which calls the current RMA a handbrake, suggests the RMA makes it much easier for beneficial projects to proceed, respects property rights and includes greater use of economic instruments.
On the Draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport in which fundamental reform is advocated using the 1998 Better Transport Better Roads model.
Their Report "Reining in the Supreme Court" has gained allot of attention too becoming a bit of a poster child of right wing echo chambers (including the NZ Herald).
It sure seems that the NZ initiative/ACT/HobsonsPledge/TaxPayersUnion etc doth protest too much. It is very obvious they are using 'Free speech & freedom' as a mantra to hide behind. They are a well funded, self-serving and devious lot that I wouldn't trust a pet rat with.
Thanks for exposing and shedding light on them.