The Why: Our Predicament and Democratic Choice
INTRODUCTION
1.1 We have General Elections in order to choose our future and there are four alternatives, depending on the political imperative:
| Economic | Ecological | ||
| A | Strong | None | Growth, Right |
| B | Moderate | Limited | Growth, Centre |
| C | Limited | Moderate | Growth, Left |
| D | None | Strong | Survival |
1.2 Survival Politics puts ecology first, because we are part of the ecology.
1.3 A 1980 survey by Auckland University on behalf of the Commission for the Future (Attitudes to the Future) showed preference as:
| A | 7% |
| B | 59% |
| C | 21% |
| D | 13% |
1.4 A 1993 survey by Massey University for the International Social Survey Programme (The Environment) included the question "should the government take much stronger measures to protect the environment even if they hurt economic growth":
| Strongly in favour | 18% |
| Somewhat in favour | 46% |
| Neither | 19% |
| Somewhat against | 11% |
| Strongly against | 3% |
| Can‘t choose | 3% |
BACKGROUND - 1972
2.1 The United Nations Conference at Stockholm confirmed the impending ecological crises in ‘Only One Earth’:
In short, the two worlds of man — the biosphere of his inheritance, the technosphere of his creation — are out of balance, indeed, potentially, in deep conflict. And man is in the middle. This is the hinge of history at which we stand, more global, more inescapable and more bewildering than any ever encountered by the human species and one which will take decisive shape within the lifespan of children who are already born. (p.47)
2.2 The Club of Rome produced ‘Limits to Growth’ which confirmed that growth is unsustainable and its problems exponential:
The crux of the matter is not only whether the human species will survive, but even more whether it can survive without falling into a state of worthless existence. (p.197)
2.3 The Ecologist magazine published ‘A Blueprint for Survival’ which outlined the political changes required:
We do not need to destroy the ecosphere utterly to bring catastrophe upon ourselves: all we have to do is carry on as we are. (p.21)
2.4 The New Zealand Values Party was formed, calling its first manifesto ‘Blueprint for New Zealand, an Alternative Future’:
...the national leadership continues to overemphasise economic growth at the expense of both the environment and a more natural pace of life. (p.1)
LOGIC
3.1 Growth is a relative term, as more is relative to less, therefore exploitation is inevitable.
3.2 We have proved ourselves to be unable to contain the ecological and social effects of this exploitation.
3.3 Industrial growth is driven by economic growth, which is legislated for and can be legislated against.
3.4 While protest and pressure groups attempt to address the ecological, social and economic effects of growth, Survival politics confronts the root cause — the link between economic and industrial growth.
3.5 Economic growth is in fact uneconomic (in the period 1972 to 1998 debt outgrew growth by a factor of 3:1).
3.6 Green politics is either pale (Pressure groups) or dark (Survival politics).
APPLICATION:
4.1 The only reliable public opinion poll is a general election and for that a political party is needed.
4.2 The New Zealand Values Party was formed in 1972, wound up in 1990 and restored in 1997.
4.3 Its manifesto is reduced to only those aspects of policy which provide transition to a sustainable economy.
4.4 Its constitution is revised to accord with the philosophy and principles of the manifesto.
4.5 Members are bound by both, and candidates will represent their electorates on all other issues.
4.6 Regions (electorates) are autonomous and may combine for any reason.