The traditional political terms left & right arose during the French Revolution from their respective positions in the national assembly. Representatives of the people sat on the left and those of the power structure on the right. In one sense this polarity persists: we can easily see the right as defenders of the status quo and the left as the embodiment of the aspirations of the powerless. In this frame, progress comes from the devolution of state power to lower levels. That's why the left has used the term `progressive' since the 19th century (while the right has used 'conservative').

Another polarity frame from the 19th century that persists is capitalism/socialism. The right has continued to represent the ancient patriarchy and it's residual power structure (the state), it has gradually been transferring its dependency on the monarchy and aristocracy into a dependence on commerce. Using a combination of traditional power and wealth as your natural source of collective strength is sensible for the right, and has always been an effective strategy. This transfer took place in Britain during the 17th & 18th centuries. The American & French revolutions created mass expectations of freedom for the masses from the traditional exploitation and oppression that the monarchy and aristocracy had been imposing upon them since the dark ages. The ancient Greek concept of democracy was revived as the political ideology of the left. It took about a century for the state to be restructured accordingly throughout western countries, but by the end of the 19th century our modern political structure had emerged.

The left and right have since been in collusion in maintaining social control via the power of the state, carefully limiting the extent of the freedom of the people. Whether by coup d'état or election, we've seen them ascend to control the government and make law changes to suppress the rights of their opponents. The most overt such behaviour became known as totalitarianism – exhibited during the 1930s as fascism on the right and communism on the left, and degenerating into assassinations, torture & genocide. All while pretending to be democratic. These political movements believed democracy must be a sham to seduce the masses into supporting them. Those who instead believed democracy must be real chose socialism (on the left) and liberalism (on the right) as better ideologies. So nowadays the historical collusion between the left and right primarily takes the form of business as usual: the idea that the traditional economy must be maintained by means of suitable government regulation of market forces. The right believes in minimal regulation; the left believes in maximal.

Dualism has this effect on the psyche: it constrains us to see things as black & white when the real world is multi-coloured (with a spectrum of shades of grey implied). When confronted by opposed views in situations where the truth is important to figure out, and vital to their future, people adopt an either/or attitude. They claim one option is right and the other wrong. When reality ain't so simple, this behaviour creates massive social pathology when done en masse. So when the green political movement emerged from the environmentalism of the '60s & '70s, it instinctively knew that it must finesse the historical status quo by means of the novel stance `neither left nor right, but in front'.

Most people remain locked into a dualist perspective their entire lives. Those transcending the primitive conceptual outlook see other options becoming available to them. Evolutionary advance comes from identifying and choosing the best alternative to the traditional dualist framework that society has inherited. Collectively, progress emerges by consensus as the dangers of both of the extremes become evident. Folks may then articulate their new consensus as a rationale for change and social development by explaining to slow learners what's obviously wrong with the traditional extremes that the political establishment continues to promote. This emerging consensus in the middle will always profit by balancing their collective critique with acknowledgement of those elements of the left & right that do have ongoing merit. Doing so then enables us to repackage these essentials into a new synthesis.

As Milton Friedman reminded us in the mid-'70s, we must be free to choose. It's our natural right as autonomous human beings. State-imposed limits on this freedom are therefore only viable if there is general agreement that they are in our common interest. The past half-century has seen the masses turn away from the old nanny state socialists cling to, with its fostering of a dependency relation between the individual and the collective. Most people now accept that they must be free to choose how to earn their living, and that being independent is ideal. However they have also proved themselves averse to returning to the law of the jungle as dictator of social outcomes (the covert agenda of the right under the guise of market forces). The middle way for the greens to follow is therefore allowing the market to prosper while using the state as a guidance function, for damage control, for disciplining and redirecting the market as & when necessary.

The Green Party must restore its authenticity by returning to the green movement's original stance of being neither left nor right. Best to point out that the realignment is not mere pragmatism, but it's in accordance with the principle famously established in the 19th century by Hegel, when he explained how any thesis usually gives rise to an antithesis – and this polarity is eventually resolved by a synthesis of both. It is indeed how we operate in a political context. The right's thesis (might is right) was opposed by the thesis of the left (power to the people). An equally succinct identifier for the synthesis is required. When the green movement emerged from the counter-culture 40 years ago, coevolution was the key identifying principle (with sustainability as the primary goal). Nature uses symbiosis in ecosystems to integrate their ecology while maximising biodiversity. We have been acting accordingly, role-modelling peaceful co-existence via non-violent conflict resolution. Progress has been much slower on the economic & political fronts due to excessive timidity, lack of collective imagination and enterprise, the failure to use lateral thinking, plus the parliamentary tactic of leftist alignment which is now years past its use-by date...

Repositioning ourselves in the political center allows us to better appeal to & represent swing voters - the 5% or so who are the interface of the mainstream from which change proceeds. Control the middle ground of the political spectrum and you are key player in the game (as NZ First has long been teaching us). Acknowledging common ground with the left and right respectively then becomes a powerful strategy for success, as it identifies fertile political terrain where collaboration with both wings of the establishment can take root. The ensuing fruits of that work will demonstrate to swing voters that we are authentic in representing them in a centrist manner, and will prove to the media that we are no longer fringe.

It will be essential to capture NZ First market share by being seen to build consensus on the basis of principle rather than on their basis of expediency. This means spelling out the underlying metaphysics: with the left, the key principles of equity and restoring the commons; with the right, the key principles of enterprise & conservation. Just explain to the media & public that a conservative is supposed to conserve - and we're just helping the right to get real, since they're incapable of figuring that out for themselves without a dictionary.

For an individual, transcending the dichotomy induced in the psyche by a dualist belief system results in personal liberation. For any collective, group or society, transcending the polarised stand-off & impasse is what is required to get us all past the cultural stagnation and social harm that dualism creates. It is never easy to cohere sufficiently to achieve collective transcendence! Unison is ever elusive, but all it takes is seeing the middle way forward to the future between the twin extremes of left and right, and agreeing to head down that path.

Triangulating a problematic polarity enables us to finesse the situation, solve the problem, by choice of a better (third) alternative. If you explain this to folks with an open mind, they get it. Eventually, even slow learners do. When the media & public remain bogged down in traditional beliefs, we can be a beacon of hope for all who seek a better way ahead. This strategy is an essential strand in the new style of politics many have long been calling for. Acting as exemplar on this basis, we can lead the way. Maybe even snowball a global trend. Ride the wave rolling on to the sustainable society...

Dennis Frank, 27/11/14

Okay, it's been a while, eh?  What have I been up to since putting this site online late 2011?  First, Bill & I were trying to establish a kiwi version of the online petition site Get Up!

Bill had spent months awaiting a response from them, then negotiating the right to use their format & part-way was joined by some younger guys in Wellington who had had the same idea.  Bill had enlisted his young sidekick in Sea Shepherd, Matt, to write the software but they kicked the project down to Wellington when it turned out progress would happen faster there.  We remained on the advisory board to ensure the design was successful.  Originally we had decided to call it Stand Up! a la Bob Marley (symmetry with the Oz name) but turned out there was a young union group called Stand Up & others got paranoid at the similarity.

A fake poll was conducted by the young woman hired to manage project development, so Bill & I decided to leave in disgust at the unethical conduct.  Last I heard it was going to be called Action Stations & be up & running a year ago – but no sign of life as yet, huh?  Spiritual contamination is ever a trap for young players...

You're either part of the solution or part of the problem.  True, you can always spot those who are clearly both simultaneously.  Anyone not living in a dualist world can identify them. Not easily the tricky buggers who are doing it deliberately, of course!  Is the reader smart enough to have figured out why the others in this small category are doing it unconsciously? If not, your homework is to read “The Madness of Adam & Eve”.  This excellent book promotes a novel and ingenious genetic theory of schizoprenia;  which is that it is not only natural, it has driven the evolutionary trajectory of the human race.  Clue:  people always remarked how genius & insanity would often coincide within one individual.

Then Bill & I checked out the Occupy movement. I was concerned they would try to reinvent the wheel & end up making the same mistakes my generation did 40 years ago.  So it transpired.  Their tribal methodology threw up a new sign language & a measure of solidarity was exhibited globally - which proved ephemeral.  Occupy Auckland then degenerated into a braindead conformism, which subsequently morphed into anarchy.  In between these two stages a list of grievances was agreed and issued to the media.  Documentary proof that protestors are incapable of anything more constructive than complaining?  Alarmed, I suggested to Bill that we redraft it into a positive plan instead, and test consensus just like I did for the Greens 20 years back.

Once each negative clause was transformed into a positive declaration of intent, I polished up the language and Bill circulated it asking Occupy supporters to agree to their name being added to ours at the bottom to demonstrate consensus.  When we got 17 people listed identifying themselves as agreeing that the document provided a positive alternative to the status quo, I took a bunch of copies down & gave one to each likely-looking person I encountered at the occupation, explaining the purpose of the document and advising them to get the group to adopt this positive translation of their grievances.

I pointed out that the 99% needed a positive alternative to business as usual, so the protest movement is more likely to obtain solidarity with the 99% by providing it.  The interim consensus of 17 supporters was sufficient to demonstrate that widespread agreement with the positive version of their grievance document was likely.  All recipients agreed to advise the group to accept it.   Didn't happen! Why?  Protestors think they are incapable of doing anything other than protesting.  Never mind that some protest movements have achieved social transformation by signalling a better way forward for all.  You have to be aware of such outcomes as precedents.   How many protestors know of them?? How many learn from history?

Emotionally retarded, stuck in grievance mode, these aging adolescents unable to mature seem destined for permanent irrelevance.  Their pretence that they represent the 99% is clearly a sham when they make no attempt to lead the 99% to a better future.  Once protest movements were the leading edge of progress – now all protestors do is whine.  The people are inclined to view such pathetic performance with apathy - or disgust and contempt.  We await the real thing instead.

I was concurrently oldest in my class of a couple of dozen doing the Auckland Permaculture Workshop design certificate, one day per month throughout 2012.  Excellent content!  When you're apprehensive that you know everything already it's a huge relief to encounter a couple of tutors providing an exemplary demonstration that it ain't so!   The year got even busier when Tim Lynch interviewed me for his radio show, Greenplanet FM, and then invited me to co-host with him & Lisa Er in the latter part of the year.  So I did a series of shows that are still available as podcasts – you can listen to them at the GreenplanetFM website.

Then I watched as the dominos fell in Europe – would 2012 bring the long-awaited final collapse of the capitalist debt-slavery system?  No, as it turned out.  For about the 5th time in the past 30 or so years the system lurched thro crisis like a battered ship through a storm, sails shredded, a few spars blown away, sailors not as drunken as 2008 however.  The natural resilience of the system once again proven, courtesy of everyone being too stupid to go for a better option.  Would the outcome have been different if the left had disengaged from its traditional collusion with the right and not propped the system up?  Better the devil they know, eh?

Summer I prioritised a more extensive vegetable garden this year, incorporating permaculture strategies and tactics.  Autumn I prioritised maintenance & repair projects, some long-deferred.  This winter I'm writing again – recently an essay on mythistory, framed to fill the gap in Wikipedia where the mythistory page is missing still.  I've put the prototype onsite there, but lack the programming expertise to format it – alas, their prescription is too minimalist by far, the most profound dimensions of the subject will likely be gutted, preliminary advice suggests.  I now await hopefully a kind editor! Meantime, if you are intrigued, you can inform yourself about mythistory here...     http://www.alternativeaotearoa.org/mythistory.html

Leading Edge
avante garde in everyday language  -  signals leadership with cutting-edge effect as primary functions

GetInSync
motivating, directing - signals group cohesion via like-mindedness

goKiwi!
highly motivating, strong common identity with national recognition

evolver
conceptual - signals catalytic effect on society (evolution not revolution)

BetterWay
inspirational alternative - signals a better option than the status quo, for all

Innovator
conceptual, alternative - signals new things happening due to enterprise

concordance
conceptual/experiential, evocative - signals like-mindedness (concord) with flow dynamic (dance)