thedailyblog--2020-07-24--Global survival depends on reason and mutual respect

A UK charity , Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights ( LPHR ) , that works to protect and promote Palestinian human rights and the international rule of law , has recently published its Child Right Bulletin for 1 May-30 June 2020 .
Some examples from the bulletin reveal a little of Israel ’ s contemptuous violations against Palestinian minors , even young children .
A 17-year-old Palestinian was fatally shot in the head with a 0.22-calibre bullet by Israeli forces in Hebron and a 14-year-old boy killed by unexploded Israeli Army ordnance he found and then handled , near his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the West Bank , Israeli soldiers severely beat a 15-year-old boy , breaking his arm and causing abdominal bleeding , while eight Palestinian children were beaten and injured by Israeli Occupation settlers in Jerusalem and the West Bank .
At night , on 3 July in Jenin , Israeli forces , firing stun grenades and tear gas canisters , raided Zububa village , seizing and terrorising for a time 17-year-old : Mujahid Niyaz Jaradat .
On 7 July , a five-year-old child was run over and hospitalised by an Israeli Army vehicle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again in Hebron , an eight-year-old child was run over and hospitalised by an Occupation settler vehicle .
On 17 July , in the evening , a gang , from the Kiryat Arba Israeli Occupation settlement , assaulted a family in Wadi Husei that included women and children , and prevented them from reaching their homes .
This month , up until 20 July , eight Palestinian minors have been abducted by Israeli forces .
On 8 July , handcuffed and with his feet bound to a bed , Palestinian political prisoner and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( aged 75 ) , died , due to medical negligence .
The death occurred at the Israeli Kaplan Medical Centre .
A report by the Addameer Prisoners Support and Human Rights Association reveals that the Israeli Prison Service ( IPS ) deliberately and routinely neglects its duty to provide prisoners with necessary healthcare and hygiene , including the avoidance of overcrowding .
On 21 July , a Palestinian coronavirus testing station , set up at the northern entrance to the West Bank city of Jenin , was destroyed by the Israeli Army @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soldiers had raided both the city and the UN refugee camp , opening fire on residents and wounding one person in the leg .
Construction of the testing station had been going on since March , accompanied by signs explaining the purpose .
Just two days away from opening , the soldiers destroyed it .
International pressure and advocacy are desperately needed if there is to be any hope of stopping Israel from committing acts such as this destruction of a facility designed to save lives .
Between 1 and 20 July ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Palestinian homes and issued demolition orders against several others .
With regard to three of the demolitions , the householders themselves were forced to carry out the destruction , or otherwise be forced to pay an extortionate sum to the Israeli Occupation demolition squads , who would be sent in to do it instead .
In addition to the houses destroyed , 38 Palestinian homes were invaded by Israeli troops , often during the night .
One of the most traumatic violations any family can suffer is home invasion .
It is especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that parents must face with the utmost dread and feelings of helplessness .
This month , up until 20 July , a single missile alone was fired towards the Green Line by Gaza Resistance fighters , with Israel carrying out 28 ceasefire violations , including three hijackings of Palestinian fishing boats , three air strikes and two Israeli Army incursions .
Israeli forces , on 2 July , positioned between al-Nabi Elias and Izbit al-Tabib villages , opened fire towards a special-needs patient , Awis Kamal Mara ’ ba , and took him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ troops , manning a watchtower at the entrance to Kifl Haris , shot two villagers , killing one of them , Ibrahim Mustafa Ibrahim Abu Yaqoub ( 34 ) , while wounding and hospitalising another , Muhammad Abdel Salam Asaad .
According to the Governor of Salfit , the two men were simply walking through the village , when Israeli troops opened fire “ for no reason ” .
On 18 July , two people were wounded by Israeli soldiers invading a home in the Balata UN refugee camp and , the following @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Jenin UN refugee camp .
In addition to all of the above , Palestinians have to suffer the plunder and destruction of their access to water , affecting both supply and storage .
The Israeli Army bulldozes crops , and the settlers set fire to Palestinian olive trees .
Both invade and seize control of Palestinian farmland , whenever they please .
Israel ’ s military Occupation of the West Bank and its criminal violations elsewhere , beyond its borders , bring it close to the epicentre of a global assault on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being perpetrated by the corporate-controlled great powers .
Israel ’ s major ally and financier , the United States of America , is threatening sanctions against members of the International Criminal Court at The Hague , should they investigate possible war crimes by US soldiers .
The US also targets people and organisations that seek to expose and oppose the threats to international security that the US and its friends represent .
Right now , the founder of WikiLeaks , journalist Julian Assange , has had to face trial in London over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the US , where he would face 175 years in gaol .
The US is outraged because Assange has revealed its criminal behaviour and intent .
It is ten years since WikiLeaks published a video of American oldiers , in a helicopter , shooting into a crowd of people in Baghdad .
In all that time , there has been no move to bring the perpetrators to account .
The UK , another US confederate , has imprisoned Assange , not for breaking any law but simply in order to hold him at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pending his desired extradition .
A human rights lawyer and UN Special Rapporteur on Torture since 2016 , Nils Melzer , tells us “ Julian Assange does not have a fair trial in the UK ” .
Speaking as a UK law professor , Melzer says he is shocked to see that “ Julian Assange was not given — and is currently still not being given — adequate access to his lawyers , that he has not been given access to his American lawyers at all although he is threatened with extradition to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has not had access to legal documents for many months.
” Being held in virtual isolation in a prison , Assange ’ s health , and even his life , are facing a growing danger .
Melzer reminds us that this case should serve as a warning .
It is setting a precedent “ with regard to investigative journalism , secrecy and impunity for torture and war crimes around the world .
Firstly , if the United States convicts Julian Assange for espionage , it means that it becomes a crime to expose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US officials .
That is an extremely dangerous precedent because we will then effectively live under censorship.
” Melzer , who served with the International Committee of the Red Cross for 12 years in various zones of conflict , also reminds us that “ the Iraq war was illegal , a war of aggression that led to more than a million people being killed , and millions being displaced and tortured .
So this is not a small case that we ’ re talking about and the implications it has are emblematic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US and Israel WikiLeaks released diplomatic cables related to Israel from 2007 to 2015 , sourced primarily from communications between Washington and the US Embassy in Tel Aviv .
These cables and email messages are now part of the Public Library of US Diplomacy .
They reveal a relationship in which US acquiescence gave Israel ’ s interests and intentions precedence , even in contravention of international humanitarian law .
WikiLeaks makes plain “ the extraordinary extent of Israel ’ s influence over American officials and legislators and their collusion as Israel continually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study , which is extensive and extremely detailed , reveals the intensity of US and Israeli involvement in aggression , oppression and human rights violations .
Paddle Now – uniting for a safer and more humanistic world Hugh Steadman , the spirit behind the New Zealand Paddle Now newsletter , strives to bring us together in support of organisations that are concerned for the future of humanity and of our planet .
Paddle Now reminds us that “ rapid climate change and high-technology warfare are global problems that will not be averted without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its enforcement by multinational institutions designed for the task .
Significant success in these areas is dependent on improved global governance and the strengthening of multinational institutions , such as the United Nations and courts , responsible for the development and implementation of international law.
” Individuals and organisations concerned with combating climate change or the erosion of international law , as well as those working in defence of justice and human rights , are fighting a common cause .
The latest Paddle Now newsletter warns that “ at a time of heightened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is about to be faced with a choice which , if wrong , could well destroy our society.
” Hugh Steadman has written to both Ron Mark and Andrew Little regarding this country ’ s involvement with RIMPAC , the biennial , naval exercise organised by the US Navy ’ s Pacific Command .
Neither politician has replied nor even acknowledged the article sent to them weeks ago .
Steadman warns us that : “ NZ ’ s foreign policy is so secretive and so closed to democratic influence that , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Lange cabinet , including the PM , were aware of the decision to install the Waihopai intelligence gathering station .
It would appear that none of them had a clear idea of what it would involve , nor the extent that it would bind NZ to follow decisions made in Washington.
” In May 1946 , less than a year after the nuclear bombing of Japan , Albert Einstein sent an urgent appeal to prominent Americans , warning that “ the unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unparalleled catastrophe.
” Later , the Russell-Einstein Manifesto posed the question : “ Here , then , is the problem which we present to you , stark and dreadful and inescapable : Shall we put an end to the human race ; or shall mankind renounce war ?
” There is a video , Afghanistan War Exposed : An Imperial Conspiracy , that everyone should see because it is about a war to which New Zealand contributed .
Abby Martin ’ s introduction tells us the video “ covers the whole truth about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ construct of the 80s through to today ’ s senseless stalemate .
Two decades , three administrations , tens of thousands of lives .
It ’ s time to dissociate our country from such involvement.
” Only the greedy and powerful profit from war – and greed blinds the perpetrators to consequences .
There is no absolute democracy .
The degree of justice and human rights we may enjoy depends upon the extent of our vigilance .
With the threat of nuclear annihilation approaching zero hour , the openly insane preachings of some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially when coupled with the downplaying of , the now-acknowledged , accelerating climate change .
Never before has humanity been so technologically-enabled to communicate and unite in demanding respect for each other and for the environment .
Whatever we feel most able to contribute , as individuals – let us now do it , together .

A UK charity, Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights (LPHR), that works to protect and promote Palestinian human rights and the international rule of law, has recently published its Child Right Bulletin for 1 May-30 June 2020. Some examples from the bulletin reveal a little of Israel’s contemptuous violations against Palestinian minors, even young children.
A 17-year-old Palestinian was fatally shot in the head with a 0.22-calibre bullet by Israeli forces in Hebron and a 14-year-old boy killed by unexploded Israeli Army ordnance he found and then handled, near his home in Beit Lahiya, Gaza. In the West Bank, Israeli soldiers severely beat a 15-year-old boy, breaking his arm and causing abdominal bleeding, while eight Palestinian children were beaten and injured by Israeli Occupation settlers in Jerusalem and the West Bank. At night, on 3 July in Jenin, Israeli forces, firing stun grenades and tear gas canisters, raided Zububa village, seizing and terrorising for a time 17-year-old: Mujahid Niyaz Jaradat. On 7 July, a five-year-old child was run over and hospitalised by an Israeli Army vehicle in Hebron and on 20 July, again in Hebron, an eight-year-old child was run over and hospitalised by an Occupation settler vehicle. On 17 July, in the evening, a gang, from the Kiryat Arba Israeli Occupation settlement, assaulted a family in Wadi Husei that included women and children, and prevented them from reaching their homes. This month, up until 20 July, eight Palestinian minors have been abducted by Israeli forces.
Health violations
On 8 July, handcuffed and with his feet bound to a bed, Palestinian political prisoner and cancer patient, Saadi Khalil Mahmoud Al-Gharably (aged 75), died, due to medical negligence. The death occurred at the Israeli Kaplan Medical Centre. A report by the Addameer Prisoners Support and Human Rights Association reveals that the Israeli Prison Service (IPS) deliberately and routinely neglects its duty to provide prisoners with necessary healthcare and hygiene, including the avoidance of overcrowding.
On 21 July, a Palestinian coronavirus testing station, set up at the northern entrance to the West Bank city of Jenin, was destroyed by the Israeli Army. Before destroying the facility, Israeli soldiers had raided both the city and the UN refugee camp, opening fire on residents and wounding one person in the leg. Construction of the testing station had been going on since March, accompanied by signs explaining the purpose. Just two days away from opening, the soldiers destroyed it. International pressure and advocacy are desperately needed if there is to be any hope of stopping Israel from committing acts such as this destruction of a facility designed to save lives.
Homes destroyed
Between 1 and 20 July (inclusive) the Israeli Army destroyed ten Palestinian homes and issued demolition orders against several others. With regard to three of the demolitions, the householders themselves were forced to carry out the destruction, or otherwise be forced to pay an extortionate sum to the Israeli Occupation demolition squads, who would be sent in to do it instead. In addition to the houses destroyed, 38 Palestinian homes were invaded by Israeli troops, often during the night. One of the most traumatic violations any family can suffer is home invasion. It is especially terrifying for the children and an experience that parents must face with the utmost dread and feelings of helplessness.
Gaza ceasefire violations
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
This month, up until 20 July, a single missile alone was fired towards the Green Line by Gaza Resistance fighters, with Israel carrying out 28 ceasefire violations, including three hijackings of Palestinian fishing boats, three air strikes and two Israeli Army incursions.
Shootings
Israeli forces, on 2 July, positioned between al-Nabi Elias and Izbit al-Tabib villages, opened fire towards a special-needs patient, Awis Kamal Mara’ba, and took him prisoner. On 10 July, Occupation troops, manning a watchtower at the entrance to Kifl Haris, shot two villagers, killing one of them, Ibrahim Mustafa Ibrahim Abu Yaqoub (34), while wounding and hospitalising another, Muhammad Abdel Salam Asaad. According to the Governor of Salfit, the two men were simply walking through the village, when Israeli troops opened fire “for no reason”. On 18 July, two people were wounded by Israeli soldiers invading a home in the Balata UN refugee camp and, the following day, another person was wounded in the Jenin UN refugee camp.
In addition to all of the above, Palestinians have to suffer the plunder and destruction of their access to water, affecting both supply and storage. The Israeli Army bulldozes crops, and the settlers set fire to Palestinian olive trees. Both invade and seize control of Palestinian farmland, whenever they please.
US, ICC and Julian Assange
Israel’s military Occupation of the West Bank and its criminal violations elsewhere, beyond its borders, bring it close to the epicentre of a global assault on freedom and respect for international humanitarian law being perpetrated by the corporate-controlled great powers. Israel’s major ally and financier, the United States of America, is threatening sanctions against members of the International Criminal Court at The Hague, should they investigate possible war crimes by US soldiers. The US also targets people and organisations that seek to expose and oppose the threats to international security that the US and its friends represent. Right now, the founder of WikiLeaks, journalist Julian Assange, has had to face trial in London over the US demand that he be extradited to the US, where he would face 175 years in gaol. The US is outraged because Assange has revealed its criminal behaviour and intent. It is ten years since WikiLeaks published a video of American soldiers, in a helicopter, shooting into a crowd of people in Baghdad. In all that time, there has been no move to bring the perpetrators to account.
The UK, another US confederate, has imprisoned Assange, not for breaking any law but simply in order to hold him at the pleasure of the United States, pending his desired extradition. A human rights lawyer and UN Special Rapporteur on Torture since 2016, Nils Melzer, tells us “Julian Assange does not have a fair trial in the UK”. Speaking as a UK law professor, Melzer says he is shocked to see that “Julian Assange was not given — and is currently still not being given — adequate access to his lawyers, that he has not been given access to his American lawyers at all although he is threatened with extradition to the United States, and that he has not had access to legal documents for many months.” Being held in virtual isolation in a prison, Assange’s health, and even his life, are facing a growing danger.
Melzer reminds us that this case should serve as a warning. It is setting a precedent “with regard to investigative journalism, secrecy and impunity for torture and war crimes around the world. Firstly, if the United States convicts Julian Assange for espionage, it means that it becomes a crime to expose secret evidence for serious crimes committed by US officials. That is an extremely dangerous precedent because we will then effectively live under censorship.” Melzer, who served with the International Committee of the Red Cross for 12 years in various zones of conflict, also reminds us that “the Iraq war was illegal, a war of aggression that led to more than a million people being killed, and millions being displaced and tortured. So this is not a small case that we’re talking about and the implications it has are emblematic and of global proportions.”
WikiLeaks, the US and Israel
WikiLeaks released diplomatic cables related to Israel from 2007 to 2015, sourced primarily from communications between Washington and the US Embassy in Tel Aviv. These cables and email messages are now part of the Public Library of US Diplomacy. They reveal a relationship in which US acquiescence gave Israel’s interests and intentions precedence, even in contravention of international humanitarian law. WikiLeaks makes plain “the extraordinary extent of Israel’s influence over American officials and legislators and their collusion as Israel continually resorts to violence against Palestinians.” The study, which is extensive and extremely detailed, reveals the intensity of US and Israeli involvement in aggression, oppression and human rights violations.
Paddle Now – uniting for a safer and more humanistic world
Hugh Steadman, the spirit behind the New Zealand Paddle Now newsletter, strives to bring us together in support of organisations that are concerned for the future of humanity and of our planet. Paddle Now reminds us that “rapid climate change and high-technology warfare are global problems that will not be averted without the further development of international law and its enforcement by multinational institutions designed for the task. Significant success in these areas is dependent on improved global governance and the strengthening of multinational institutions, such as the United Nations and courts, responsible for the development and implementation of international law.” Individuals and organisations concerned with combating climate change or the erosion of international law, as well as those working in defence of justice and human rights, are fighting a common cause.
The latest Paddle Now newsletter warns that “at a time of heightened international tension and nuclear danger, NZ is about to be faced with a choice which, if wrong, could well destroy our society.” Hugh Steadman has written to both Ron Mark and Andrew Little regarding this country’s involvement with RIMPAC, the biennial, naval exercise organised by the US Navy’s Pacific Command. Neither politician has replied nor even acknowledged the article sent to them weeks ago. Steadman warns us that:
“NZ’s foreign policy is so secretive and so closed to democratic influence that, according to Geoffrey Palmer, only three members of the Lange cabinet, including the PM, were aware of the decision to install the Waihopai intelligence gathering station. It would appear that none of them had a clear idea of what it would involve, nor the extent that it would bind NZ to follow decisions made in Washington.”
In May 1946, less than a year after the nuclear bombing of Japan, Albert Einstein sent an urgent appeal to prominent Americans, warning that “the unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking and we thus drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.” Later, the Russell-Einstein Manifesto posed the question: “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”
There is a video, Afghanistan War Exposed: An Imperial Conspiracy, that everyone should see because it is about a war to which New Zealand contributed. Abby Martin’s introduction tells us the video “covers the whole truth about the Afghanistan War, from the CIA construct of the 80s through to today’s senseless stalemate. Two decades, three administrations, tens of thousands of lives. It’s time to dissociate our country from such involvement.”
Serve need, not greed
Only the greedy and powerful profit from war – and greed blinds the perpetrators to consequences. There is no absolute democracy. The degree of justice and human rights we may enjoy depends upon the extent of our vigilance. With the threat of nuclear annihilation approaching zero hour, the openly insane preachings of some world leaders make a mockery of reason, especially when coupled with the downplaying of, the now-acknowledged, accelerating climate change.
Never before has humanity been so technologically-enabled to communicate and unite in demanding respect for each other and for the environment. Whatever we feel most able to contribute, as individuals – let us now do it, together.


thedailyblog--2020-07-27--Killing The Nats With, Of All Things, Kindness.

WHY ARE THE RIGHT so very , very frightened of Jacinda Ardern ?
Are the fears of the Mike Hoskings of this world driven solely by the fact that she is a woman ?
Or , is it about something deeper than that ?
Is it actually driven by the fact that , as a woman , she is given the cultural space to deploy ideas which would , were she a man , be denied her ?
From the moment she became New Zealand ’ s prime minister in 2017 , Jacinda ’ s signature theme has been “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absolutely nothing to stop a male politician from adopting the theme of “ kindness ” as his own .
The fact that so few – anywhere around the world – have done so is , however , instructive .
To elevate kindness and compassion over all the other traditional political virtues , such as strength , sound judgement and decisiveness , is not something 999 out of 1,000 male politicians would do .
Why not ?
Because in the minds of far too many voters such a move would be interpreted as effeminate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ David Cunliffe ?
With rare emotional honesty , he responded to the shocking domestic violence statistics presented to him at a conference of Women ’ s Refuges by telling the assembled delegates that there were times when he was “ sorry I ’ m a man ” .
How well I recall the evening of the day he uttered those words .
My drinking companions , all of them good , card-carrying “ progressives ” , had their heads in the hands .
Male or female – it made no difference – everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s heartfelt admission would sink Labour ’ s campaign .
Socialists , feminists , socialist-feminists : we all knew that no New Zealand male , much less one intent on becoming prime minister , could so openly cast aspersions upon Kiwi masculinity and be forgiven .
So ingrained is this fear of being branded weak and effeminate that even female politicians have made it their business to present themselves as the best man for the job .
Golda Meir , Indira Gandhi , Margaret Thatcher , Jenny Shipley and even Labour ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worked tirelessly to come across as tough , strong , decisive and , yes , ruthless politicians .
Each of them , in their own way , echoed the words of Shakespeare ’ s Lady Macbeth : That tend on mortal thoughts , unsex me here , And fill me , from the crown to the toe , top-full Stop up the access and passage to remorse , That no compunctious visitings of nature Shake my fell purpose , nor keep peace between The effect and it !
Come to my woman ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gall , you murdering ministers , Wherever in your sightless substances You wait upon nature ’ s mischief !
Come , thick night , And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell , That my keen knife see not the wound it makes , Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark , Tellingly , it is no great stretch to imagine Judith “ Crusher ” Collins smiling grimly at Lady Macbeth ’ s terrifying repudiation of the feminine .
Equally tellingly , it is impossible to credibly attribute such sentiments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s refusal to “ thicken her blood ” that has caused such fright among the Right .
In spite of its apologists ’ protestations to the contrary , managing the neoliberal order requires very thick blood indeed .
And although neoliberals would recoil from the description , “ direst cruelty ” is precisely what the free market inflicts upon those lacking the resources to engage with it successfully .
In other words , neoliberalism is the antithesis of everything that has traditionally been associated with the feminine aspects of human nature .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ : such qualities have no place in the neoliberal order .
When Jacinda proclaimed her determination to practice the “ politics of kindness ” , she was , wittingly or unwittingly , raising a revolutionary banner .
Jacinda ’ s response to the Covid-19 Pandemic has proved particularly difficult for the neoliberal order to swallow .
Her refusal to place the needs of the few ahead of the needs of the many continues to enrage its defenders .
For the first time in 35 years , the New Zealand State has told its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , bankers and landlord ’ s ; that their interests must take second place to those of ordinary working-class New Zealanders .
Billions have been – and continue to be – spent to keep the nation ’ s households functioning .
Rights have been constrained , not , this time , in the name of “ labour market flexibility ” , but in order to keep the whole population safe .
For the first time in a long time , the New Zealand government has instructed its people to be something other than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time in a long time , it has asked them to treat each other with “ kindness ” .
The Mike Hoskings of this world are telling New Zealanders not to believe the numbers thrown up by Newshub ’ s Reid Research poll .
They simply can not accept that the social solidarity which was asked for , and given , during the period of Lockdown has paid such handsome political dividends .
Clearly , they are no historians .
Eighty-two years ago , an equally flinty-faced National Party described Labour ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
The Prime Minister , Mickey Savage , responded that all his government was offering the people of New Zealand was “ applied Christianity ” .
Mickey could say this , of course , with complete confidence .
New Zealanders in the 1930s were an actively Christian people .
The injunction to “ love they neighbour as thyself ” constituted the beating heart of the Christian religion .
“ Humbug !
” cried the capitalists .
“ Amen !
” shouted just about everybody else .
The secret of Christianity ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ integrate its unashamedly feminine values with the all-too-masculine impulses of the classical and feudal regimes it tamed and civilised .
For two millennia , frustrated patriarchs have railed against the womanly weakness of this “ slave religion ” .
Everyone from Gibbon to Nietzsche has lamented its tendency to soften and re-direct the all-important will to power that makes societies such wonderful places for men to live in .
New Zealand is no longer the Christian country it was in Mickey Savage ’ s time , but “ kindness ” makes a pretty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonetheless .
I strongly suspect that Jacinda knows to the decimal point the mighty harvest of votes her predecessor reaped in the general election of 1938 .
The 55.8 percent given to Labour for its “ applied Christianity ” isn ’ t far off the 60 percent currently being offered for Jacinda ’ s “ kindness ” .
Right now , though , I ’ m pretty sure our young prime minister , who is modelling a whole new way for women to do politics in the Twenty-First century , would happily accept @ @ @

WHY ARE THE RIGHT so very, very frightened of Jacinda Ardern? Are the fears of the Mike Hoskings of this world driven solely by the fact that she is a woman? Or, is it about something deeper than that? Is it actually driven by the fact that, as a woman, she is given the cultural space to deploy ideas which would, were she a man, be denied her?
From the moment she became New Zealand’s prime minister in 2017, Jacinda’s signature theme has been “kindness”. Theoretically, there is absolutely nothing to stop a male politician from adopting the theme of “kindness” as his own. The fact that so few – anywhere around the world – have done so is, however, instructive. To elevate kindness and compassion over all the other traditional political virtues, such as strength, sound judgement and decisiveness, is not something 999 out of 1,000 male politicians would do. Why not? Because in the minds of far too many voters such a move would be interpreted as effeminate and weak.
Recall the fate of David Cunliffe? With rare emotional honesty, he responded to the shocking domestic violence statistics presented to him at a conference of Women’s Refuges by telling the assembled delegates that there were times when he was “sorry I’m a man”. How well I recall the evening of the day he uttered those words. My drinking companions, all of them good, card-carrying “progressives”, had their heads in the hands. Male or female – it made no difference – everyone around the table knew that Cunliffe’s heartfelt admission would sink Labour’s campaign. Socialists, feminists, socialist-feminists: we all knew that no New Zealand male, much less one intent on becoming prime minister, could so openly cast aspersions upon Kiwi masculinity and be forgiven.
So ingrained is this fear of being branded weak and effeminate that even female politicians have made it their business to present themselves as the best man for the job. Golda Meir, Indira Gandhi, Margaret Thatcher, Jenny Shipley and even Labour’s own Helen Clark: all of them worked tirelessly to come across as tough, strong, decisive and, yes, ruthless politicians. Each of them, in their own way, echoed the words of Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth:
Come you spirits
That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
And fill me, from the crown to the toe, top-full
Of direst cruelty! Make thick my blood,
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Stop up the access and passage to remorse,
That no compunctious visitings of nature
Shake my fell purpose, nor keep peace between
The effect and it! Come to my woman’s breasts
And take my milk for gall, you murdering ministers,
Wherever in your sightless substances
You wait upon nature’s mischief! Come, thick night,
And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell,
That my keen knife see not the wound it makes,
Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark,
To cry ‘Hold, hold!’
Tellingly, it is no great stretch to imagine Judith “Crusher” Collins smiling grimly at Lady Macbeth’s terrifying repudiation of the feminine. Equally tellingly, it is impossible to credibly attribute such sentiments to Jacinda Ardern.
It is Jacinda’s refusal to “thicken her blood” that has caused such fright among the Right. In spite of its apologists’ protestations to the contrary, managing the neoliberal order requires very thick blood indeed. And although neoliberals would recoil from the description, “direst cruelty” is precisely what the free market inflicts upon those lacking the resources to engage with it successfully. In other words, neoliberalism is the antithesis of everything that has traditionally been associated with the feminine aspects of human nature. Kindness and compassion, nurturance and inclusiveness: such qualities have no place in the neoliberal order. When Jacinda proclaimed her determination to practice the “politics of kindness”, she was, wittingly or unwittingly, raising a revolutionary banner.
Jacinda’s response to the Covid-19 Pandemic has proved particularly difficult for the neoliberal order to swallow. Her refusal to place the needs of the few ahead of the needs of the many continues to enrage its defenders. For the first time in 35 years, the New Zealand State has told its business people: it’s employers, bankers and landlord’s; that their interests must take second place to those of ordinary working-class New Zealanders. Billions have been – and continue to be – spent to keep the nation’s households functioning. Rights have been constrained, not, this time, in the name of “labour market flexibility”, but in order to keep the whole population safe. For the first time in a long time, the New Zealand government has instructed its people to be something other than “competitive”. For the first time in a long time, it has asked them to treat each other with “kindness”.
The Mike Hoskings of this world are telling New Zealanders not to believe the numbers thrown up by Newshub’s Reid Research poll. They simply cannot accept that the social solidarity which was asked for, and given, during the period of Lockdown has paid such handsome political dividends. Clearly, they are no historians.
Eighty-two years ago, an equally flinty-faced National Party described Labour’s Social Security legislation as “applied lunacy”. The Prime Minister, Mickey Savage, responded that all his government was offering the people of New Zealand was “applied Christianity”. Mickey could say this, of course, with complete confidence. New Zealanders in the 1930s were an actively Christian people. The injunction to “love they neighbour as thyself” constituted the beating heart of the Christian religion. “Humbug!” cried the capitalists. “Amen!” shouted just about everybody else.
The secret of Christianity’s power has always been its capacity to integrate its unashamedly feminine values with the all-too-masculine impulses of the classical and feudal regimes it tamed and civilised. For two millennia, frustrated patriarchs have railed against the womanly weakness of this “slave religion”. Everyone from Gibbon to Nietzsche has lamented its tendency to soften and re-direct the all-important will to power that makes societies such wonderful places for men to live in.
New Zealand is no longer the Christian country it was in Mickey Savage’s time, but “kindness” makes a pretty good substitute for “applied Christianity” nonetheless. I strongly suspect that Jacinda knows to the decimal point the mighty harvest of votes her predecessor reaped in the general election of 1938. The 55.8 percent given to Labour for its “applied Christianity” isn’t far off the 60 percent currently being offered for Jacinda’s “kindness”. Right now, though, I’m pretty sure our young prime minister, who is modelling a whole new way for women to do politics in the Twenty-First century, would happily accept either figure!


thedailyblog--2020-07-26--Dr Liz Gordon: Rethinking education

Dr Liz Gordon: Rethinking education

On Saturday I attended the Alternative Aotearoa meeting in Wellington .
This was a fantastic event , organised by my friend and fellow Daily Blogger John Minto .
I think what stood out for me was the large number of young people , pākeha , Māori and Pacifica who spoke passionately about the need for change in so many aspects of New Zealand life .
For me , my eight minutes of fame were about rethinking education for the future .
I talked first about neoliberalism , and the work I have done over more than 30 years to rein @ @ @ @ @ @ @ user pays approach to our education system .
But I also reminded people that before neoliberalism , our education system was far from perfect .
Māori , women , people of other cultures and the poor failed to achieve in an education system that was hierarchical , narrow and exclusionary .
I said that is quite ironic that protest action had focused on things like pulling down statues as the obvious markers of colonialism , when one effigy right in front of all our eyes , and within all of our experiences , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ colonialist and affects the opportunities of every child , enhancing some and depressing others .
What is education for ?
We imported lock , stock and barrel , a compulsory schooling system from the United Kingdom that encapsulated the system of class and privilege from that country .
There are many examples of this .
Why , for example , are school uniforms of a particular type , blazer , shirt , tie ?
Who wears such attire in the real world ?
Why are schooling systems so hierarchical , with models of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prison than to children ?
Where a boy can be stood down merely for having hair that curls on his collar ?
Where a person can be expelled for having a disability ?
Attempts to import low level initiatives into schools through restorative practices have generally fallen on fallow ground , with some notable exceptions .
This is because such practices , which promote low-level interventions rather than top-down discipline , are out of synch with the overall structure of the school .
Attempts to implement restorative systems always lead to active resistance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a ‘ default ’ ( disciplinary ) mode by others , with the rest embracing the system .
Even though these systems work brilliantly in calming classrooms and reducing punishment , there is far from a whole of system buy-in .
And the system is so exclusionary .
Children who do something wrong or even who have disabilities can be chucked out of school with a label that makes them suffer a life sentence of a lack of education .
Also , those who may need education the most tend to get it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race privilege is undeniable , but does it reflect some true hierarchy of ‘ ability ’ or some structuring of the schooling system ?
The latter , of course , as educational research always shows .
Bullying in schools also needs to be recognised as something produced by the school rather than imported by bad children .
The pinnacle of the type of system we have here in New Zealand is England ’ s public schools which , until not that many years ago , encouraged a system of ‘ fagging ’ where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ students , abiding by their will .
While the practice has stopped ( oh , the abuse it caused ! )
, the bullying of younger by older , powerless by powerful and browner by whiter still exists in practice .
Research done by Adrienne Alton-Lee and Graham Nuttall in New Zealand classrooms years ago noted the casual racism , sexism and bullying that went on just below the surface of classroom life .
The alternative view of schooling is that it should be a system that promotes the best learning of every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other barriers to learning .
What if , instead of excluding , judging , failing and bullying , our schools were opened up as places where each person ’ s human potential was maximised , their talents uncovered , their barriers to learning dissolved , their hopes and dream encouraged and where the community of the school was completely supportive .
Our schooling system is an edifice of colonialism .
The system forces good people , teachers and students , into poor practices that block opportunities and can make life a misery .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ others are left with no clear path to good futures .
For those who do not get a slice of the education cake , their whole lives can be beset by underachievement .
The school system that we have is built on a colonial legacy that has determined that there be a hierarchy of human achievement based on pre-existing structures of class , race and ethnicity .
We need a vision of whole-of-system educational reform to unleash the potential of all of us .
New Zealand has eradicated Covid here .
Our team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Let ’ s put our focus on improving our children ’ s outcomes .
Here is an election challenge for the Labour Party , which has so far failed to show leadership towards a system that truly promotes education for all .
Dr Liz Gordon is a researcher and a barrister , with interests in destroying neo-liberalism in all its forms and moving towards a socially just society .
She usually blogs on justice , social welfare and education topics .

On Saturday I attended the Alternative Aotearoa meeting in Wellington. This was a fantastic event, organised by my friend and fellow Daily Blogger John Minto. I think what stood out for me was the large number of young people, pākeha, Māori and Pacifica who spoke passionately about the need for change in so many aspects of New Zealand life.
For me, my eight minutes of fame were about rethinking education for the future. I talked first about neoliberalism, and the work I have done over more than 30 years to rein back the competition, marketisation, and user pays approach to our education system.
But I also reminded people that before neoliberalism, our education system was far from perfect. Māori, women, people of other cultures and the poor failed to achieve in an education system that was hierarchical, narrow and exclusionary.
I said that is quite ironic that protest action had focused on things like pulling down statues as the obvious markers of colonialism, when one effigy right in front of all our eyes, and within all of our experiences, is a system of schooling that is colonialist and affects the opportunities of every child, enhancing some and depressing others.
What is education for? We imported lock, stock and barrel, a compulsory schooling system from the United Kingdom that encapsulated the system of class and privilege from that country. There are many examples of this. Why, for example, are school uniforms of a particular type, blazer, shirt, tie? Who wears such attire in the real world?
Why are schooling systems so hierarchical, with models of discipline more appropriate to the Army or prison than to children? Where a boy can be stood down merely for having hair that curls on his collar? Where a person can be expelled for having a disability?
Attempts to import low level initiatives into schools through restorative practices have generally fallen on fallow ground, with some notable exceptions. This is because such practices, which promote low-level interventions rather than top-down discipline, are out of synch with the overall structure of the school. Attempts to implement restorative systems always lead to active resistance by some teachers, falling back into a ‘default’ (disciplinary) mode by others, with the rest embracing the system. Even though these systems work brilliantly in calming classrooms and reducing punishment, there is far from a whole of system buy-in.
And the system is so exclusionary. Children who do something wrong or even who have disabilities can be chucked out of school with a label that makes them suffer a life sentence of a lack of education. Also, those who may need education the most tend to get it least. The link between class and race privilege is undeniable, but does it reflect some true hierarchy of ‘ability’ or some structuring of the schooling system? The latter, of course, as educational research always shows.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Bullying in schools also needs to be recognised as something produced by the school rather than imported by bad children. The pinnacle of the type of system we have here in New Zealand is England’s public schools which, until not that many years ago, encouraged a system of ‘fagging’ where younger children became the slaves of senior students, abiding by their will. While the practice has stopped (oh, the abuse it caused!), the bullying of younger by older, powerless by powerful and browner by whiter still exists in practice.
Research done by Adrienne Alton-Lee and Graham Nuttall in New Zealand classrooms years ago noted the casual racism, sexism and bullying that went on just below the surface of classroom life.
The alternative view of schooling is that it should be a system that promotes the best learning of every person, including those with disabilities and other barriers to learning. What if, instead of excluding, judging, failing and bullying, our schools were opened up as places where each person’s human potential was maximised, their talents uncovered, their barriers to learning dissolved, their hopes and dream encouraged and where the community of the school was completely supportive.
Our schooling system is an edifice of colonialism. The system forces good people, teachers and students, into poor practices that block opportunities and can make life a misery. While the system fertilises many lives, others are left with no clear path to good futures. For those who do not get a slice of the education cake, their whole lives can be beset by underachievement.
The school system that we have is built on a colonial legacy that has determined that there be a hierarchy of human achievement based on pre-existing structures of class, race and ethnicity. We need a vision of whole-of-system educational reform to unleash the potential of all of us. New Zealand has eradicated Covid here. Our team of five million can do anything! Let’s put our focus on improving our children’s outcomes. Here is an election challenge for the Labour Party, which has so far failed to show leadership towards a system that truly promotes education for all.
Dr Liz Gordon is a researcher and a barrister, with interests in destroying neo-liberalism in all its forms and moving towards a socially just society. She usually blogs on justice, social welfare and education topics.


thedailyblog--2020-07-28--To stop exploitation “ordinarily resident” New Zealanders need permanent residence

Unite Union National Director Mike Treen says he welcomes the changes made to combat migrant workers exploitation .
It will make it easiest for individual workers to access the support they need to make complaints .
get support and change employers if necessary .
However , over the last few decades New Zealand has created a system that creates exploitation again and again .
That system used the desire of residency to : – Bring students and workers to New Zealand and charge them tens of thousands of dollars in fees to subsidise private and public education , – Allow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get to individual employers so it was im [ possible to complain about treatment without risking their chance to get residency – Change the rules on who qualifies for permanent residence after they have come to New Zealand so that they will never qualify and all they can do is keep renewing their visas for as long as possible .
These are effectively de-facto New Zealander who have made New Zealand their home for a decade or more .
Many have children born in New Zealand who know no other life .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasonable world would be considered “ essential workers ” .
They are working in health care , on our farms , in our schools .
They continue to fill critical roles in our society .
Employers want these workers to stay .
Now many of these workers are classified as “ ordinarily resident ” New Zealanders by the outgoing Minister of Immigration Iain lees-Galloway .
they are the next category to be allowed back into New Zealand after New Zealand cirtzens who want to return are allowed back .
In my view , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have been allowed to become citizens in any fair immigration system and not exploited by the system in the way they have .
They deserve to be treated the same as any other citizen .
Every migrant worker who is currently an “ ordinarily resident ” New Zealander should be fast-tracked to residency and taken off any visa that ties them to a particular employer .
The system of exploitation and indentured servitude has to be abolished .
New Zealand will not be able to bring in temporary workers or students for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this Pandemic circles the globe .
We have a chance to get rid of a system that depends on a permanent presence of hundreds of thousands of “ temporary ” visa holders with no hope of transitioning to residency once and for all .
This is a chance in a generation to do the right thing to those who have been so cruelly exploited and abused by the state as well as private employers .

Unite Union National Director Mike Treen says he welcomes the changes made to combat migrant workers exploitation.
It will make it easiest for individual workers to access the support they need to make complaints. get support and change employers if necessary.
However, over the last few decades New Zealand has created a system that creates exploitation again and again.
That system used the desire of residency to:
– Bring students and workers to New Zealand and charge them tens of thousands of dollars in fees to subsidise private and public education,
– Allow employers to tie the work visas they get to individual employers so it was im[possible to complain about treatment without risking their chance to get residency
– Change the rules on who qualifies for permanent residence after they have come to New Zealand so that they will never qualify and all they can do is keep renewing their visas for as long as possible.
These are effectively de-facto New Zealander who have made New Zealand their home for a decade or more. Many have children born in New Zealand who know no other life.
They also obviously have jobs that in any reasonable world would be considered “essential workers”. They are working in health care, on our farms, in our schools. They continue to fill critical roles in our society.
Employers want these workers to stay.
Now many of these workers are classified as “ordinarily resident” New Zealanders by the outgoing Minister of Immigration Iain lees-Galloway. they are the next category to be allowed back into New Zealand after New Zealand cirtzens who want to return are allowed back.
In my view, these “ordinarily resident” New Zealanders would have been allowed to become citizens in any fair immigration system and not exploited by the system in the way they have. They deserve to be treated the same as any other citizen.
Every migrant worker who is currently an “ordinarily resident” New Zealander should be fast-tracked to residency and taken off any visa that ties them to a particular employer.
The system of exploitation and indentured servitude has to be abolished.
New Zealand will not be able to bring in temporary workers or students for at least four or five years while this Pandemic circles the globe.
We have a chance to get rid of a system that depends on a permanent presence of hundreds of thousands of “temporary” visa holders with no hope of transitioning to residency once and for all.
This is a chance in a generation to do the right thing to those who have been so cruelly exploited and abused by the state as well as private employers.


Arguing About China

ARGUING ABOUT CHINA is fast becoming a “ thing ” – especially on the Left .
On one side stand the old-timers , derided by some as “ tankies ” , who grew up during the first Cold War and are deeply troubled by the increasingly reckless , United States-led campaign to create a second .
On the other side stand the defenders of human rights and democracy , the people who will not countenance any attempt to intrude economic , diplomatic or military considerations into their quest for liberty .
These are the people for whom the ancient cry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though the heavens fall !
” was invented .
Given the obvious dangers associated with deliberately heightening the tensions between the Peoples Republic of China and the “ Five Eyes ” anglophone association of the USA , the UK , Canada , Australia and ( reluctantly ) New Zealand , it seems only prudent to test the moral consistency of the Human Rights and Democracy Camp ’ s position .
How much , exactly , are they willing to give up for the liberal-democratic values they are so determined to promote ?
Let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the average Westerner ’ s heart – the miraculous technology that connects and transports them to the rest of the world .
Since most of the world ’ s “ Rare Earths ” , those incredibly scarce and valuable minerals that make our cutting-edge technology function , are sourced from China , are the liberal-democrats willing to stop using their miracle machines until the Chinese Communist Party is dethroned ?
Not fair ?
Okay .
Let ’ s bring it all back home .
New Zealand ’ s Five Eyes “ partners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Wellington to join them in “ decoupling ” this country ’ s 5G network from the Chinese IT flagship Huawei .
If the government buckles and Huawei is banned in New Zealand ( as it has just been banned in the UK ) and the CCP retaliates by banning New Zealand ’ s dairying flagship , Fonterra , from operating in China , will the Human Rights and Democracy Camp accept the resulting domestic economic hardship as the price to be paid for standing up to Chinese tyranny ?
And what will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s position be if , emboldened by their success over Huawei , our Five Eyes partners insist that New Zealand join with Australia in lifting its defence expenditure to a minimum of 2 percent of GDP ?
Are these stalwart champions of liberal-democracy willing to see the billions of dollars currently earmarked for schools , hospitals and fighting climate-change redirected to fighter-jets , frigates and submarines ?
Will this , too , be accepted as the price of securing regime change in Beijing ?
Following the logic of this new Cold War , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prepared to accommodate something similar to the sharp shift to the political right that accompanied the onset of the first Cold War in the late-1940s and early-1950s ?
Will they , as so many “ liberal-democrats ” did in the face of the “ red scare ” and the McCarthyite witch-hunts , look the other way as artists , writers , journalists and trade unionists are accused of being communist agents of the People ’ s Republic and transformed overnight into jobless , friendless political pariahs ?
Will they , too , embrace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democracy in the name of promoting human rights and democracy ?
Following this descending geopolitical staircase to its dark terminus , will our by now fully-paid-up New Cold Warriors remain silent as their government ranges itself alongside a United States determined to “ face down ” the Chinese communist tyrants regardless of the cost ?
Will they be content to leave the management of this confrontation to a US President who , unlike Jack Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 , possesses no personal experience of war and insufficient intellectual resources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his Joint Chiefs of Staff ?
Will they simply hope that the Chinese – as they did 160 years ago – reluctantly surrender their sovereignty to the West ’ s superior firepower ?
And what will they tell their children and grandchildren as intercontinental ballistic missiles and their multi-megaton nuclear payloads start criss-crossing the Pacific ?
That they made sure that justice was done – even at the cost of setting the heavens on fire , bringing down human civilisation and condemning their families to a lingering death from radiation among the ruins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argument in favour of craven appeasement ?
According to its logic , wouldn ’ t Britain have been wiser to allow Adolf Hitler free-rein in Europe ?
Aren ’ t we “ tankies ” , like the despised Neville Chamberlain , pursuing peace at any price ?
The comparison is , of course , entirely spurious .
In 1938 , neither the UK nor Nazi Germany possessed nuclear weapons .
Had they done so , the diplomatic and military calculations of the 1920s and 30s would have been made using the same formulae @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joseph Stalin was , after all , every bit as foul a villain as Hitler , and just as worthy of destruction .
But , once his Soviet Union acquired atomic and hydrogen bombs , the costs of making war on it far exceeded any possible benefits – up to and including human rights and democracy !
There ’ s not much call for either in the irradiated wastelands that follow the mutual and assured destruction of a nuclear exchange .
We tankies would like nothing more than to see a China in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down deep roots .
We are simply doubtful that either goal can be achieved when the US Secretary of State , Mike Pompeo , is openly declaring his determination to force regime change in Beijing .
The policy we much prefer is the policy that took the heat ( so to speak ) out of the first Cold War : “ Peaceful Co-existence ” .
Only when the Chinese Communist Party no longer views the US and its allies as an existential threat will it be possible to resume a meaningful dialogue about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republic of China .
While the Five Eyes powers brazenly advance the diplomatic , economic and military containment of China – also known as the “ Indo-Pacific Strategy ” – such a dialogue is impossible .
New Zealand ’ s own relationship with China might , however , be salvageable if our own Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade was willing to equip its minister , Winston Peters , with a few facts .
In relation to Hong Kong , for example , it would have been immensely helpful for the New Zealand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attention to Article 23 of the 1997 treaty by which the UK returned Hong Kong to China as a Special Administrative Region .
The article states : “ The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason , secession , sedition , subversion against the Central People ’ s Government , or theft of state secrets , to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region , and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” In other words , legislating for the protection of national security – the very action our Foreign Minister is decrying – was specifically provided for in the Basic Law of the Hong Kong SAR more than 20 years ago .
( Hat-tip to Mike Smith for drawing Article 23 to my attention . )
All that has changed since the West happily signed-off on Article 23 is that China has grown stronger .
That strength has helped to make New Zealand a more prosperous country .
In joining the reckless efforts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Eyes powers to contain and weaken China we will do nothing to strengthen human rights and democracy in that country and may , by heeding the dangerous counsels of coercion , end up weakening them in our own .
Just months before he was assassinated , President John F. Kennedy addressed the students of the American University in Washington .
What he said then is as relevant to international relations today as it was in 1963 : “ So , let us not be blind to our differences , but let us also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the means by which those differences can be resolved .
And if we can not end now our differences , at least we can help make the world safe for diversity .
For , in the final analysis , our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet .
We all breathe the same air .
We all cherish our children ’ s future .
And we are all mortal .
”

ARGUING ABOUT CHINA is fast becoming a “thing” – especially on the Left. On one side stand the old-timers, derided by some as “tankies”, who grew up during the first Cold War and are deeply troubled by the increasingly reckless, United States-led campaign to create a second. On the other side stand the defenders of human rights and democracy, the people who will not countenance any attempt to intrude economic, diplomatic or military considerations into their quest for liberty. These are the people for whom the ancient cry: “Let justice be done, though the heavens fall!” was invented.
Given the obvious dangers associated with deliberately heightening the tensions between the Peoples Republic of China and the “Five Eyes” anglophone association of the USA, the UK, Canada, Australia and (reluctantly) New Zealand, it seems only prudent to test the moral consistency of the Human Rights and Democracy Camp’s position. How much, exactly, are they willing to give up for the liberal-democratic values they are so determined to promote?
Let’s begin with something very close to the average Westerner’s heart – the miraculous technology that connects and transports them to the rest of the world. Since most of the world’s “Rare Earths”, those incredibly scarce and valuable minerals that make our cutting-edge technology function, are sourced from China, are the liberal-democrats willing to stop using their miracle machines until the Chinese Communist Party is dethroned?
Not fair? Okay. Let’s bring it all back home.
New Zealand’s Five Eyes “partners” are currently putting very heavy pressure on Wellington to join them in “decoupling” this country’s 5G network from the Chinese IT flagship Huawei. If the government buckles and Huawei is banned in New Zealand (as it has just been banned in the UK) and the CCP retaliates by banning New Zealand’s dairying flagship, Fonterra, from operating in China, will the Human Rights and Democracy Camp accept the resulting domestic economic hardship as the price to be paid for standing up to Chinese tyranny?
And what will the Human Rights and Democracy Camp’s position be if, emboldened by their success over Huawei, our Five Eyes partners insist that New Zealand join with Australia in lifting its defence expenditure to a minimum of 2 percent of GDP? Are these stalwart champions of liberal-democracy willing to see the billions of dollars currently earmarked for schools, hospitals and fighting climate-change redirected to fighter-jets, frigates and submarines? Will this, too, be accepted as the price of securing regime change in Beijing?
Following the logic of this new Cold War, is the Human Rights and Democracy Camp prepared to accommodate something similar to the sharp shift to the political right that accompanied the onset of the first Cold War in the late-1940s and early-1950s? Will they, as so many “liberal-democrats” did in the face of the “red scare” and the McCarthyite witch-hunts, look the other way as artists, writers, journalists and trade unionists are accused of being communist agents of the People’s Republic and transformed overnight into jobless, friendless political pariahs? Will they, too, embrace the paradox of trashing human rights and democracy in the name of promoting human rights and democracy?
Following this descending geopolitical staircase to its dark terminus, will our by now fully-paid-up New Cold Warriors remain silent as their government ranges itself alongside a United States determined to “face down” the Chinese communist tyrants regardless of the cost? Will they be content to leave the management of this confrontation to a US President who, unlike Jack Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, possesses no personal experience of war and insufficient intellectual resources to test and challenge the advice of his Joint Chiefs of Staff? Will they simply hope that the Chinese – as they did 160 years ago – reluctantly surrender their sovereignty to the West’s superior firepower? And what will they tell their children and grandchildren as intercontinental ballistic missiles and their multi-megaton nuclear payloads start criss-crossing the Pacific? That they made sure that justice was done – even at the cost of setting the heavens on fire, bringing down human civilisation and condemning their families to a lingering death from radiation among the ruins?
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
But isn’t this an argument in favour of craven appeasement? According to its logic, wouldn’t Britain have been wiser to allow Adolf Hitler free-rein in Europe? Aren’t we “tankies”, like the despised Neville Chamberlain, pursuing peace at any price?
The comparison is, of course, entirely spurious. In 1938, neither the UK nor Nazi Germany possessed nuclear weapons. Had they done so, the diplomatic and military calculations of the 1920s and 30s would have been made using the same formulae applied during the first Cold War. Joseph Stalin was, after all, every bit as foul a villain as Hitler, and just as worthy of destruction. But, once his Soviet Union acquired atomic and hydrogen bombs, the costs of making war on it far exceeded any possible benefits – up to and including human rights and democracy! There’s not much call for either in the irradiated wastelands that follow the mutual and assured destruction of a nuclear exchange.
We tankies would like nothing more than to see a China in which human rights and democracy have sunk down deep roots. We are simply doubtful that either goal can be achieved when the US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, is openly declaring his determination to force regime change in Beijing. The policy we much prefer is the policy that took the heat (so to speak) out of the first Cold War: “Peaceful Co-existence”. Only when the Chinese Communist Party no longer views the US and its allies as an existential threat will it be possible to resume a meaningful dialogue about human rights and democracy in the Peoples Republic of China. While the Five Eyes powers brazenly advance the diplomatic, economic and military containment of China – also known as the “Indo-Pacific Strategy” – such a dialogue is impossible.
New Zealand’s own relationship with China might, however, be salvageable if our own Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade was willing to equip its minister, Winston Peters, with a few facts. In relation to Hong Kong, for example, it would have been immensely helpful for the New Zealand Government to have drawn its citizens’ attention to Article 23 of the 1997 treaty by which the UK returned Hong Kong to China as a Special Administrative Region. The article states:
“The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People’s Government, or theft of state secrets, to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region, and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies.”
In other words, legislating for the protection of national security – the very action our Foreign Minister is decrying – was specifically provided for in the Basic Law of the Hong Kong SAR more than 20 years ago. (Hat-tip to Mike Smith for drawing Article 23 to my attention.)
All that has changed since the West happily signed-off on Article 23 is that China has grown stronger. That strength has helped to make New Zealand a more prosperous country. In joining the reckless efforts of the United States and the other Five Eyes powers to contain and weaken China we will do nothing to strengthen human rights and democracy in that country and may, by heeding the dangerous counsels of coercion, end up weakening them in our own.
Just months before he was assassinated, President John F. Kennedy addressed the students of the American University in Washington. What he said then is as relevant to international relations today as it was in 1963:
“So, let us not be blind to our differences, but let us also direct attention to our common interests and the means by which those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.”


thedailyblog--2020-07-29--Andy Haden – the giant who bowed to a lofty mountain: international solidarity

All Black great Andy Haden has died and the tributes are flowing for his rugby prowess along with commentary about the various controversies he involved himself with – most importantly his strong support for rugby contacts with apartheid South Africa .
After the High Court stalled the 1985 All Black tour to apartheid South Africa Haden was livid .
Two rugby players , Phil Recordon and Paddy Finnegan , had taken the New Zealand Rugby Football Union to court arguing the proposed tour would cause serious damage to rugby ’ s public image and therefore the NZRFU would be in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had the duty to promote the interests of rugby .
The Court issued an interim injunction stopping the tour .
Rather than fight the injunction in the Supreme Court the NZRFU cancelled the tour to much jubilation in New Zealand and around the world .
Haden was foaming .
He went to work with others and secretly planned the 1986 “ Cavalier ’ s tour ” to South Africa .
This was the All Black team selected for the previous year ’ s tour apart from a couple of principled players , such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go .
Subsequently the Cavalier players had their names added to the United Nations Register of Sportspeople who had played in South Africa – the so-called UN blacklist .
A couple of years later Haden quietly wrote to the UN Special Committee on Apartheid asking for his name to be withdrawn from the list on the basis he wouldn ’ t play rugby in South Africa again .
That was enough and his name was withdrawn .
It wasn ’ t a principled decision .
Haden was worried the increasing pressure on “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and business opportunities .
The giant had bowed to a lofty mountain – international solidarity against apartheid and racism .

All Black great Andy Haden has died and the tributes are flowing for his rugby prowess along with commentary about the various controversies he involved himself with – most importantly his strong support for rugby contacts with apartheid South Africa.
After the High Court stalled the 1985 All Black tour to apartheid South Africa Haden was livid.
Two rugby players, Phil Recordon and Paddy Finnegan, had taken the New Zealand Rugby Football Union to court arguing the proposed tour would cause serious damage to rugby’s public image and therefore the NZRFU would be in breach of its constitution under which it had the duty to promote the interests of rugby. The Court issued an interim injunction stopping the tour. Rather than fight the injunction in the Supreme Court the NZRFU cancelled the tour to much jubilation in New Zealand and around the world.
Haden was foaming. He went to work with others and secretly planned the 1986 “Cavalier’s tour” to South Africa. This was the All Black team selected for the previous year’s tour apart from a couple of principled players, such as John Kirwan, who refused to go.
Subsequently the Cavalier players had their names added to the United Nations Register of Sportspeople who had played in South Africa – the so-called UN blacklist.
A couple of years later Haden quietly wrote to the UN Special Committee on Apartheid asking for his name to be withdrawn from the list on the basis he wouldn’t play rugby in South Africa again. That was enough and his name was withdrawn.
It wasn’t a principled decision. Haden was worried the increasing pressure on “boycott-breakers” would hinder his international travel and business opportunities.
The giant had bowed to a lofty mountain – international solidarity against apartheid and racism.


The Disinformation Game

WHEN IT COMES to the disinformation game , the Russians have got “ form ” .
Perhaps their most nefarious exercise in deceiving the world is the evil concoction known as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion .
The harm this antisemitic tract has caused since its publication in 1902-03 is incalculable .
Adolf Hitler was enraged by it .
The American automobile manufacturer , Henry Ford , was convinced by it , and caused hundreds-of-thousands of copies to be distributed throughout the United States .
Even after the Second World War , the publication could be still be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ East .
Tragically , the Internet has given the document a whole new audience to deceive .
Thousands of people around the world remain convinced that The Protocols is an accurate account of an actual secret meeting of Jewish leaders in a Prague graveyard !
The purpose of this covert conclave ?
The systematic subjugation of the entire human race to the will of “ International Jewry ” .
The true authors of The Protocols were agents of the Okhrana – the Tsarist Secret Police .
Antisemitism was rife throughout the Russian Empire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Europe where Jewish communities had , over many centuries , established themselves .
Whipping up hatred of the Jews was a time-honoured way of diverting the anger of the Russian peasantry away from their aristocratic masters and onto their defenceless neighbours .
The Protocols were created with the express purpose of fuelling that anger .
Bloody pogroms followed its distribution in the first decade of the twentieth century .
Not only did the “ success ” of The Protocols demonstrate the alarming effectiveness of propaganda based on conspiracy theories , but it also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the origins and purposes of the communications that excite and motivate them .
Certainly , the lessons learned by the Tsar ’ s secret police were not lost on the secret policemen of the Soviet state which replaced the Russian Empire – nor on their successors in the security services of today ’ s Russian Federation .
Not that the Russians are the only people capable of concocting and distributing disinformation .
When it comes to the operations of the “ Deep State ” , Britain ’ s secret services have been practising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least the sixteenth century .
In 1924 , for example , His Majesty ’ s spies concocted what became known as the “ Zinoviev Letter ” .
This out-and-out forgery purported to prove that the Soviet Government , hand-in-glove with the Communist Party of Great Britain , was planning to take advantage of the recently-elected Labour Government ’ s diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union to step-up its revolutionary agitation throughout the British Isles .
Published in the Tory-aligned Daily Mail , the Zinoviev Letter played a crucial role in bringing down Britain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be little doubt , however , that the British disinformers ’ finest hour came as Great Britain battled on alone against the triumphant forces of the Nazi Reich .
Britain ’ s wartime prime minister , Winston Churchill , knew that Hitler could only be defeated if the United States entered the war on Britain ’ s side .
Accordingly , he and the secret services were prepared to throw everything they had into a top-secret struggle to persuade the American people to abandon their isolationism and join the fight against Hitler @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York ” was a remarkable Canadian-born businessman , William Stephenson .
From June 1940 until the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in December 1941 , Stephenson oversaw an astonishing , multi-million pound campaign of disinformation and media manipulation designed to change America ’ s mind about the war .
Stephenson ’ s propaganda offensive , chronicled brilliantly by Henry Hemming in Our Man in New York : The British Plot to Bring America into the Second World War , involved fake news agencies distributing carefully-crafted fake news .
It commissioned world-class forgers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subversion of South American governments .
It infiltrated America ’ s leading polling agency where its agents were able to insert “ useful ” questions in its opinion surveys .
Best of all , Stephenson was able to enlist the support of William “ Wild Bill ” Donovan , the man who would later set up the Central Intelligence Agency .
Indeed , Hemming makes a pretty strong case for the CIA , along with its forerunner , the Office of Strategic Services , being designed in London , by London , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CIA was ready to show its British teachers what an attentive pupil it had been .
Determined to prevent the election of a Communist Party-led government in the Italian elections of that year , the CIA unleashed a no-holds-barred propaganda campaign designed to undermine the Italian Left and secure victory for the Christian Democratic Party and its backers in the Catholic Church and the Mafia .
The CIA poured millions into US-controlled newspapers , US-influenced trade unions , and US-made newsreels – often featuring appeals from prominent Italian-Americans like Frank Sinatra to resist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next time the United States Congress complains long and loud about Russian interference in American elections , the rest of the world would be wise to pose the question : “ What took Moscow so long ?
” After all , the American-designed-and-executed campaign to secure the re-election of the Russian Federation ’ s first president , Boris Yeltsin , took place in 1996 !
The Russians waited 20 years before using carefully-crafted propaganda and conspiracy theories to help secure the election of America ’ s worst president – Donald Trump .

WHEN IT COMES to the disinformation game, the Russians have got “form”. Perhaps their most nefarious exercise in deceiving the world is the evil concoction known as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
The harm this antisemitic tract has caused since its publication in 1902-03 is incalculable. Adolf Hitler was enraged by it. The American automobile manufacturer, Henry Ford, was convinced by it, and caused hundreds-of-thousands of copies to be distributed throughout the United States. Even after the Second World War, the publication could be still be found in anti-Zionist bookshops across the Middle East. Tragically, the Internet has given the document a whole new audience to deceive.
Thousands of people around the world remain convinced that The Protocols is an accurate account of an actual secret meeting of Jewish leaders in a Prague graveyard! The purpose of this covert conclave? The systematic subjugation of the entire human race to the will of “International Jewry”.
The true authors of The Protocols were agents of the Okhrana – the Tsarist Secret Police. Antisemitism was rife throughout the Russian Empire, especially in those parts of Eastern Europe where Jewish communities had, over many centuries, established themselves. Whipping up hatred of the Jews was a time-honoured way of diverting the anger of the Russian peasantry away from their aristocratic masters and onto their defenceless neighbours. The Protocols were created with the express purpose of fuelling that anger. Bloody pogroms followed its distribution in the first decade of the twentieth century.
Not only did the “success” of The Protocols demonstrate the alarming effectiveness of propaganda based on conspiracy theories, but it also shows how little most people understand about the origins and purposes of the communications that excite and motivate them. Certainly, the lessons learned by the Tsar’s secret police were not lost on the secret policemen of the Soviet state which replaced the Russian Empire – nor on their successors in the security services of today’s Russian Federation.
Not that the Russians are the only people capable of concocting and distributing disinformation. When it comes to the operations of the “Deep State”, Britain’s secret services have been practising the dark arts of deception since at least the sixteenth century.
In 1924, for example, His Majesty’s spies concocted what became known as the “Zinoviev Letter”. This out-and-out forgery purported to prove that the Soviet Government, hand-in-glove with the Communist Party of Great Britain, was planning to take advantage of the recently-elected Labour Government’s diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union to step-up its revolutionary agitation throughout the British Isles. Published in the Tory-aligned Daily Mail, the Zinoviev Letter played a crucial role in bringing down Britain’s first Labour Government.
There can be little doubt, however, that the British disinformers’ finest hour came as Great Britain battled on alone against the triumphant forces of the Nazi Reich. Britain’s wartime prime minister, Winston Churchill, knew that Hitler could only be defeated if the United States entered the war on Britain’s side. Accordingly, he and the secret services were prepared to throw everything they had into a top-secret struggle to persuade the American people to abandon their isolationism and join the fight against Hitler.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Britain’s “man in New York” was a remarkable Canadian-born businessman, William Stephenson. From June 1940 until the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in December 1941, Stephenson oversaw an astonishing, multi-million pound campaign of disinformation and media manipulation designed to change America’s mind about the war.
Stephenson’s propaganda offensive, chronicled brilliantly by Henry Hemming in Our Man in New York: The British Plot to Bring America into the Second World War, involved fake news agencies distributing carefully-crafted fake news. It commissioned world-class forgers to produce bogus German plans for the subversion of South American governments. It infiltrated America’s leading polling agency where its agents were able to insert “useful” questions in its opinion surveys. Best of all, Stephenson was able to enlist the support of William “Wild Bill” Donovan, the man who would later set up the Central Intelligence Agency. Indeed, Hemming makes a pretty strong case for the CIA, along with its forerunner, the Office of Strategic Services, being designed in London, by London, for London.
In 1948, the newly-established CIA was ready to show its British teachers what an attentive pupil it had been. Determined to prevent the election of a Communist Party-led government in the Italian elections of that year, the CIA unleashed a no-holds-barred propaganda campaign designed to undermine the Italian Left and secure victory for the Christian Democratic Party and its backers in the Catholic Church and the Mafia. The CIA poured millions into US-controlled newspapers, US-influenced trade unions, and US-made newsreels – often featuring appeals from prominent Italian-Americans like Frank Sinatra to resist the communist menace!
So, the next time the United States Congress complains long and loud about Russian interference in American elections, the rest of the world would be wise to pose the question: “What took Moscow so long?” After all, the American-designed-and-executed campaign to secure the re-election of the Russian Federation’s first president, Boris Yeltsin, took place in 1996! The Russians waited 20 years before using carefully-crafted propaganda and conspiracy theories to help secure the election of America’s worst president – Donald Trump.