News from New Zealand, posted on a public list, about a campaign with closed debates

Rik Tindall may have posted:

Kia ora taatou,

Everyone should try running for Mayor at least once in their life. There
are lessons to be learned from this process as nowhere else.

First and foremost of the available insights is the specific nature of
the predetermination (interested bias) that tends to control New Zealand
politics, down to local level.

A version of the following statement was elicited and published in an
article by the Christchurch Star - thank you Star reporters:

"Candidates cry foul over debate snub" 20 August 2010
http://issuu.com/the.star/docs/110232cs?mode=embed&viewMode=presentation&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Fsoftlight%2Flayout.xml&backgroundColor=dddddd&showFlipBtn=true&proShowSidebar=false&logo=http://starnews.co.nz/images/MagicBox4.gif&logoOffsetX=0&logoOffsetY=0

However the letter on which my quoted statement was based did not make
it past The Press letters editor:

Dear Sir,

Duncan Cotterill Law's closed mayoral forum brought shame upon all participants [19Aug2010]. It insulted both rate-payers and democracy.

All business ideas should be welcome at the table, for resolving economic slump. But this tired cabal, encircled by their wagon-train, shows only fear of the unknown course that society is on and their lack of preparedness for it.

Until they demonstrate commitment to democratic principle and transparency, candidates Anderton and Parker cannot be trusted with the city key.

Rik Tindall, mayoral candidate


To conclude then:

Q: what is the next worse thing to a one-party state?

A: A two-party state, it seems (under Anglo-American tutelage).

Winners are picked ahead of time, and substantive issues intentionally avoided, by a watered-down 'combative' / adversarial 'personality contest' / 'presidential race' set up by not just the media moguls.

But the big question is, can this historic shared imperial Anglo-American 'soft fascism' actually survive, or is it now in terminal decline?

What have Australian voters just said, and need now to translate, other than 'there is no real choice in parliamentary politics' as the offerings are so very much the same?

Is there a third choice that is even available under Capital+Labour monopoly? (Duopoly; the interests of capital are variously titled "Liberal", "Conservative", "Tory", "National" etc.)

On the topic of political choice, The Press certainly is forming a view:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/perspective/4054218/Aust-poll-bad-for-two-party-system

- Open up the debate, the unlimited battle of ideas, and an inclusive future can start to unfold. Otherwise, we are drifting back in time.