thedailyblog--2020-07-19--Life in Level 1: The Doom of National

Life in Level 1: The Doom of National

“ The Martians had no resistance to the bacteria in our atmosphere to which we have long since become immune .
Once they had breathed our air , germs , which no longer affect us , began to kill them .
The end came swiftly .
All over the world , their machines began to stop and fall .
After all that men could do had failed , the Martians were destroyed and humanity was saved by the littlest things which God and His wisdom had put upon this Earth.
” – H.G .
Wells , “ War of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And most likely in 2023 if the pandemic has not been defeated .
Their laissez faire approach to government and economics has been revealed to be utterly inappropriate for the challenges in the Age of the Virus .
National has been caught out – like the proverbial possum frozen in the glare of oncoming headlights – as the human race struggles to adapt to the new norm of responding to the spread of contagion .
There is an inexorable inevitability to how politics has begun to change radically with the advent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the State is required to navigate societies through these stormy pandemic waters .
The “ free market ” is not only incapable of dealing with a deadly virus – it actually aids and abets the spread of contagion .
Sweden , Brazil , Victoria , and the US ( especially states such a Florida , Texas , California , et al ) are a brutal warning when humans fail to heed and respond to a viral threat .
The virus will mercilessly seek out every crack ( or in the case of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) in Humanity ’ s defenses and , like water in 100-year old pipes , seep through .
Humans have only one defense against plague : our intellect .
Failure to use what natural evolution has gifted us leaves us at the mercy of whatever challenge Nature throws against us .
In this case , a virus that is neither aware of us , nor cares about us .
Like background radiation or clouds in the sky , it simply IS .
How we deal with it , using our remarkable abilities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and succumbing .
React with political expediency ( and a lethal dose of outright ignorance ) like Trump or Bolsanaro , and the virus will exploit that ignorance to maximum lethal advantage .
One lesson we have learned is that the virus is no respecter of political or economic ideologies .
It attacks central-planned and liberal free market economies alike .
China and the US proved that .
But unlike the US , China managed to contain the contagion by acting swiftly and decisively .
By locking down Wuhan – a city of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reduced transmission .
Only the power of the State could control transmission .
The free market and it ’ s twin sibling , Hyper Individualism , could not cope .
The dictates of free market profit-making ( unyielding demands by share-holders ) in tandem with selfish Me First individualism , was diametrically contrary to crucial collective strategies required to control transmission .
In an act of sheer stupidity and political expediency , Trump has insisted that all schools in the US reopen .
School children are to become the new vectors of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illusion of “ normality ” in time for the November presidential election .
The virus is now effectively out of control in the US and Brazil .
The death toll is escalating , killing young and old .
Despite the lessons from other nations there have been calls for Aotearoa to re-open our borders to foreign students and even tourists .
Some have suggested that Universities could manage isolation/quarantine of students – despite even the government falling short in this critical area .
The National Party and business pressure groups have joined in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our borders .
Their number one priority is “ business as usual ” .
Recently , three “ prominent ” New Zealanders – former chief science advisor Sir Peter Gluckman , former prime minister Helen Clark and ex-Air New Zealand chief executive Rob Fyfe – joined the agitation to re-open our borders “ some time in the near future we have to have a strategy in place of gradually opening the border , because we can not [ keep it closed ] indefinitely “ .
Finance Minister Grant Robertson spoke for the vast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those demands ; “ Growing our capacity for quarantine that we have absolute confidence in requires facilities that will need to be very carefully designed and used .
Moving toward an international student market for that will take some time.
” Two days later , finally reading and understanding the mood of the nation , then-Leader of the National Party , Todd Muller walked back National ’ s calls to re-open our borders ; “ What I was framing up was a criteria that could exist in the future , when clearly that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ context … what I was talking about was a critique of the government ’ s lack of transparency or visibility around what the next step is in terms of opening up our border .
There ’ s no appetite – from me or any New Zealander – for the border to be open today , partly because of what ’ s happening overseas and partly because of the shemozzle at the border.
” And on 12 July , appearing as a guest on TVNZ ’ s Q+A , Mr Fyfe – one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” – also seemed to be having second thoughts on loosening border controls ; “ Personally , I ’ d be nervous opening to any country until we have our testing and trace capability to the standard it needs to be at and in my mind we ’ re not there yet [ … ] no country has really solved the tracing challenge.
” Even Helen Clark , another of the “ trio of prominent New Zealanders ” voiced the obvious concerns felt by most people ; “ We ’ re nowhere near @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people say we may not see any widely available vaccine for at least two and a half years , it may then not be fully efficacious , it may not stop us getting it , it may mean it mitigates symptoms.
” As if to underscore the point and drive home the stark , unvarnished realities we were facing , Jacinda Ardern summed up it up succinctly , and in doing so , spoke for nearly the entire nation ; “ Right now as this pandemic is surging and while the technology and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , now is not the right time.
” Wigram Capital Advisors economist , Rodney Jones , who has been tracking the spread and effects of the contagion repeated the warning ; “ We only need to look to Victoria , New South Wales , Hong Kong , Singapore and Korea to see examples of other places that like us had the virus under control at a point in time only to see it emerge again.
” With this virus , we have to live with uncertainty and risks that we ’ re not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of us.
” In simple terms , most of us were in no mood to undo the victory we had achieved in nearly two months of lock-down .
Not for all the tea in China or all the gold in Fort Knox .
Prime Minister Ardern spoke for most of us when she categorically refused to yield to calls to loosen our border controls ; “ Right now as this pandemic is surging and while the technology and testing is as limited as it is , now is not the right time.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; pro-individualistic political parties with nowhere to go .
With tourism and the education export industries effectively “ dead ” , traditional market-driven ideologies have been ham-strung – not by their left-wing ideological counterparts – but by an unseen enemy that is not even aware of our existence .
Aside from trade in commodity goods , National can not campaign on market liberalisation of the free movement of people with skills and/or wealth .
Those days are behind us .
Thus far , National ’ s strategy for re-election appears to be based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and throughout the North Island ( an asphalt fetish , as David Slack described it ) and treating Kiwi Returnees as a cash cow by billing them for quarantining .
Aside from the sheer questionable legality of imposing what is effectively a border tax on New Zealand citizens and Permanent Residents returning home , how is that remotely reconcilable with their promise not to introduce new taxes in their first term ?
!
No less than three successive National Party leaders have promised : no new taxes ; “ We will not introduce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” – Simon Bridges , 29 November 2018 “ There will be no new taxes from the next National Government , and that could not be more distinctive than what the Labour-Greens will serve up for this country.
” – Todd Muller , 29 June 2020 “ This is not the party that is going into adding more cost to businesses and more cost to people who earn income and who are actually keeping this economy going .
We are not the Party of taxing people any more than we need to.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Only Judith Collins ’ unspecific assurances leaves “ wiggle room ” for introducing a new cost to Returnees – effectively a tax .
So , “ no new taxes ” – except , maybe , perhaps… ?
It is this mish-mash of rehashed policies ; vague , un-costed promises ; and incoherent populism that voters will look askance at .
As free market economics takes a back seat to the collective needs of society , National finds itself on the outer , a Party in search of a new raison d ’ être @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be “ business as usual ” because the virus – an implacable , unrelenting , impersonal enemy – will not allow it .
By contrast , Labour has been more or less consistent in responding to the new dictates of the crisis to the approval of the majority .
There is an admiration – even from some National-leaning voters this blogger has spoken with – that PM Ardern has done what has needed to be done .
Some would go even further , so the government sits nicely in the middle as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But more importantly , the ideological mania of “ small government ” has been shown to be a dangerously naively fallacy – especially when confronted with such a crisis as a pandemic .
When faced with a nationwide or global emergency – whether biological , environmental , etc – only the State can muster the required resources to meet such a challenge head-on .
People have long memories and they will remember calls from a succession of National party leaders ; business “ captains of industry ” ; and various other commentators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they will see the mess across the Tasman in Victoria ( and now escalating in New South Wales ) .
They will appreciate how incredibly fortunate we were to have a government that was cautious and valued lives over commercial dictates .
And they will vote accordingly .
Because National has failed to adapt .
TVNZ News : Texas reports 10,000 new cases as Covid-19 continues to surge around US Apnews : How California went from success story to virus hot spot Live Science : China just lifted its lockdown on Wuhan Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major districts say schools will stay closed in fall Stuff : Coronavirus – Managed isolation Covid-19 testing failures lead to buck passing but no answers Otago Daily Times : NZ should open borders to countries with Covid – Muller NZ Herald : Covid 19 coronavirus – Majority of Kiwis want to keep borders closed , but are concerned about economy , jobs TVNZ News : ‘ Right now is not the right time ’ – PM responds to further calls for NZ ’ s borders to reopen Otago Daily Times : National – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mediaworks/Newshub : Todd Muller rules out wealth tax under National , says Labour-Greens will drag New Zealand into debt RNZ : Judith Collins on her plans for National ( alt.link ) TVNZ News : NSW at ‘ crucial point ’ in the fight against Covid-19 as new clusters emerge Life in Lock Down : Day 2 of Level 3 Life in level 1 : Newshub Nation , Q + A , and the end of Todd Muller ’ s leadership This blogpost will be re-published in five days on “ Frankly Speaking “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left here ( The Daily Blog ) or there ( Frankly Speaking ) .

.
.
“The Martians had no resistance to the bacteria in our atmosphere to which we have long since become immune. Once they had breathed our air, germs, which no longer affect us, began to kill them. The end came swiftly. All over the world, their machines began to stop and fall. After all that men could do had failed, the Martians were destroyed and humanity was saved by the littlest things which God and His wisdom had put upon this Earth.” – H.G. Wells, “War of the Worlds“
.
National will lose in September. And most likely in 2023 if the pandemic has not been defeated. Their laissez faire approach to government and economics has been revealed to be utterly inappropriate for the challenges in the Age of the Virus.
National has been caught out – like the proverbial possum frozen in the glare of oncoming headlights – as the human race struggles to adapt to the new norm of responding to the spread of contagion.
There is an inexorable inevitability to how politics has begun to change radically with the advent of a global pandemic.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
More than ever, the State is required to navigate societies through these stormy pandemic waters. The “free market” is not only incapable of dealing with a deadly virus – it actually aids and abets the spread of contagion.
Sweden, Brazil, Victoria, and the US (especially states such a Florida, Texas, California, et al) are a brutal warning when humans fail to heed and respond to a viral threat. The virus will mercilessly seek out every crack (or in the case of the US and Brazil, gaping holes) in Humanity’s defenses and, like water in 100-year old pipes, seep through.
Humans have only one defense against plague: our intellect. Failure to use what natural evolution has gifted us leaves us at the mercy of whatever challenge Nature throws against us. In this case, a virus that is neither aware of us, nor cares about us. Like background radiation or clouds in the sky, it simply IS.
How we deal with it, using our remarkable abilities, will be the crucial difference between prevailing and succumbing.
React with political expediency (and a lethal dose of outright ignorance) like Trump or Bolsanaro, and the virus will exploit that ignorance to maximum lethal advantage.
One lesson we have learned is that the virus is no respecter of political or economic ideologies. It attacks central-planned and liberal free market economies alike. China and the US proved that.
But unlike the US, China managed to contain the contagion by acting swiftly and decisively. By locking down Wuhan – a city of eleven million people – they controlled and reduced transmission.
Only the power of the State could control transmission. The free market and it’s twin sibling, Hyper Individualism, could not cope. The dictates of free market profit-making (unyielding demands by share-holders) in tandem with selfish Me First individualism, was diametrically contrary to crucial collective strategies required to control transmission.
In an act of sheer stupidity and political expediency, Trump has insisted that all schools in the US reopen. School children are to become the new vectors of a deadly contagion so Trump can present an illusion of “normality” in time for the November presidential election.
The virus is now effectively out of control in the US and Brazil. The death toll is escalating, killing young and old.
Despite the lessons from other nations there have been calls for Aotearoa to re-open our borders to foreign students and even tourists. Some have suggested that Universities could manage isolation/quarantine of students – despite even the government falling short in this critical area.
The National Party and business pressure groups have joined in a whining chorus of agitation to open our borders. Their number one priority is “business as usual”.
Recently, three “prominent” New Zealanders – former chief science advisor Sir Peter Gluckman, former prime minister Helen Clark and ex-Air New Zealand chief executive Rob Fyfe – joined the agitation to re-open our borders “some time in the near future we have to have a strategy in place of gradually opening the border, because we cannot [keep it closed] indefinitely“.
Finance Minister Grant Robertson spoke for the vast majority of New Zealanders when he rejected those demands;
“Growing our capacity for quarantine that we have absolute confidence in requires facilities that will need to be very carefully designed and used.
Moving toward an international student market for that will take some time.”
Two days later, finally reading and understanding the mood of the nation, then-Leader of the National Party, Todd Muller walked back National’s calls to re-open our borders;
“What I was framing up was a criteria that could exist in the future, when clearly that can’t happen in the current context … what I was talking about was a critique of the government’s lack of transparency or visibility around what the next step is in terms of opening up our border.
There’s no appetite – from me or any New Zealander – for the border to be open today, partly because of what’s happening overseas and partly because of the shemozzle at the border.”
And on 12 July, appearing as a guest on TVNZ’s Q+A, Mr Fyfe – one of the trio of “prominent New Zealanders” – also seemed to be having second thoughts on loosening border controls;
“Personally, I’d be nervous opening to any country until we have our testing and trace capability to the standard it needs to be at and in my mind we’re not there yet […] no country has really solved the tracing challenge.”
Even Helen Clark, another of the “trio of prominent New Zealanders” voiced the obvious concerns felt by most people;
“We’re nowhere near through the end of this, some people say we may not see any widely available vaccine for at least two and a half years, it may then not be fully efficacious, it may not stop us getting it, it may mean it mitigates symptoms.”
As if to underscore the point and drive home the stark, unvarnished realities we were facing, Jacinda Ardern summed up it up succinctly, and in doing so, spoke for nearly the entire nation;
“Right now as this pandemic is surging and while the technology and testing is as limited as it is, now is not the right time.”
Wigram Capital Advisors economist, Rodney Jones, who has been tracking the spread and effects of the contagion repeated the warning;
“We only need to look to Victoria, New South Wales, Hong Kong, Singapore and Korea to see examples of other places that like us had the virus under control at a point in time only to see it emerge again.”
With this virus, we have to live with uncertainty and risks that we’re not accustomed to. This is new for all of us.”
In simple terms, most of us were in no mood to undo the victory we had achieved in nearly two months of lock-down. Not for all the tea in China or all the gold in Fort Knox.
Prime Minister Ardern spoke for most of us when she categorically refused to yield to calls to loosen our border controls;
“Right now as this pandemic is surging and while the technology and testing is as limited as it is, now is not the right time.”
Which leaves traditionally pro-market; pro-globalisation; pro-individualistic political parties with nowhere to go.
With tourism and the education export industries effectively “dead”, traditional market-driven ideologies have been ham-strung – not by their left-wing ideological counterparts – but by an unseen enemy that is not even aware of our existence.
Aside from trade in commodity goods, National cannot campaign on market liberalisation of the free movement of people with skills and/or wealth. Those days are behind us.
Thus far, National’s strategy for re-election appears to be based on regurgitated roading and tunnels under/through/over mountains and throughout the North Island (an asphalt fetish, as David Slack described it) and treating Kiwi Returnees as a cash cow by billing them for quarantining.
Aside from the sheer questionable legality of imposing what is effectively a border tax on New Zealand citizens and Permanent Residents returning home, how is that remotely reconcilable with their promise not to introduce new taxes in their first term?!
No less than three successive National Party leaders have promised: no new taxes;
“We will not introduce any new taxes during our first term.” – Simon Bridges, 29 November 2018
“There will be no new taxes from the next National Government, and that could not be more distinctive than what the Labour-Greens will serve up for this country.” – Todd Muller, 29 June 2020
“This is not the party that is going into adding more cost to businesses and more cost to people who earn income and who are actually keeping this economy going. We are not the Party of taxing people any more than we need to.” – Judith Collins, 15 July 2020
Only Judith Collins’ unspecific assurances leaves “wiggle room” for introducing a new cost to Returnees – effectively a tax. So, “no new taxes” – except, maybe, perhaps…?
It’s a “levy”, not a tax?
It’s a “charge”, not a tax?
It is this mish-mash of rehashed policies; vague, un-costed promises; and incoherent populism that voters will look askance at.
As free market economics takes a back seat to the collective needs of society, National finds itself on the outer, a Party in search of a new raison d’être. In a post-pandemic world it cannot be “business as usual” because the virus – an implacable, unrelenting, impersonal enemy – will not allow it.
By contrast, Labour has been more or less consistent in responding to the new dictates of the crisis to the approval of the majority. There is an admiration – even from some National-leaning voters this blogger has spoken with – that PM Ardern has done what has needed to be done.
Some would go even further, so the government sits nicely in the middle as the measured, calm voice of reason.
But more importantly, the ideological mania of “small government” has been shown to be a dangerously naively fallacy – especially when confronted with such a crisis as a pandemic. When faced with a nationwide or global emergency – whether biological, environmental, etc – only the State can muster the required resources to meet such a challenge head-on.
People have long memories and they will remember calls from a succession of National party leaders; business “captains of industry”; and various other commentators, to re-open our borders.
Then they will see the mess across the Tasman in Victoria (and now escalating in New South Wales).
They will appreciate how incredibly fortunate we were to have a government that was cautious and valued lives over commercial dictates.
And they will vote accordingly.
Because National has failed to adapt.
.
.
.
.
References
Quotes: War of the Worlds
CTV News: Florida reports a record 156 coronavirus deaths in 24 hours
TVNZ News: Texas reports 10,000 new cases as Covid-19 continues to surge around US
Apnews: How California went from success story to virus hot spot
Live Science: China just lifted its lockdown on Wuhan
Washington Post: Despite pressure from Trump, major districts say schools will stay closed in fall
Mediaworks/Newshub: University head begs for return of international students
Stuff: Coronavirus – Managed isolation Covid-19 testing failures lead to buck passing but no answers
Otago Daily Times: NZ should open borders to countries with Covid – Muller
RNZ: Border reopening must be priority – Business NZ
RNZ: NZ must consider opening borders – Gluckman, Clark, Fyfe
NZ Herald: Covid 19 coronavirus – Majority of Kiwis want to keep borders closed, but are concerned about economy, jobs
NZ Herald: Grant Robertson – Don’t expect return of foreign students in 2020
RNZ: Checkpoint – 2 July 2020
TVNZ: Q+A – 12 July 2020
RNZ: Covid-19 review ‘challenging’ because pandemic ‘ongoing’, Helen Clark says
RNZ: Economist warns risk of another Covid-19 outbreak rising
TVNZ News: ‘Right now is not the right time’ – PM responds to further calls for NZ’s borders to reopen
Twitter: David Slack – 11:55AM Jul 17, 2020
RNZ: Covid-19 – National to charge for quarantine
NZHerald: National leader Judith Collins unveils $31b transport plan to crush Auckland’s congestion
Otago Daily Times: National – No new taxes in the first term
Mediaworks/Newshub: Todd Muller rules out wealth tax under National, says Labour-Greens will drag New Zealand into debt
RNZ: Judith Collins on her plans for National (alt.link)
TVNZ News: NSW at ‘crucial point’ in the fight against Covid-19 as new clusters emerge
Twitter: @FoxyLustyGrover – 6:53AM Jul 1, 2020
Previous related blogposts
Life in Lock Down: Day 2 of Level 3
Life in Level 1: Reinfection – Labour’s kryptonite
Life in Level 1: Reinfection – No, Dr Bloomfield!
Life in Level 1: The Taxpayer’s Coin
Life in Level 1: Cunning Plans, Unanswered Questions
Life in level 1: Newshub Nation, Q + A, and the end of Todd Muller’s leadership
.
.
.
Acknowledgement: Guy Body
.
This blogpost will be re-published in five days on “Frankly Speaking“. Reader’s comments may be left here (The Daily Blog) or there (Frankly Speaking).
.
.
= fs =


thedailyblog--2020-07-19--Dr Liz Gordon: Labour is in trouble

Dr Liz Gordon: Labour is in trouble

What a difference a week makes !
From unelectable , it now seems like we will be facing a resurgence in National ’ s chances under Judith Collins .
The thoughtful , consultative , kind and effective policies of Labour , all that good leadership , is likely to be damaged , possibly severely , possibly terminally , by the populist Collins , popping out bold and authoritarian policies like lights on a Christmas tree .
We saw this in Sunday ’ s media , with National ’ s new policy that people should pay $ 3,000 towards the costs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the country .
This will be cheered by people all around the country , many of whom were considering supporting Labour .
It is dangerous .
Never mind that the amount is peanuts .
Never mind that the legal context of trying to force people into quarantine and make them pay for it is iffy and might be defeated by judicial review .
There is that little corner of New Zealander ’ s hearts , perhaps captured or enhanced by 30 years of neo-liberalism , that insists that users must pay , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affirmed that this policy will breach the Bill of Rights Act ( clause 18 ( 2 ) ) which reads : “ Every New Zealand citizen has the right to enter New Zealand.
” Geez .
Their very first detailed policy breaches the Bill of Rights .
Dirty politics indeed .
I criticised Todd Muller because his only contribution was to pop up at every corner saying “ shambolic blah blah ” .
The only policy I recall him releasing was a new road from Christchurch to Ashburton .
And that was released @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , such that the media had no interest in the policy .
In politics timing is everything .
I do not expect Labour to try to match National ’ s populism .
I hope that the party has left its populist policies way behind it ( visions of Roger Douglas and flat taxes still populate my nightmares ) .
It is also not enough to be the steady hand on the tiller , although that is crucial .
I think Labour needs a three-strand strategy .
The first is to extend its excellent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three years .
Key messaging is that the Covid is not going away anytime soon , that the priority is always to keep New Zealanders safe ( and the safest way is no community transmission ) and that the only party you can trust to do this is Labour .
This is easy peasy and , by default , is the current stance .
When Jacinda says she is too busy managing a crisis to think about the election , she is by default purveying this message .
The second strand is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , alongside and in and through what may be at least three more years of Covid infection .
How this is done is crucial .
The plan needs to be a multi-sector , whole of society approach that blends economic goals with improving the economic opportunities of the people and reducing inequalities .
This will include flexible work , supporting a range of industries and especially local manufacturing ( by New Zealand for New Zealand ) , further building the mana of our nation into economic opportunities for export , especially of food @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Can ’ t we do something fantastic down south with the amazing water/electricity resource that will shortly be vacated by Rio Tinto .
Not another aluminium smelter , but something that works with our own resources and our own people to create things that we and the world need .
This might be multiple somethings .
There is no need to think big , just think broadly .
Every opportunity needs to be harnessed within a people and environment friendly way .
We need a vision for the future that shows we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at extreme risk in order to recover economically .
Now is the time for economic nation-building , for big picture thinking .
You get the gist .
The third strand is policies around our society .
We must come out of Covid ( if coming out is ever possible , assuming things have not changed forever , and here I am referring to the research on how the overpopulation of the planet has made us ever more vulnerable to doomsday viruses ) , with a better , smarter , fairer and more equal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first .
There will be a focus on developing New Zealand for New Zealanders .
Kindness and consideration for others will be the key .
Policies for the people first , and profits will follow .
Labour ’ s manifesto does not need to go into enormous detail , but simply to show a way , a vision , an alternative route to Collins ’ populism .
National can only ever offer policies for the one , the best , the winner .
Labour can provide a vision for the team of five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people first , fair and safe .
Let ’ s hope the party is tuned in next weekend to the Alternative Aotearoa event in Wellington and on a podcast near you .
Let ’ s hope those of us advocating for an alternative can see it come to fruition at the election .

What a difference a week makes! From unelectable, it now seems like we will be facing a resurgence in National’s chances under Judith Collins. The thoughtful, consultative, kind and effective policies of Labour, all that good leadership, is likely to be damaged, possibly severely, possibly terminally, by the populist Collins, popping out bold and authoritarian policies like lights on a Christmas tree.
We saw this in Sunday’s media, with National’s new policy that people should pay $3,000 towards the costs of their quarantine as they come back into the country. This will be cheered by people all around the country, many of whom were considering supporting Labour. It is dangerous.
Never mind that the amount is peanuts. Never mind that the legal context of trying to force people into quarantine and make them pay for it is iffy and might be defeated by judicial review. There is that little corner of New Zealander’s hearts, perhaps captured or enhanced by 30 years of neo-liberalism, that insists that users must pay, no matter what.
Gerry Brownlee today affirmed that this policy will breach the Bill of Rights Act (clause 18(2)) which reads: “Every New Zealand citizen has the right to enter New Zealand.” Geez. Their very first detailed policy breaches the Bill of Rights. Dirty politics indeed.
I criticised Todd Muller because his only contribution was to pop up at every corner saying “shambolic blah blah”. The only policy I recall him releasing was a new road from Christchurch to Ashburton. And that was released in the middle of a huge scandal, such that the media had no interest in the policy. In politics timing is everything.
I do not expect Labour to try to match National’s populism. I hope that the party has left its populist policies way behind it (visions of Roger Douglas and flat taxes still populate my nightmares). It is also not enough to be the steady hand on the tiller, although that is crucial.
I think Labour needs a three-strand strategy. The first is to extend its excellent Covid management approach to embrace the next three years. Key messaging is that the Covid is not going away anytime soon, that the priority is always to keep New Zealanders safe (and the safest way is no community transmission) and that the only party you can trust to do this is Labour. This is easy peasy and, by default, is the current stance. When Jacinda says she is too busy managing a crisis to think about the election, she is by default purveying this message.
The second strand is to develop an economic plan to work with, alongside and in and through what may be at least three more years of Covid infection. How this is done is crucial. The plan needs to be a multi-sector, whole of society approach that blends economic goals with improving the economic opportunities of the people and reducing inequalities.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
This will include flexible work, supporting a range of industries and especially local manufacturing (by New Zealand for New Zealand), further building the mana of our nation into economic opportunities for export, especially of food but also other things and so on. Can’t we do something fantastic down south with the amazing water/electricity resource that will shortly be vacated by Rio Tinto. Not another aluminium smelter, but something that works with our own resources and our own people to create things that we and the world need. This might be multiple somethings. There is no need to think big, just think broadly. Every opportunity needs to be harnessed within a people and environment friendly way.
We need a vision for the future that shows we do not have to put our country at extreme risk in order to recover economically. Now is the time for economic nation-building, for big picture thinking. You get the gist.
The third strand is policies around our society. We must come out of Covid (if coming out is ever possible, assuming things have not changed forever, and here I am referring to the research on how the overpopulation of the planet has made us ever more vulnerable to doomsday viruses), with a better, smarter, fairer and more equal society. People will have to come first. There will be a focus on developing New Zealand for New Zealanders. Kindness and consideration for others will be the key. Policies for the people first, and profits will follow.
Labour’s manifesto does not need to go into enormous detail, but simply to show a way, a vision, an alternative route to Collins’ populism. National can only ever offer policies for the one, the best, the winner. Labour can provide a vision for the team of five million moving forward, Covid free, people first, fair and safe.
Let’s hope the party is tuned in next weekend to the Alternative Aotearoa event in Wellington and on a podcast near you. Let’s hope those of us advocating for an alternative can see it come to fruition at the election.


thedailyblog--2020-07-20--NZ First’s St Anger Moment ?

NZ First’s St Anger Moment ?

Over the weekend , NZ First did something rather remarkable for a smaller party .
They turned 27 .
Now , in the annals of music and film , a standout performer ’ s twenty seventh year is always one that ’ s for some reason fraught with risk of imminent mortality .
Whether Jimi Hendrix or Kurt Cobain , Jim Morrison or Amy Winehouse … there ’ s just something about that age that seems to inspire the critical existence failure in the renowned .
Their potential never becoming quite realized , and leaving them forever frozen in time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perspective , be no bad thing – there is never the ensuing slide into mediocrity which , say , Metallica underwent in the St Anger era .
They are remembered amongst the constellation of Greats by virtue of never having stopped being , even as and when they stopped being .
Except while it is unquestionably the case that NZ First in its two-point-seventh decade is facing a bit of a death-risk in the next few months , that last statement is only of questionable application to the party .
In much the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asking at what point the French Revolution ceased being a Good Idea , the debate as to whether or perhaps when NZ First stopped being Great ( as opposed , presumably , to ‘ Make New Zealand Great Again ’ – with all that *that* entails ) is one that could go on for some time .
For what it ’ s worth , my answer to the former question is to be unfavourable as to The Terror , but to consider Napoleon to be the apotheosis of The Revolution and therefore fundamentally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its Goodness going forward to the end and then some .
And as applies the latter question … .
while I ’ ve been pretty disappointed upon occasion by my former party ( c.f the TPPA volte-face , Shane Jones in general , inter alia ) , I have nevertheless been broadly content that my vote for it in 2017 was the right one .
We did , after all , get a pretty decent Labour-led Government out of it , for a start .
And I ’ ve been genuinely pleased with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and strong advocacy in the Defence portfolio – a series of decisions which we shall reap the benefits of for years if not decades to come .
But all up , in recent weeks NZ First has seemed a rather different kind of rock-star to a sprightly young suicide risk of just under 30 .
In my writeup on NZ First at its 2017 Convention , I compared the Party to Motörhead – on the basis that while it did seem to basically be releasing the same album every three years or so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s exactly what the fanbase seemed content with , and it kept things ticking over consistently if perhaps not immensely excitingly for everybody else within earshot of the stadium .
This no longer quite seems to be the case .
Insofar as NZF ’ s found itself in the ineluctable position of no longer quite being able to convincingly play the rebel Outsider following nearly three years in Government … and is instead attempting to deploy an array of rather bemusing foreign-import cliches to try and give itself some maladroit ‘ maverick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of genuine , transformative change .
These range from those so-called ‘ Bad-Boys of Brexit ’ that either are or aren ’ t working for NZ First at this year ’ s Election contingent upon which day of the week it is and how the question is asked … through to Winston ’ s apparent keynote sub-theme of rejecting “ Woke Pixie-Dust ” in his yesterday ’ s address .
All up , the sense I ’ m getting from this is not Lemmy Kilmister .
It ’ s rather , some *other* @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s regrettably started to go a bit tone-deaf and as a result has gone down a bit of a peculiar trajectory in a semi-desperate bid to reclaim the ‘ vibe ’ of their now-distant youthful prime .
Perhaps 2020 shall prove to be Winston ’ s “ St Anger ” moment .
Or , possibly it ’ s like Dave Mustaine following the frankly remarkable recovery from his stroke – during which his born-again Evangelical Christianity really started to shine through with no off-switch and lead to the critically as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I wasn ’ t at NZ First ’ s Convention this year , so my perception of events is based on little more than media reports and talking with people actually still involved or proximate to the Party who were .
This appeared to confirm that the substance on-view in the media was broadly accurate : that not too terribly much of import occurred ( with one major exception ) , and that in lieu of meaningful announcements , we had Winston attempting to out-woke on being anti-woke Judith Collins in a ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ sounding attack on what in the old days would have been termed ‘ political correctness ’ , while also making pretty standard remarks about the importance of ‘ stability ’ and preparing for this country ’ s ‘ future ’ .
And you know what ?
That ’ s not actually so bad .
Most parties don ’ t signal flagship policy launches in Election years at their annual Conventions .
They save those for when precious oxygen is needed on the campaign trail .
Stability IS important , going forward – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and positive sight to compare the way the Coalition Government , despite containing three occasionally rather different parties … hasn ’ t imploded or rolled its leadership in the manner that National has done twice in two months over on the other side of the aisle .
It would be nice to presume that ‘ Stability ’ of Government also means that NZ First is keen to make ready to support Labour ( and perhaps the Greens ) for a second term in office , but I suppose we ’ ll have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather less impressed all up with NZ First ’ s commitment to ‘ back our future ’ , given that its major contribution ( again , with the exception of Ron Mark ’ s decent defence portfolio work ) to future-planning for New Zealand has been to turn on a somewhat less than discriminate hose of Provincial Growth Funding and seemingly support the continued status of New Zealand as economic colony through a lack of positive vision for transformative change away from over-reliance on primary industries and tourism ( and this , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s closure unlocks by necessity a whole nother conceptual space for regional development in Southland ) … but that is another rant for another time .
In terms of actual policy announcements … there appears to have been but one of serious significance – Tracey Martin ’ s push for the restoration of a Universal Family Benefit .
Which is actually a pretty decent proposal .
I don ’ t think that it ’ s a serious competitor for a Universal Basic Income – or , for that matter , to the Green @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Income proposal … but that ’ s because these are different tools with different objectives in mind .
You could probably even run them somewhat complementarily .
And I perhaps wouldn ’ t even have brought up the Green Party ’ s GMI , except for the fact that Martin , in speaking about the NZF proposal , asserted that part of her objective was to “ bust [ the ] myth ” that “ the Greens have got a monopoly in caring about poverty ” with reference to their recent policy announcements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the brusqueness towards the Greens … by claiming to be equal to or better than the Greens in what ’ s ostensibly Green Party core competency , was also something Winston got in on – declaring NZ First to be “ in fact the greenest party in Parliament “ .
Presumably with a substance other than envy .
Which , if nothing else , goes to show that I was right all along about the two parties actually realizing they have more in common in terms of values than either really wants to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ animositically as a result .
Now , in terms of the actual ‘ mood of the people ’ , it may also be worth looking at a few of the policy remits that were successfully passed by the Party over the weekend .
These included some somewhat predictable ones around abolishing conscience voting for MPs on matters put to referendum and doubling the manpower of our defence force in order to facilitate better humanitarian ( as well as military ) response .
But also some slightly more surprising ones , such as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minimizing the use of landfills … and , perhaps in light of present circumstances across the Pacific , a proposal to institute body cameras for Police and Corrections personnel .
All things considered , this year ’ s NZ First Convention – as seen from a rather far distance of a whole few suburbs away and second-hand ( instead of just the smoke being second-hand as in previous years ) – seems to have been a bit average .
Nothing really bad appears to have happened … but , then , with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Family Benefit proposal , nothing rather remarkable seems to have occurred , either .
Even the Green Monster that turned up part-way through Sunday was both ‘ non-political ’ and dealt with outside the venue by security .
As I have said … in an Election Year , this is almost to be expected – you could view Labour ’ s Convention a few weeks back in much the same light .
However , the trouble is that with NZ First , I ’ m not really sure how much more and different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going forward from now until the Election .
It ’ s certainly possible that the Party shall surprise us with some visionary , big-ticket items that are actually worth turning out for .
I definitely hope so .
It ’ s even possible that some of those visionary , big-ticket items ( should they exist ) are actually intended to be pursued with some vigour by the Party when ( or , perhaps , if ) it is back in Government in four or five months time .
Although after the way in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Bottom Lines seemed to become occasional Bottom Afterthoughts during the course of last Election ’ s culminatory coalition negotiations process ( a matter that was , to be fair , not necessarily under NZF ’ s control – unless it wanted to genuinely go cross-benches and/or subject the country to another election as a result of neither Labour nor National being prepared to countenance some of the more .. unique ones ) , it could be well understanded if the Party chose to eschew such things ( until it gets desperate ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its record .
A record which , for all its ( occasional ) faults – is not actually a bad one , especially in light of its positive contribution to good governance over the past three years , and keeping National seriously hammered for the nine years before that .
Certainly , the notion of ‘ Stability ’ and continuance for prudent governance is what Labour ’ s running on this time around – and therein lies at least half of the problem .
The Party will have perceived that being too closely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subconsciously indistinguishable from Labour – and therefore likely to become electorally eclipsed by them .
This is the opposite scenario to what prevailed in 2011 , wherein the Party being fundamentally distinct from Labour ( not least , by virtue of being politically purportedly ‘ dead ’ at the time ) induced many left-of-National Kiwis to tactically or enthusiastically vote for NZF as a fairly direct result .
So instead of running on its record of Good Governance with Labour , we see this curious Cat on the Doorstep campaign stratagem ( that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether ‘ in ’ or ‘ out ) – of simultaneously running on a record of supposed Good Governance against Labour ( and the Greens ) , as can be seen with the ‘ handbreak on silly policy ’ rhetoric of late .
But also performative signalling of just how different they are ( or like to think they are ) from Labour ( and most especially the Greens ) in areas that are heavily visually distinctive , but lacking in real substance .
Or , in other words , Winston ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exactly that .
The Pictsie [ with deference to his proud Scottish heritage ] dusting of shouting “ Woke ” about the place [ as he recently did to The Spinoff , for instance , to deflect from their scrutiny of his British associate ’ s pledged assistance ] , in order to distract from how little there is to easily distinguish NZ First and Labour from each other after three years joined at the hip in coalition governance and Cabinet .
“ Where Is My Mind ” , indeed .
And yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m not exactly enthused by this contemporary choice of stylistic veneer … in many ways , it ’ s preferable to NZF deciding to try and add substance to its claim of distinctiveness from those it ’ s recently been in government with .
Because while in yesteryear it did this rather effectively by actually running to the economic left of the Labour party … I rather suspect that were it to try and do genuine policy or ethos distinctiveness from Labour ( and the Greens ) today , it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But this comes with a risk .
The ‘ Woke ’ attack line is not merely a distracting bauble for some of its supporters to play with .
It ’ s also something of a cathartic steam-valve for various portions of the Party that probably really do think that they ’ ve been enabling Government-By-Tumblr for the past three years and are now fed up with it .
What this means in practice , is that what ’ s supposed to be a gimmick – could turn into a much more genuinely felt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Especially with them Brexit Back-Street Boys involved .
Soon as that happens , it could well turn into , to quote Megadeth ’ s Foreclosure of a Dream : “ Backed in a corner , caught up in the race Means to an end ended in disgrace Perspective is lost in the spirit of the chase ” That is to say , in much the same manner as Metallica in the early 2000s , NZF may wind up attempting to push through its doldrumish funk by channeling that raw frustration and emotion and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vibe itself .
An outlet , rather than outreach , perhaps .
And while this may have worked rather well in previous years , and upon previous releases ( by which I mean NZ First at its arguable necessary-best in 1993-1996 and 2011 , and Metallica in its early best albums , Ride the Lightning and Master of Puppets ) … the part that ’ s arguably missing in the here and now is both the technical proficiency to make it a seriously engaging output , as well as the ‘ something to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to other than perceived personal annoyance .
A lack of realization of these facts – a lack of self awareness – and a decision to press forward down the rabbit-hole of what felt good at the time to release … appears to have been how St. Anger happened .
An album which , for those unaware of the controversy , was basically the musical equivalent of recording a patient screaming their neuroses out in a therapy session .
Which may sound incredibly Metal in theory … but in practice , the questionable ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quality of the result effectively definitively ended Metallica ’ s reign at or near the top of their relevant musical scene and splintered its fanbase irreparably .
You can see how this might relate to NZ First if it keeps going too hard down this trajectory as we head toward the Election – and especially if there ’ s little else to offset it or otherwise add substance to its offering .
I could probably take the metaphor further at some length ( including Load / Reload and S & M representing NZF @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adding pressure to ‘ act out ’ at the end of the term to draw a line under the previous ; and the frankly disconcerting supposition that if NZF ’ s emotive ‘ Anti-Woke ’ posturing is Metallica circa 2003 , Judith Collins as the larger and likely more successful mobilizer of the phenomenon may be Nu Metal ) … but this stopped being a report on NZF ’ s Convention and started being rather peculiar politico-musical history some paragraphs ago .
To phrase it succinctly , then – NZ First in its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The largely lackluster Convention isn ’ t really a problem for that – however the prospect of the party doubling or even trebling down on some of the only material from said Convention to actually get air-time ( i.e .
the “ Woke Pixie-Dust ” – the ruin of many a rockstar ) in lieu of much else of substance … could lead to this becoming the Party ’ s “ St .
Anger Moment ” – and thence joining the Twenty Seven Club itself .
A fate which , despite the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a most unfortunate ‘ Fade to Black ’ , indeed .

Over the weekend, NZ First did something rather remarkable for a smaller party. They turned 27.
Now, in the annals of music and film, a standout performer’s twenty seventh year is always one that’s for some reason fraught with risk of imminent mortality. Whether Jimi Hendrix or Kurt Cobain, Jim Morrison or Amy Winehouse … there’s just something about that age that seems to inspire the critical existence failure in the renowned. Their potential never becoming quite realized, and leaving them forever frozen in time. Which can, from an artistic perspective, be no bad thing – there is never the ensuing slide into mediocrity which, say, Metallica underwent in the St Anger era. They are remembered amongst the constellation of Greats by virtue of never having stopped being, even as and when they stopped being.
Except while it is unquestionably the case that NZ First in its two-point-seventh decade is facing a bit of a death-risk in the next few months, that last statement is only of questionable application to the party. In much the same manner as the old parlour-game of asking at what point the French Revolution ceased being a Good Idea, the debate as to whether or perhaps when NZ First stopped being Great (as opposed, presumably, to ‘Make New Zealand Great Again’ – with all that *that* entails) is one that could go on for some time.
For what it’s worth, my answer to the former question is to be unfavourable as to The Terror, but to consider Napoleon to be the apotheosis of The Revolution and therefore fundamentally its savior and the stalwart support for its Goodness going forward to the end and then some. And as applies the latter question …. while I’ve been pretty disappointed upon occasion by my former party (c.f the TPPA volte-face, Shane Jones in general, inter alia), I have nevertheless been broadly content that my vote for it in 2017 was the right one. We did, after all, get a pretty decent Labour-led Government out of it, for a start. And I’ve been genuinely pleased with Ron Mark’s actual forward thinking and strong advocacy in the Defence portfolio – a series of decisions which we shall reap the benefits of for years if not decades to come.
But all up, in recent weeks NZ First has seemed a rather different kind of rock-star to a sprightly young suicide risk of just under 30. In my writeup on NZ First at its 2017 Convention, I compared the Party to Motörhead – on the basis that while it did seem to basically be releasing the same album every three years or so … that was OK, because that’s exactly what the fanbase seemed content with, and it kept things ticking over consistently if perhaps not immensely excitingly for everybody else within earshot of the stadium.
This no longer quite seems to be the case. Insofar as NZF’s found itself in the ineluctable position of no longer quite being able to convincingly play the rebel Outsider following nearly three years in Government … and is instead attempting to deploy an array of rather bemusing foreign-import cliches to try and give itself some maladroit ‘maverick’ appeal to paper over its lack of genuine, transformative change.
These range from those so-called ‘Bad-Boys of Brexit’ that either are or aren’t working for NZ First at this year’s Election contingent upon which day of the week it is and how the question is asked … through to Winston’s apparent keynote sub-theme of rejecting “Woke Pixie-Dust” in his yesterday’s address.
All up, the sense I’m getting from this is not Lemmy Kilmister. It’s rather, some *other* aging, punch-drunk hard-living music-scene stalwart that’s regrettably started to go a bit tone-deaf and as a result has gone down a bit of a peculiar trajectory in a semi-desperate bid to reclaim the ‘vibe’ of their now-distant youthful prime. Perhaps 2020 shall prove to be Winston’s “St Anger” moment. Or, possibly it’s like Dave Mustaine following the frankly remarkable recovery from his stroke – during which his born-again Evangelical Christianity really started to shine through with no off-switch and lead to the critically as well as fanbase panned ‘Super Collider’.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Anyway, I digress.
I wasn’t at NZ First’s Convention this year, so my perception of events is based on little more than media reports and talking with people actually still involved or proximate to the Party who were.
This appeared to confirm that the substance on-view in the media was broadly accurate: that not too terribly much of import occurred (with one major exception), and that in lieu of meaningful announcements, we had Winston attempting to out-woke on being anti-woke Judith Collins in a ‘how do you do, fellow kids’ sounding attack on what in the old days would have been termed ‘political correctness’, while also making pretty standard remarks about the importance of ‘stability’ and preparing for this country’s ‘future’.
And you know what? That’s not actually so bad. Most parties don’t signal flagship policy launches in Election years at their annual Conventions. They save those for when precious oxygen is needed on the campaign trail. Stability IS important, going forward – and it’s a pretty amusing and positive sight to compare the way the Coalition Government, despite containing three occasionally rather different parties … hasn’t imploded or rolled its leadership in the manner that National has done twice in two months over on the other side of the aisle. It would be nice to presume that ‘Stability’ of Government also means that NZ First is keen to make ready to support Labour (and perhaps the Greens) for a second term in office, but I suppose we’ll have to see what happens.
I’m rather less impressed all up with NZ First’s commitment to ‘back our future’, given that its major contribution (again, with the exception of Ron Mark’s decent defence portfolio work) to future-planning for New Zealand has been to turn on a somewhat less than discriminate hose of Provincial Growth Funding and seemingly support the continued status of New Zealand as economic colony through a lack of positive vision for transformative change away from over-reliance on primary industries and tourism (and this, in the same week that Tiwai Point’s closure unlocks by necessity a whole nother conceptual space for regional development in Southland) … but that is another rant for another time.
In terms of actual policy announcements … there appears to have been but one of serious significance – Tracey Martin’s push for the restoration of a Universal Family Benefit. Which is actually a pretty decent proposal. I don’t think that it’s a serious competitor for a Universal Basic Income – or, for that matter, to the Green Party’s significantly watered-down Guaranteed Minimum Income proposal … but that’s because these are different tools with different objectives in mind. You could probably even run them somewhat complementarily. And I perhaps wouldn’t even have brought up the Green Party’s GMI, except for the fact that Martin, in speaking about the NZF proposal, asserted that part of her objective was to “bust [the] myth” that “the Greens have got a monopoly in caring about poverty” with reference to their recent policy announcements in the relevant area.
Interestingly, the brusqueness towards the Greens … by claiming to be equal to or better than the Greens in what’s ostensibly Green Party core competency, was also something Winston got in on – declaring NZ First to be “in fact the greenest party in Parliament“. Presumably with a substance other than envy.
Which, if nothing else, goes to show that I was right all along about the two parties actually realizing they have more in common in terms of values than either really wants to believe … and therefore fighting bitterly, animositically as a result.
Now, in terms of the actual ‘mood of the people’, it may also be worth looking at a few of the policy remits that were successfully passed by the Party over the weekend. These included some somewhat predictable ones around abolishing conscience voting for MPs on matters put to referendum and doubling the manpower of our defence force in order to facilitate better humanitarian (as well as military) response.
But also some slightly more surprising ones, such as a push for greater efforts at recycling and minimizing the use of landfills … and, perhaps in light of present circumstances across the Pacific, a proposal to institute body cameras for Police and Corrections personnel.
All things considered, this year’s NZ First Convention – as seen from a rather far distance of a whole few suburbs away and second-hand (instead of just the smoke being second-hand as in previous years) – seems to have been a bit average. Nothing really bad appears to have happened … but, then, with the plausible exception of Martin’s Universal Family Benefit proposal, nothing rather remarkable seems to have occurred, either. Even the Green Monster that turned up part-way through Sunday was both ‘non-political’ and dealt with outside the venue by security.
As I have said … in an Election Year, this is almost to be expected – you could view Labour’s Convention a few weeks back in much the same light. However, the trouble is that with NZ First, I’m not really sure how much more and different they’re actually going to manage going forward from now until the Election.
It’s certainly possible that the Party shall surprise us with some visionary, big-ticket items that are actually worth turning out for. I definitely hope so.
It’s even possible that some of those visionary, big-ticket items (should they exist) are actually intended to be pursued with some vigour by the Party when (or, perhaps, if) it is back in Government in four or five months time.
Although after the way in which NZ First’s ever-mounting stack of Bottom Lines seemed to become occasional Bottom Afterthoughts during the course of last Election’s culminatory coalition negotiations process (a matter that was, to be fair, not necessarily under NZF’s control – unless it wanted to genuinely go cross-benches and/or subject the country to another election as a result of neither Labour nor National being prepared to countenance some of the more .. unique ones) , it could be well understanded if the Party chose to eschew such things (until it gets desperate) in favour of basically just standing upon its record.
A record which, for all its (occasional) faults – is not actually a bad one, especially in light of its positive contribution to good governance over the past three years, and keeping National seriously hammered for the nine years before that.
Certainly, the notion of ‘Stability’ and continuance for prudent governance is what Labour’s running on this time around – and therein lies at least half of the problem.
The Party will have perceived that being too closely aligned with Labour , effectively means becoming subconsciously indistinguishable from Labour – and therefore likely to become electorally eclipsed by them. This is the opposite scenario to what prevailed in 2011, wherein the Party being fundamentally distinct from Labour (not least, by virtue of being politically purportedly ‘dead’ at the time) induced many left-of-National Kiwis to tactically or enthusiastically vote for NZF as a fairly direct result.
So instead of running on its record of Good Governance with Labour, we see this curious Cat on the Doorstep campaign stratagem (that is to say, not quite sure whether ‘in’ or ‘out) – of simultaneously running on a record of supposed Good Governance against Labour (and the Greens), as can be seen with the ‘handbreak on silly policy’ rhetoric of late. But also performative signalling of just how different they are (or like to think they are) from Labour (and most especially the Greens) in areas that are heavily visually distinctive, but lacking in real substance.
Or, in other words, Winston’s “Woke Pixie Dust” is just exactly that. The Pictsie [with deference to his proud Scottish heritage] dusting of shouting “Woke” about the place [as he recently did to The Spinoff, for instance, to deflect from their scrutiny of his British associate’s pledged assistance], in order to distract from how little there is to easily distinguish NZ First and Labour from each other after three years joined at the hip in coalition governance and Cabinet.
“Where Is My Mind”, indeed.
And yet – it could be worse. While I’m not exactly enthused by this contemporary choice of stylistic veneer … in many ways, it’s preferable to NZF deciding to try and add substance to its claim of distinctiveness from those it’s recently been in government with. Because while in yesteryear it did this rather effectively by actually running to the economic left of the Labour party … I rather suspect that were it to try and do genuine policy or ethos distinctiveness from Labour (and the Greens) today, it would go in the exact opposite direction.
But this comes with a risk. The ‘Woke’ attack line is not merely a distracting bauble for some of its supporters to play with. It’s also something of a cathartic steam-valve for various portions of the Party that probably really do think that they’ve been enabling Government-By-Tumblr for the past three years and are now fed up with it.
What this means in practice, is that what’s supposed to be a gimmick – could turn into a much more genuinely felt and genuinely pushed surge of emotion. Especially with them Brexit Back-Street Boys involved. Soon as that happens, it could well turn into, to quote Megadeth’s Foreclosure of a Dream:
“Backed in a corner, caught up in the race
Means to an end ended in disgrace
Perspective is lost in the spirit of the chase”
That is to say, in much the same manner as Metallica in the early 2000s, NZF may wind up attempting to push through its doldrumish funk by channeling that raw frustration and emotion and have it become the message, the vibe itself. An outlet, rather than outreach, perhaps.
And while this may have worked rather well in previous years, and upon previous releases (by which I mean NZ First at its arguable necessary-best in 1993-1996 and 2011, and Metallica in its early best albums, Ride the Lightning and Master of Puppets) … the part that’s arguably missing in the here and now is both the technical proficiency to make it a seriously engaging output, as well as the ‘something to say’ to match that emotional heft to other than perceived personal annoyance.
A lack of realization of these facts – a lack of self awareness – and a decision to press forward down the rabbit-hole of what felt good at the time to release … appears to have been how St. Anger happened. An album which, for those unaware of the controversy, was basically the musical equivalent of recording a patient screaming their neuroses out in a therapy session. Which may sound incredibly Metal in theory … but in practice, the questionable (even arguably somewhat ‘tone-deaf’) quality of the result effectively definitively ended Metallica’s reign at or near the top of their relevant musical scene and splintered its fanbase irreparably.
You can see how this might relate to NZ First if it keeps going too hard down this trajectory as we head toward the Election – and especially if there’s little else to offset it or otherwise add substance to its offering.
I could probably take the metaphor further at some length (including Load / Reload and S&M representing NZF’s years in Government … therefore adding pressure to ‘act out’ at the end of the term to draw a line under the previous; and the frankly disconcerting supposition that if NZF’s emotive ‘Anti-Woke’ posturing is Metallica circa 2003, Judith Collins as the larger and likely more successful mobilizer of the phenomenon may be Nu Metal) … but this stopped being a report on NZF’s Convention and started being rather peculiar politico-musical history some paragraphs ago.
To phrase it succinctly, then – NZ First in its 27th year is facing a risky situation. The largely lackluster Convention isn’t really a problem for that – however the prospect of the party doubling or even trebling down on some of the only material from said Convention to actually get air-time (i.e. the “Woke Pixie-Dust” – the ruin of many a rockstar) in lieu of much else of substance … could lead to this becoming the Party’s “St. Anger Moment” – and thence joining the Twenty Seven Club itself.
A fate which, despite the Party’s traditional colours, would be a most unfortunate ‘Fade to Black’, indeed.


thedailyblog--2020-07-23--Questions for the Media to ask – if they have a spare moment or two

For the mainstream media , today was even a better day than yesterday .
More Sex .
More Politics .
More Sex AND Politics .
Yesterday , the msm dealt with Andrew Falloon .
The obscure backbench MP had been found to have sent pornographic images to at least four women .
The woman ’ s parents laid the complaint with PM Ardern ’ s office .
The images were unsolicited .
Judith Collins was advised by the Prime Minister and three days later , Mr Falloon resigned .
It was a straight forward case , reminiscent of Anthony Weiner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sending explicit images of himself to women – one of whom was under-age .
Unfortunately for the msm , the story of Andrew Falloon ran it ’ s cycle to it ’ s natural conclusion : he resigned from Parliament and would not stand for re-election .
It was a Sex and Politics story that no doubt generated umpteen million clicks , generating advertising revenue along the way .
Today ( 22 July ) , cue : Judith Collins and her revelation that government minister Iain Lees-Galloway had being engaged in a long-term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ RNZ ’ s Morning Report at around 7.26AM ; An hour earlier , at 6.31AM , Ms Collins had appeared on Mediaworks/TV3 ’ s “ AM Show “ with Duncan Garner ; It was at this point that Ms Collins disclosed the “ bombshell ” that a Labour politician was also under investigation for misconduct ; Duncan Garner : “ Have you received anything about Labour ministers or Labour MPs ?
” Judith Collins : “ I have actually , and I have advised the Prime Minister and I ’ ve asked for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it directly to her.
” Collins : “ Oh actually just yesterday but I passed it on … ” Remarkable difference in style .
PM Ardern passes complaint on to Ms Collins ( after gaining consent ) but does not capitalise on it by going to the media .
Judith Collins passes the complaint on to PM Ardern – then announces it to both The AM Show on TV3 and an hour later to RNZ ’ s Morning Report .
But according to her , she denied exploiting the issue and engaging in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ busy with the media all day denying she wasn ’ t politicking .
When a journo asked if it wasn ’ t Ms Collins who had disclosed and made public the issue to the media ( bless !
there ’ s at least one who asks an obvious question ) , she took pains to deny it ; “ No I haven ’ t actually put it in the public domain , I ’ ve been asked a direct question this morning on another news media about whether I have received anything like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have.
” But throughout the entire unsavoury spectacle of the media gorging on another Sex & Politics story , there are three questions that not only remain unanswered – they have not even been asked .
1. Who is the person who disclosed Iain Lees-Galloways affair to Judith Collins ?
Is this person a National Party member/staffer/operative ?
2 .
Did the woman , with whom Mr Lees-Galloway have the affair with , have prior knowledge , or give consent , to this issue being disclosed to other people and eventually made public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put the question – “ Have you received anything about Labour ministers or Labour MPs ?
” – to Ms Collins ?
Was he ‘ primed ’ beforehand ?
Why did he not ask if any other National MPs were engaged in similar behaviour ?
If he was ‘ primed ’ with fore knowledge , who advised him ?
These three questions would seem to be at the very core of how this story unfolded and why .
Because it doesn ’ t take much of a sleuth to understand that the timing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early morning media appearances has taken the blow torch of public attention off National and firmly onto Labour .
Secondly , it ‘ dilutes ’ the perception that National ’ s bloated sense of entitlement is at the core of it ’ s problems .
With the humiliating despatching of Mr Lees-Galloway , the perception is now that sleazy behaviour is rampant throughout all politicians , not just the Nats .
And thirdly/lastly , let ’ s not forget that most enduring quote from Nicky Hager ’ s expose , Dirty Politics ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ total destruction… But then I ’ ve learned to give is better than to receive.
” She called it the “ double ” rule : “ always reward with Double ” ; and said “ If you can ’ t be loved , then best to be feared.
” If Judith Collins wanted revenge for Hamish Walker and Andrew Falloon ’ s political demise , she certainly “ gave back double ” : a minister ’ s ‘ scalp ’ .
The questions above remain unasked and unanswered .
Until we gain greater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will remain fixated on titillating Sex & Politics .
Meanwhile , the bigger story remains untold .
It would be nice – for a change – if some hard questions were asked .
But only if the media have a spare moment or two Metro UK : Anthony Weiner jailed for sexting underage girl photos of his penis This blogpost will be re-published in five days on “ Frankly Speaking “ .
Reader ’ s comments may be left here ( The Daily Blog ) or there ( Frankly Speaking ) .

.
For the mainstream media, today was even a better day than yesterday. More Sex. More Politics. More Sex AND Politics.
Yesterday, the msm dealt with Andrew Falloon. The obscure backbench MP had been found to have sent pornographic images to at least four women.
The woman’s parents laid the complaint with PM Ardern’s office. The images were unsolicited.
Judith Collins was advised by the Prime Minister and three days later, Mr Falloon resigned.
It was a straight forward case, reminiscent of Anthony Weiner, a former US congressman outed for sending explicit images of himself to women – one of whom was under-age.
Unfortunately for the msm, the story of Andrew Falloon ran it’s cycle to it’s natural conclusion: he resigned from Parliament and would not stand for re-election.
It was a Sex and Politics story that no doubt generated umpteen million clicks, generating advertising revenue along the way.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Today (22 July), cue: Judith Collins and her revelation that government minister Iain Lees-Galloway had being engaged in a long-term affair with another woman.The story appeared on RNZ’s Morning Report at around 7.26AM;
.
.
An hour earlier, at 6.31AM, Ms Collins had appeared on Mediaworks/TV3’s “AM Show“ with Duncan Garner;
.
.
It was at this point that Ms Collins disclosed the “bombshell” that a Labour politician was also under investigation for misconduct;
Duncan Garner: “Have you received anything about Labour ministers or Labour MPs?”
Judith Collins: “I have actually, and I have advised the Prime Minister and I’ve asked for anybody who has that information to send it directly to her.”
Garner: “When did this happen?”
Collins: “Oh actually just yesterday but I passed it on …”
Remarkable difference in style. PM Ardern passes complaint on to Ms Collins (after gaining consent) but does not capitalise on it by going to the media.
Judith Collins passes the complaint on to PM Ardern – then announces it to both The AM Show on TV3 and an hour later to RNZ’s Morning Report. But according to her, she denied exploiting the issue and engaging in politicking. In fact, she was busy with the media all day denying she wasn’t politicking.
When a journo asked if it wasn’t Ms Collins who had disclosed and made public the issue to the media (bless! there’s at least one who asks an obvious question), she took pains to deny it;
“No I haven’t actually put it in the public domain, I’ve been asked a direct question this morning on another news media about whether I have received anything like that and the answer is yes I have.”
But throughout the entire unsavoury spectacle of the media gorging on another Sex & Politics story, there are three questions that not only remain unanswered – they have not even been asked .
1. Who is the person who disclosed Iain Lees-Galloways affair to Judith Collins? Is this person a National Party member/staffer/operative?
2. Did the woman, with whom Mr Lees-Galloway have the affair with, have prior knowledge, or give consent, to this issue being disclosed to other people and eventually made public?
3. Why did Duncan Garner put the question – “Have you received anything about Labour ministers or Labour MPs?” – to Ms Collins? Was he ‘primed’ beforehand? Why did he not ask if any other National MPs were engaged in similar behaviour? If he was ‘primed’ with fore knowledge, who advised him?
These three questions would seem to be at the very core of how this story unfolded and why. Because it doesn’t take much of a sleuth to understand that the timing of Ms Collin’s disclosures and early morning media appearances has taken the blow torch of public attention off National and firmly onto Labour.
Secondly, it ‘dilutes’ the perception that National’s bloated sense of entitlement is at the core of it’s problems. With the humiliating despatching of Mr Lees-Galloway, the perception is now that sleazy behaviour is rampant throughout all politicians, not just the Nats.
And thirdly/lastly, let’s not forget that most enduring quote from Nicky Hager’s expose, Dirty Politics;
“Personally I would be out for total destruction… But then I’ve learned to give is better than to receive.” She called it the “double” rule: “always reward with Double”; and said “If you can’t be loved, then best to be feared.”
If Judith Collins wanted revenge for Hamish Walker and Andrew Falloon’s political demise, she certainly “gave back double”: a minister’s ‘scalp’.
At Raybon Kan hinted at earlier today;
.
.
The questions above remain unasked and unanswered.
Until we gain greater clarity, the story surrounding Mr Lees-Galloway will remain fixated on titillating Sex & Politics. Meanwhile, the bigger story remains untold.
It would be nice – for a change – if some hard questions were asked. But only if the media have a spare moment or two
.
References
NZ Herald: National MP Andrew Falloon quits after sending sexual image to female university student
RNZ: Falloon texts – What meets threshold for prosecution?
Metro UK: Anthony Weiner jailed for sexting underage girl photos of his penis
.
Acknowledgement: Rod Emmerson
.
This blogpost will be re-published in five days on “Frankly Speaking“. Reader’s comments may be left here (The Daily Blog) or there (Frankly Speaking).
.
.
= fs =


thedailyblog--2020-07-23--Why Is The Left Not Opposing The West’s New Cold War With China?

ANTI-RACISM IS BIG at the moment – very big .
Why , then , are so many on the left of politics , both here and overseas , climbing aboard the Western powers ’ New Cold War Express ?
The European nations that profited most from the trans-Atlantic slave trade ; the ruthless beneficiaries of the plantation system ; the peoples who introduced the terms “ white ” and “ black ” to the world ’ s vocabulary ; these are the racist capitalist imperialists the Left is lining up with against the Peoples Republic of China .
Given that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the very brink of nuclear annihilation , the idea of joining in the creation of a new one seems ever-so-slightly daft .
Why can ’ t the Left see that ?
The answer , sadly , is that the contemporary Left is almost entirely ignorant of geopolitics and the strict limitations it places on diplomatic action .
Even when it comes to basic economics and its decisive influence on politics , the Left ’ s powers of analysis have atrophied to an astonishing degree .
All that remains to those who still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ersatz “ morality ” with which the Western powers are so adept at cloaking their attacks on geopolitical and economic rivals .
China must become our enemy because of its treatment of Tibet , the persecution of the Uighurs , and the suppression of political dissent in Hong Kong .
Let ’ s deconstruct this analysis piece by piece – starting with Tibet .
In geopolitical terms , Tibet constitutes the “ high ground ” of Eurasia .
Whenever the Chinese Empire was strong enough to assert its suzerainty over Tibet ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Tibetan theocracy willingly paid homage to Beijing .
In the nineteenth century , however , the British transformed Tibet into one of its many “ protectorates ” .
In the “ Great Game ” ( the euphemistic term employed to describe the imperial moves and counter-moves of the British and Russian empires for control of Central Asia ) Tibet was seen by London as crucial to the protection of India ’ s northern flank .
China , humbled in the same wars that secured the island of Hong Kong for Her Britannic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resist .
Fast-forward to the middle of the twentieth century .
The British Empire is in full retreat .
India has won its independence .
The Chinese Communist Party has driven the nationalist Kuomintang regime off the Chinese mainland and , with the support of its Soviet ally , is well-positioned to restore China ’ s suzerainty over Tibet .
In geopolitical terms , the CCP has little choice .
Acknowledging Tibet ’ s “ independence ” , would be interpreted by the Indians and the Soviets as an invitation to fill the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Peoples Liberation Army occupies Tibet , dismantles its feudal Buddhist theocracy , and drives the Dalai Lama over the Himalayas to exile in India .
While the Communist Party retains power in Beijing , Tibet will remain under Chinese control .
And , for as long as well-meaning new-agers in the West demand the restoration of the Dalai Lama , Beijing will do everything it can to smother Tibetan nationalism .
Tragically , that means smothering the ancient religious culture which inspires the nationalists ’ resistance .
The louder the international clamour for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the CCP becomes to transform the territory into just another Chinese province .
Perhaps Richard Gere and his fellow travellers might like to think about that the next time they feel moved to raise the flag of “ Free Tibet ” ?
An equal determination to crush the forces of religious nationalism is evident in Xinjiang , where the CCP has launched a massive campaign to neutralise the ability of the Islamic faith to arm – both literally and figuratively – the nascent movement for Uighur independence .
With Xinjiang sharing its western @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Kyrgyzstan , Tajikistan , Afghanistan and Pakistan , Beijing ’ s nervousness is understandable .
The concentration of upwards of a million “ suspect ” Uighurs in massive high-rise complexes reflects the CCP ’ s longstanding belief in the superiority of coercive social-engineering over the much more costly alternative ( in every sense ) of full-scale military engagement and “ pacification ” .
Beijing has observed the philosophical cul-de-sacs into which the West ’ s policies of multicultural diversity and religious tolerance have driven it , and remains committed to enforcing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That China ’ s official communist ideology now finds itself engaged in a no-holds-barred , hearts-and-minds struggle with the Islamic religion is in no way considered wrong or unfortunate .
Rather , it is seen as a necessary and unavoidable confrontation between progressive and reactionary thinking .
A vast “ struggle session ” from which , it is confidently assumed , the Chinese state will emerge stronger and more united than ever .
Beijing is no more willing to countenance a challenge to its sovereignty from the eastern extremity of the Peoples @ @ @ @ @ @ @ west .
Indeed , the threat of an Islamic jihad breaking out in Xinjiang , and the year-long protests bedevilling the “ Special Administrative Region ” of Hong Kong , are viewed as evidence of a single , US-led , effort to divert and delay China ’ s re-emergence as the world ’ s dominant power .
From the CCP ’ s perspective , the slightest indication of weakness on the part of the Chinese state will only encourage the West to apply new and greater pressures at other points of perceived vulnerability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illustrative of the West ’ s long-term Chinese strategy .
It has been an article of faith in Western capitals for many decades that the adoption of what they considered “ capitalism ” by Deng Xiaoping in 1979 would lead China inexorably towards “ liberal democracy ” .
Far from being seen as proof that Beijing will do whatever it takes to avoid the fate of the Soviet Union , the West interpreted the 1989 massacre in Tiananmen Square as merely the first act in a drama that would expand and intensify until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freedoms .
Hong Kong was supposed to show Beijing the way .
In time the whole of China would embrace free speech and the rule of law .
What China saw was something quite different .
“ Liberal democracy ” , as applied in what had been the Soviet Union , brought only territorial disintegration , corruption and Nato ’ s relentless advance to Russia ’ s suddenly buffer-less and strategically vulnerable borders .
Boris Yeltsin , a boorish drunkard , epitomised the humiliation of the once proud Soviet state .
He presided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expectancy of the Russian people plummeted .
That he won re-election was due almost entirely to the shameless intervention of American political fixers .
If these were the blessings of liberal democracy , Beijing wanted none of them !
China ’ s national security apparatus was particularly determined to ward off any hint of the so-called “ colour revolutions ” which had swept Europe ’ s former socialist states .
It familiarised itself with the tactics of these initially student-based “ non-violent ” protest movements .
They noted how , when met with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to blossom into society-wide uprisings .
They also tracked the involvement of foreign advisers and their American funders .
What had worked in Belgrade , Tbilisi and Kiev would not be permitted to work in Hong Kong .
While Washington waited impatiently for the arrival of the PLA – and another Tiananmen bloodbath – Beijing quietly prepared its new Security Law .
Slowly , but unmistakably , the yellow ribbons and umbrellas of Hong Kong ’ s year of living dangerously are melting away .
In 1900 , an eight-nation alliance of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suppress the popular revolutionary movement which was threatening to end foreign influence in China .
Comprised of British , French , German , Russian , Austro-Hungarian , Italian , United States and Japanese military units ( along with state contingents from Australia ) this 45,000-strong force subdued the revolutionaries , pillaged Beijing , and forced the Imperial Chinese government to meet the costs of their punitive expedition .
The moral tenor of this frankly and unapologetically imperialist intervention is best captured in the message sent to his troops by the German Kaiser , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ awaits you : You must see to it that a serious injustice is expiated .
The Chinese have overturned the law of nations .
Never before in world history have the sanctity of diplomats and the obligations of hospitality been subjected to such contempt .
It is all the more outrageous that these crimes have been committed by a nation which prides itself on its ancient culture …..
When you come upon him , know this : Pardon will not be given .
Prisoners will not be taken .
Bear your weapons so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will dare even to squint at a German.
” 120 years later , the racist assumptions of the Western powers vis-à-vis China have hardly changed at all .
They still arrogate to themselves the right to dispose of the future of the Chinese people as they see fit .
There remains the same racist assumption that the West ’ s values and institutions are superior in every way to those of a civilisation that has endured for 3,000 years .
The same hunger for profits that drove the British to force their opium @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the point of a gun , continues to drive the Western capitalist elites .
Nothing is forbidden to those whose skins are white .
Such is the historical force alongside which the Western Left has chosen to position itself .

ANTI-RACISM IS BIG at the moment – very big. Why, then, are so many on the left of politics, both here and overseas, climbing aboard the Western powers’ New Cold War Express? The European nations that profited most from the trans-Atlantic slave trade; the ruthless beneficiaries of the plantation system; the peoples who introduced the terms “white” and “black” to the world’s vocabulary; these are the racist capitalist imperialists the Left is lining up with against the Peoples Republic of China. Given that the Old Cold War brought the world to the very brink of nuclear annihilation, the idea of joining in the creation of a new one seems ever-so-slightly daft. Why can’t the Left see that?
The answer, sadly, is that the contemporary Left is almost entirely ignorant of geopolitics and the strict limitations it places on diplomatic action. Even when it comes to basic economics and its decisive influence on politics, the Left’s powers of analysis have atrophied to an astonishing degree. All that remains to those who still identify themselves as “left-wing” is the ersatz “morality” with which the Western powers are so adept at cloaking their attacks on geopolitical and economic rivals. China must become our enemy because of its treatment of Tibet, the persecution of the Uighurs, and the suppression of political dissent in Hong Kong.
Let’s deconstruct this analysis piece by piece – starting with Tibet.
In geopolitical terms, Tibet constitutes the “high ground” of Eurasia. Whenever the Chinese Empire was strong enough to assert its suzerainty over Tibet (which was most of the time) the Tibetan theocracy willingly paid homage to Beijing. In the nineteenth century, however, the British transformed Tibet into one of its many “protectorates”. In the “Great Game” (the euphemistic term employed to describe the imperial moves and counter-moves of the British and Russian empires for control of Central Asia) Tibet was seen by London as crucial to the protection of India’s northern flank. China, humbled in the same wars that secured the island of Hong Kong for Her Britannic Majesty, was in no position to resist.
Fast-forward to the middle of the twentieth century. The British Empire is in full retreat. India has won its independence. The Chinese Communist Party has driven the nationalist Kuomintang regime off the Chinese mainland and, with the support of its Soviet ally, is well-positioned to restore China’s suzerainty over Tibet. In geopolitical terms, the CCP has little choice. Acknowledging Tibet’s “independence”, would be interpreted by the Indians and the Soviets as an invitation to fill the power vacuum themselves. Accordingly, the Peoples Liberation Army occupies Tibet, dismantles its feudal Buddhist theocracy, and drives the Dalai Lama over the Himalayas to exile in India.
While the Communist Party retains power in Beijing, Tibet will remain under Chinese control. And, for as long as well-meaning new-agers in the West demand the restoration of the Dalai Lama, Beijing will do everything it can to smother Tibetan nationalism. Tragically, that means smothering the ancient religious culture which inspires the nationalists’ resistance. The louder the international clamour for an independent Tibet, the more determined the CCP becomes to transform the territory into just another Chinese province. Perhaps Richard Gere and his fellow travellers might like to think about that the next time they feel moved to raise the flag of “Free Tibet”?
An equal determination to crush the forces of religious nationalism is evident in Xinjiang, where the CCP has launched a massive campaign to neutralise the ability of the Islamic faith to arm – both literally and figuratively – the nascent movement for Uighur independence. With Xinjiang sharing its western border with five Islamic states: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan, Beijing’s nervousness is understandable. The concentration of upwards of a million “suspect” Uighurs in massive high-rise complexes reflects the CCP’s longstanding belief in the superiority of coercive social-engineering over the much more costly alternative (in every sense) of full-scale military engagement and “pacification”.
Beijing has observed the philosophical cul-de-sacs into which the West’s policies of multicultural diversity and religious tolerance have driven it, and remains committed to enforcing a single, Han Chinese-derived definition of citizenship. That China’s official communist ideology now finds itself engaged in a no-holds-barred, hearts-and-minds struggle with the Islamic religion is in no way considered wrong or unfortunate. Rather, it is seen as a necessary and unavoidable confrontation between progressive and reactionary thinking. A vast “struggle session” from which, it is confidently assumed, the Chinese state will emerge stronger and more united than ever.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Beijing is no more willing to countenance a challenge to its sovereignty from the eastern extremity of the Peoples Republic than it is from its uttermost west. Indeed, the threat of an Islamic jihad breaking out in Xinjiang, and the year-long protests bedevilling the “Special Administrative Region” of Hong Kong, are viewed as evidence of a single, US-led, effort to divert and delay China’s re-emergence as the world’s dominant power. From the CCP’s perspective, the slightest indication of weakness on the part of the Chinese state will only encourage the West to apply new and greater pressures at other points of perceived vulnerability.
The story of Hong Kong is illustrative of the West’s long-term Chinese strategy. It has been an article of faith in Western capitals for many decades that the adoption of what they considered “capitalism” by Deng Xiaoping in 1979 would lead China inexorably towards “liberal democracy”. Far from being seen as proof that Beijing will do whatever it takes to avoid the fate of the Soviet Union, the West interpreted the 1989 massacre in Tiananmen Square as merely the first act in a drama that would expand and intensify until the inevitable triumph of human rights and freedoms. Hong Kong was supposed to show Beijing the way. In time the whole of China would embrace free speech and the rule of law.
What China saw was something quite different. “Liberal democracy”, as applied in what had been the Soviet Union, brought only territorial disintegration, corruption and Nato’s relentless advance to Russia’s suddenly buffer-less and strategically vulnerable borders. Boris Yeltsin, a boorish drunkard, epitomised the humiliation of the once proud Soviet state. He presided over a vicious kleptocracy while the life expectancy of the Russian people plummeted. That he won re-election was due almost entirely to the shameless intervention of American political fixers. If these were the blessings of liberal democracy, Beijing wanted none of them!
China’s national security apparatus was particularly determined to ward off any hint of the so-called “colour revolutions” which had swept Europe’s former socialist states. It familiarised itself with the tactics of these initially student-based “non-violent” protest movements. They noted how, when met with brutal state repression, these movements were able to blossom into society-wide uprisings. They also tracked the involvement of foreign advisers and their American funders.
What had worked in Belgrade, Tbilisi and Kiev would not be permitted to work in Hong Kong. While Washington waited impatiently for the arrival of the PLA – and another Tiananmen bloodbath – Beijing quietly prepared its new Security Law. Slowly, but unmistakably, the yellow ribbons and umbrellas of Hong Kong’s year of living dangerously are melting away.
In 1900, an eight-nation alliance of Western powers mounted a military intervention to suppress the popular revolutionary movement which was threatening to end foreign influence in China. Comprised of British, French, German, Russian, Austro-Hungarian, Italian, United States and Japanese military units (along with state contingents from Australia) this 45,000-strong force subdued the revolutionaries, pillaged Beijing, and forced the Imperial Chinese government to meet the costs of their punitive expedition.
The moral tenor of this frankly and unapologetically imperialist intervention is best captured in the message sent to his troops by the German Kaiser, Wilhelm II:
“A great task awaits you: You must see to it that a serious injustice is expiated. The Chinese have overturned the law of nations. Never before in world history have the sanctity of diplomats and the obligations of hospitality been subjected to such contempt. It is all the more outrageous that these crimes have been committed by a nation which prides itself on its ancient culture ….. When you come upon him, know this: Pardon will not be given. Prisoners will not be taken. Bear your weapons so that for a thousand years no Chinaman will dare even to squint at a German.”
120 years later, the racist assumptions of the Western powers vis-à-vis China have hardly changed at all. They still arrogate to themselves the right to dispose of the future of the Chinese people as they see fit. There remains the same racist assumption that the West’s values and institutions are superior in every way to those of a civilisation that has endured for 3,000 years. The same hunger for profits that drove the British to force their opium into the lungs of the Chinese people at the point of a gun, continues to drive the Western capitalist elites. Nothing is forbidden to those whose skins are white.
Such is the historical force alongside which the Western Left has chosen to position itself.