Sack the bosses

john-key-houseA dozen activists from Socialist Aotearoa, the Workers Party and the Greens protested outside John Key’s house today, against the passing of the 90-day bill. The new law which comes into force in March 2009 gives small employers the right to sack staff in the first 3 months without legal redress.

The noisy protest ruffled the feathers of some of the residents of Key’s leafy neighbourhood. Some parents complained saying “there are children in the area, you know!” But rather than being horrified by the picket a large bunch of 8 to 14 year olds joined in, obviously enjoying the picket theatrics.

The picketers chanting “So it didn’t take you long; workers rights down the John” got some disapproving looks from the Range Rover mums, but lots of support from the younger set.

10 Responses to Sack the bosses

  1. Madeleine says:

    Once again no regard for children or for parental rights. The parents of the children asked you to consider them but you skite that you didn’t and that you enabled the children, too young to understand the issues, to participate despite knowing their parents did not want them too.

    Targeting people’s private homes, their spouses, children and neighbours is despicable.

    It is a political issue you have a problem with so picket parliament or Key’s office.

  2. Tim B says:

    Typical Christian fundamentalist nonsense - by “parental rights” you mean of course the right of parents to impose their beliefs and values on their children and stop them from forming their own opinions.

  3. Eli Boulton says:

    “Targeting people’s private homes, their spouses, children and neighbours is despicable. ”

    Targetting? What are you comparing a peaceful but noisy protest outside a guy’s house to a terrorist attack? Oh wait I just read your blog you are actually comparing us to terrorists. Hahaha.

  4. Rob says:

    Hey Eli it is real simple go protest outside the beehive or John Keys office, Do not do it outside his house, This is just wrong!!!

  5. Don Franks says:

    I am not a big fan of targeting political leader/corporate bosses houses, for two reasons.

    One - the act possibly contains some sort of implication you might thereby melt their hearts and change their minds.
    Two - it may win them sympathy from those who might be rallied to opposing them.

    But if I’d been in Auckland on the day I’d have been there.

    It was the right thing to do.

    No revolutionary can or should try to derail people’s anger. Key and Clark have chosen to be pinup pimps for the class enemy. They live in high luxury because they are paid well for facilitating our exploitation. Don’;t let’s make any mistake about what we’re dealing with here - these creatures have stunted and ruined countless workers lives. In terms of the values of the international proletariat those political leaders are excrement. When the revolution comes up big on our local screen they will be right out there to pay the full price for their part in fucking us over.
    So don’t lets get too wissy about the dress rehearsal.

  6. Matt says:

    Err No Tim

    I refer to the duty and responsibility parents have to raise their children a duty which involves ensuring they are adequately feed, clothed and educated , because parents have a duty to do this they have a right to do this.

    And Tim I am not a fundamentalist, if you are going to make criticisms of religious positions at least learn what theological terms refer to. Moreover you might be surprised that quite a lot of religious or non religious groups believe parents have this responsibility and hence right .

    I am also amused by the idea of children making up their own mind. People can only make decisions on the basis of the beliefs and values they already have. Children already have to had values and beliefs inculculated in them before they are able to do so. The idea then that one should let children decide instead of inculculating such values and beliefs is absurd. This is not a ‘fundamentalist’ idea it was observed by Aristotle some 2400 years before the emergence of fundamentalism.

    Moreover, if parents bringing upon their kids is “imposing values” what’s state education ? Presumably it’s the government imposing its values upon? Why don’t you lefties let the kids make up their own minds? Funny how your flawed logic is only applied to your opponents.

  7. Matt says:

    “Oh wait I just read your blog you are actually comparing us to terrorists. Hahaha.”

    What Madeleine said is that at targeting innocent third parties in order for to put pressure on your opponents to meet your demands “at its extreme end” is called terrorism. She said that “in principle” doing this is no different than high jacking a train and making demands. In context the “principle” is the principle that one can violate the rights of third parties in order to put pressure on your opponents to get want you want.

    Once again we see Socialist responding by citing something out of context and ridiculing the straw man created rather than actually offering a rebuttal. Tim B of course responds by appealing to religious stereotypes hoping the bigoted attitudes they convey will discredit the messenger. Both tactics tell us more about you and your irrational hatred of others than about the substance of your position.

  8. Paul Drake says:

    I think that Mat and Madeleine are blowing this out of proportion. the point that is being made here is that the ’90 Day Bill’ gives the employers the right to sack without reason, thereby rescinding more workers rights. Other issues that M&M are irrelevent.
    As I have mentioned in previous posts such issues would provoke a nationwide strike in France and Italy and it would be done here if only the Council of Trade Unions had more intestinal fortitude and showed leadership and solidarity with other left unions.

    The left have a right to protest where the hell it wants toand why shouldn’t WP talk to the kids? Oh never mind about Aristotle (father of the aristocracy) Let me mention that Socroties had to take the hemlock for corrupting the youth exposing, them to foreign ideas like monothiesm and teaching them how to think by using deductive reasong.

    I can understand why their parents are concerned that their kids may hear things like
    “religion is the opium of the people” because as long as religion serves a political agenda,kids are going to be kept in the box and not to question the status quo.
    The protest in the suburb was healthy some kids now know that alternative views exist

    Paul D

  9. Paul Drake says:

    In my last post I should have put the word “corrupting” in quotation marks because in reality Socraties was teaching the youth of the day how to expose corruption.

    Paul D.

  10. Heleyni Pratley says:

    Matt: “Moreover, if parents bringing upon their kids is “imposing values” what’s state education ? Presumably it’s the government imposing its values upon?”

    Yes acctually state education is imposing it’s values uppon children.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 52 other followers