WHAT PASSES for “Left” commentary these days insists that New Zealand is living under a “hard-right” government. Clearly, these commentators are unfamiliar with what constitutes a hard-right government. Equally clearly, they know next to nothing about New Zealand political history. Compared to the governments of Bill Massey, George Forbes, Sid Holland and Rob Muldoon, the coalition government of Christopher Luxon is a decidedly mild affair. The Left has mistaken a moderate and well-signalled political course correction for a reactionary reversal of progressive fortunes.
A good question, Andrew, about which I thought long and hard.
The reason I did not include Bolger's government is twofold. First, the economic and social policies it introduced were of a piece with those introduced by the Fourth Labour Government - although, one could argue, more extreme. If unapologetic neoliberalism were to be the criteria for labelling a government "hard-right", then every government of New Zealand since 1984 must be so designated, which makes the whole argument a bit soggy. (Or, should that be impossibly dry and dusty?)
The second reason, is that on the big questions - the unions and welfare in particular - the National Party had sought and been given an electoral mandate. In such circumstances, denouncing it as "hard-right" suggests that the electorate has no right to turn in that direction. But, if we were to accept this, then Democracy itself goes down the plughole.
Jenny Shipley's "government", on the other hand, possessed no mandate whatsoever, and would, I believe, have carried New Zealand a lot further to the right, had its precarious majority not prevented it from doing so.
Thought provoking read. I like Anderton's 'motto'. I think that sums it up well.
Was a bit jarring to read John Campbell's article. As someone said, he's working through the stages of grief. But to accuse the current Govt of being mainly populist, when we have just come through 5 years of Jacinda Ardern as our PM?
Curious as to why the 4th National Government (at least the 1990 to 1993 phase did not make the list of hard-right. What is neoliberalism - some sort of moderate ideological programme?
Every time that Chris Trotter says "most New Zealanders", it is reasonably easy to understand that he is talking about himself and the people that he knows.
I’m not sure Kiwis are conservative?If so so a small “c”. Pretty individualistic still so rubbing up against collective cultures was always going to be difficult. I think their will be lasting improvement in indigenous understanding and appreciation support for two or more languages etc but their are still real structural problems there which are simply prejudiced which it’s a shame Labour avoided tackling or simply didn’t know how to/couldn’t be bothered. They really looked shambolic in the end.Dumping their two best policies was a mistake which were thermos only saving grace, relying on Hipkins charm was hilarious and delusional given his hopeless results in every portfolio and their record meant a well deserved loss. A three way result puts the incumbents now on notice they haven’t got long to get it right this time. Obviously one can assume they don’t care as they get paid on either side so I should think they need to get their skates on with the fundamentals. Not looking inspiring so far. Seem to be back onto their pet projects rather than fundamentals pretty quick, complaining whinging and blaming pretty quick. Truly pathetic lies.At least Foreign Affairs is in a safe pair of experienced hands. The rest are making rookie errors already. So roll on the next election already. Kiwis will just have to continue to be vaguely irritated by incompetent bureaucracy and services failing the majority for longer and a government working for the rich in all likelihood and listen to all the whining and excuses around funding (while the rich get richer) for another decade or so when the solutions are all in front of them in terms of simple updating reform to be lawful and meet international standards and obligations. Probably still more exploitation and number eight wire for the majority of the population (women and children) being the biggest group getting the least of the resources and upholding of legal and human rights as usual. Yawn. 😂
Willis is a PLANT by ATLAS Network as her father is a big shot in that organisation. he wants her to be Dep PM. But she does not have the skills, knowledge to do the job and is floundering all over the ocean. but if she persists with Tax cuts this year for the super wealthy, all of NZ will founder. and she alone will be to blame.
Although Government funded mainstream news has been important for democracy in the past, the world has changed with easy, relatively low cost electronic communications even now providing multiple news and views services leaning all different ways that everybody can access. That together with mainstream media prostituting itself for a pocketful of silver, casting to one side the traditional independence of the press, irrespective of whether they would have pursued the ideology anyway without arm twisting contract clauses, together with a Government bent on taxpayer funded visits to the red light district, should now be seen as a signal to end Government subsidised news. Democracy I suggest will be better rather than worse off by pulling the financial rug from underneath biased, unreliable, cherry picked mainstream news presented as gospel, which has a disproportionate impact on political perceptions.
I'm finding it hard to reconcile the message of this piece (originally posted on The Democracy Project website on Monday, 8 January 2024. ) which appears in a sympathetic vein to interpret the nation's current socio-political situation as the legitimate expression of the democratic will of New Zealand people, with the message of Chris's latest piece a week later ("When Push Comes to Shove” - Democracy Project, 15 January 2024) which argues that to placate Maoridom immediately, aspects of the agenda of the Coalition Government must swiftly be undone And that as an outcome of the election we are now in a proto-revolutionary situation so that “As the bicentenary of the signing of Te Tiriti looms ever nearer, the Pakeha settler state faces two, equally unpalatable choices. It will either have to accede to a Māori-led constitutional revolution, or find its own, twenty-first-century equivalent of General Cameron.”
*Could Chris dispel my cognitive dissonance?
+ Are the “equally unpalatable” 2040 alternatives he proposes, to be the only ones available?
A good question, Andrew, about which I thought long and hard.
The reason I did not include Bolger's government is twofold. First, the economic and social policies it introduced were of a piece with those introduced by the Fourth Labour Government - although, one could argue, more extreme. If unapologetic neoliberalism were to be the criteria for labelling a government "hard-right", then every government of New Zealand since 1984 must be so designated, which makes the whole argument a bit soggy. (Or, should that be impossibly dry and dusty?)
The second reason, is that on the big questions - the unions and welfare in particular - the National Party had sought and been given an electoral mandate. In such circumstances, denouncing it as "hard-right" suggests that the electorate has no right to turn in that direction. But, if we were to accept this, then Democracy itself goes down the plughole.
Jenny Shipley's "government", on the other hand, possessed no mandate whatsoever, and would, I believe, have carried New Zealand a lot further to the right, had its precarious majority not prevented it from doing so.
Thought provoking read. I like Anderton's 'motto'. I think that sums it up well.
Was a bit jarring to read John Campbell's article. As someone said, he's working through the stages of grief. But to accuse the current Govt of being mainly populist, when we have just come through 5 years of Jacinda Ardern as our PM?
All very true - but did you also mention the dishonesty ?-the withholding of the truth and the blackmail of the PIJF?
Outstanding commentary. Thank you.
Curious as to why the 4th National Government (at least the 1990 to 1993 phase did not make the list of hard-right. What is neoliberalism - some sort of moderate ideological programme?
Every time that Chris Trotter says "most New Zealanders", it is reasonably easy to understand that he is talking about himself and the people that he knows.
I’m not sure Kiwis are conservative?If so so a small “c”. Pretty individualistic still so rubbing up against collective cultures was always going to be difficult. I think their will be lasting improvement in indigenous understanding and appreciation support for two or more languages etc but their are still real structural problems there which are simply prejudiced which it’s a shame Labour avoided tackling or simply didn’t know how to/couldn’t be bothered. They really looked shambolic in the end.Dumping their two best policies was a mistake which were thermos only saving grace, relying on Hipkins charm was hilarious and delusional given his hopeless results in every portfolio and their record meant a well deserved loss. A three way result puts the incumbents now on notice they haven’t got long to get it right this time. Obviously one can assume they don’t care as they get paid on either side so I should think they need to get their skates on with the fundamentals. Not looking inspiring so far. Seem to be back onto their pet projects rather than fundamentals pretty quick, complaining whinging and blaming pretty quick. Truly pathetic lies.At least Foreign Affairs is in a safe pair of experienced hands. The rest are making rookie errors already. So roll on the next election already. Kiwis will just have to continue to be vaguely irritated by incompetent bureaucracy and services failing the majority for longer and a government working for the rich in all likelihood and listen to all the whining and excuses around funding (while the rich get richer) for another decade or so when the solutions are all in front of them in terms of simple updating reform to be lawful and meet international standards and obligations. Probably still more exploitation and number eight wire for the majority of the population (women and children) being the biggest group getting the least of the resources and upholding of legal and human rights as usual. Yawn. 😂
Willis is a PLANT by ATLAS Network as her father is a big shot in that organisation. he wants her to be Dep PM. But she does not have the skills, knowledge to do the job and is floundering all over the ocean. but if she persists with Tax cuts this year for the super wealthy, all of NZ will founder. and she alone will be to blame.
Although Government funded mainstream news has been important for democracy in the past, the world has changed with easy, relatively low cost electronic communications even now providing multiple news and views services leaning all different ways that everybody can access. That together with mainstream media prostituting itself for a pocketful of silver, casting to one side the traditional independence of the press, irrespective of whether they would have pursued the ideology anyway without arm twisting contract clauses, together with a Government bent on taxpayer funded visits to the red light district, should now be seen as a signal to end Government subsidised news. Democracy I suggest will be better rather than worse off by pulling the financial rug from underneath biased, unreliable, cherry picked mainstream news presented as gospel, which has a disproportionate impact on political perceptions.
I'm finding it hard to reconcile the message of this piece (originally posted on The Democracy Project website on Monday, 8 January 2024. ) which appears in a sympathetic vein to interpret the nation's current socio-political situation as the legitimate expression of the democratic will of New Zealand people, with the message of Chris's latest piece a week later ("When Push Comes to Shove” - Democracy Project, 15 January 2024) which argues that to placate Maoridom immediately, aspects of the agenda of the Coalition Government must swiftly be undone And that as an outcome of the election we are now in a proto-revolutionary situation so that “As the bicentenary of the signing of Te Tiriti looms ever nearer, the Pakeha settler state faces two, equally unpalatable choices. It will either have to accede to a Māori-led constitutional revolution, or find its own, twenty-first-century equivalent of General Cameron.”
*Could Chris dispel my cognitive dissonance?
+ Are the “equally unpalatable” 2040 alternatives he proposes, to be the only ones available?