Mountain Tui: Trump’s shooting reveals a hidden danger for New Zealand too

Written By: - Date published: 10:00 am, July 15th, 2024 - 73 comments
Categories: corruption, Donald Trump, spin, taxpayers union - Tags: , , ,

Today’s video footage and news of Trump’s shooting has shaken the world. Writ large, it has taken over headlines, captivated audiences, and become an overpowering talking point for many.

Trump, a professional strongman to his core, pumped his fists in the air multiple times as a show of defiance and strength, as Secret Service swarmed, and whisked him to safety. Allies of Trump heralded this as a great opportunity that showed Trump’s strength.

Everyone else, including New Zealand Prime Minister Luxon, condemned the violent act.

The gunman was about 137 metres away, on a flat roof of a nearby building, when he took the shots. It was a clear, straight line to Trump in what has been described as a serious security oversight.

Witnesses reported calling to police and Secret Service for a few minutes before the shooting.

Mr Smith said he tried to alert the police and secret service for three to four minutes, but thought they probably could not see the gunman because of the slope of the roof.

“Why is there not Secret Service on all of these roofs here?” he asked. “This is not a big place. “[It’s a] security failure, 100% security failure.”

“I’m thinking to myself ‘Why is Trump still speaking, why have they not pulled him off the stage’… the next thing you know, five shots ring out.”

Now that in itself makes for some interesting analysis, if only for pure incompetence.

But the world media is full of information and live updates on the matter, and my intention isn’t to replicate or speculate.

Instead, I want to use this opportunity to reflect on some history, and re-consider what this might mean for our own country, Aotearoa New Zealand.

America’s past and present

In 1838, the 16th President Abraham Lincoln reflected:

At what point is the approach of danger to be expected for our country? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad.

These words of Lincoln are prescient.

For a long time, it felt like the USA was a formidable country of strength and unity.

It wasn’t too long ago that Americans danced together to the chant of “U.S.A,” spoke proudly of their nation, and the phrase “My fellow American” seemed to be heartfelt and deeply cherished. They were never perfect.

But that unity has more than flailed. That sense of commonality has more than frayed.

Today, we see discourse coloured with shades of potential aggression – America vs America.

A combination of culture wars, corruption, and intentional mis- and dis-information, have well and truly split the American people.

It’s not about the division between left vs right, liberal vs conservative, or woke vs unempathetic – it’s the radicalization that is the real danger here. As one side veers, the other is automatically carried into that space too.

Radicalisation refers to making someone become more extreme in their political or religious beliefs, often seeing opponents as enemies.

Fanned by corporate right wing media, leaders, and politicians, some Americans started to buy deeply into the narrative that the country was overrun by illegal immigrants, the economy was free-falling with little hope in sight, and ‘corrupt, useless, woke, left wing politics and politicians’ were largely to blame for all of their problems.

They started to believe that one side was useless, actively contributed to their ill fortunes, and were working against the good of America.

Any contrary points are ignored, sidestepped, or re-cast as malicious or useless.

Discourse was now no longer about policies, understanding, or working together to find the best solution for unified prosperity, cohesion, and harmony.

For some, it had shifted to seeing the other side of the aisle as the root cause of all their problems. An enemy even.

I’m not talking about fringe fanatics here, but the spreading of fanaticism into the mainstream. i.e. making people more extreme – using fear, misinformation, and anger – to change an entire country’s culture.

So as those tendencies grew on the right, and the aversion towards e.g. “woke liberals.” intensified, Trump became the perfect mirror and vessel.

Once highly respected Republicans like Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney, were now labeled as fake Republicans, and jeered and driven out by those devoted to Trump.

In truth, these are extraordinary developments, and the primary source of all that is the poisoned chalice of misinformation wars, created by people with agendas of their own.

The real genius of it all is that, on the surface, the logic can be applied to different sides, as the left started seeing more risks and moved more resolutely in opposition too. The truth as always lies in history, in nuance, in the facts, the details. And that is why some parties will actively promote ignorance, misinformation and populist slogans, while others try their best to educate, inform and fact check.

That is the great paradigm shift we are seeing.

And what was willed, is what may come to be.

Trump’s ‘Project 2025,’ a plan to autocrat America and bring it under unilateral Trump rule if he wins, would fundamentally change what America even is.

Trump appears big on trickle down economics and anti-environment policies. He’s big on military power and punishing those who oppose him. He also appears big on billionaire interests, corporations and sovereign countries like Saudi Arabia and Russia.

It’s almost impossible to work with people who are not there to work with you. If they exist only to score political points, or serve the interests of corporate donors, billionaire interests, or even other countries with deep pockets, then there is no working political system.

It’s going to be ugly in America now no matter who wins because fanaticism, disinformation and wrong beliefs were allowed to perpetuate for far too long.

How this impacts New Zealand

New Zealand has its own issues to contend with. We are the most immature in terms of going down that path of culture wars and disinformation. However, we are not immune.

Misinformation is defined as incorrect or misleading information, with or without malicious intent.

The “Stop 3 Waters” campaign, for example, led by the New Zealand Taxpayers Union, appears to have had quite a few populist slogans e.g. Less Democracy / Higher Water Costs.

I recall many around them would chant and repeat “3 Waters is theft,” which is frankly baffling when the infrastructure all remained under government ownership.

I assume “less democracy” refers to Councils forfeiting governance to a more centralised, regional model.

One, do ratepayers currently direct Councils how to manage water assets? Second, is that their job, and third, is the risk that ratepayers are unhappy one of reasons we are at risk of broken pipes, mind-blowing infrastructure debt, and non-safe drinking water in the first place?

If so, what does “less democracy” truly mean, in context?

A closer look about why that was in play could also be gleaned from the Royal Commission into Havelock North water. The Commission found that after 5000 Kiwis were poisoned, four died and others, disabled, it was clear NZ “local” councils’ water infrastructure management had significant deficiencies.

Could that be a reason, I wonder, too?

Then the National Party themselves – while still in Government in 2017 – issued this Cabinet memo and highlighted why central oversight was valuable:

In contrast to other infrastructure sectors, the three waters sector has minimal central oversight to provide transparency, address challenges and actively encourage service improvements. There is is little consistent, reliable information.. which potentially creates unforeseen risks that there will be sudden infrastructure failures and/or declines… Smaller local authorities may also lack the specialist capability and capacity to deliver.

Last but not least, council credit ratings, which are invariably lower than central government, would have meant higher costs, so direct council control was removed for that reason i.e. keeping rates affordable for everyday Kiwis while addressing the significant infrastructure debt that has risen to estimates of between ~$185bn-$200bn today.

Did “Taxpayers Union” – the organisation that Jordan Williams and David Farrar create – advertise these points within the context of their attack ads? I’m not sure, myself, but I do recall see large ‘3 Waters is theft‘ and ‘Stop 3 Waters‘ signs all over New Zealand.

Interestingly, NZ TPU have been linked to big tobacco and overseas right wing affiliated money.

In Dirty Politics, Hager wrote the Taxpayers’ Union “operates, in effect, as an arm’s-length ally of the National Party” and called it a “political tool”. The following year, political scientist Bryce Edwards described the Taxpayers’ Union to the NZ Herald as “the Act Party in drag”.

TPU spearheaded successful attack ads on Labour and Greens, spending record amounts during the last election. In 2018, reports said they already had $3 million in its coffers from unnamed donations, and they appear resourceful and busy.

And last year, on the right wing think tank ‘Atlas Network’ website, Jordan Williams boasted about how soon, New Zealand could become another libertarian “laboratory” as Taxpayers Union would work closely with the incoming Coalition Government.

They are also an unaccountable entity.

So when NZ Taxpayers Union promised rates would be higher under Labour’s 3 Waters model, who is holding them to account?

S&P – a global ratings agency – has consistently called out that under National’s water model, water rates will probably be higher. In February 2024, Kieran McNulty re-iterated: “You can’t have direct council control and balance sheet separation. It’s councils that are going to cop higher rates

The evidence seems to suggest this is true, despite National’s assurances last year that rates under their model would be the same or cheaper than Labour’s.

This is the problem with any misinformation – intentional or otherwise – it is effective and can be weaponized for political wins, as we’ve seen in the US and other places.

Now will National, aided by Taxpayers Union press releases, manouvere things to set our water assets up for privatisation to avoid the truth of higher costs? (Wait, who whispered Kiwrail just now?)

That’s for another day.

We still have an opportunity to course correct

Our relative, newer inception into the world of bold, unabashed, reckless misinformation means we still have one strong advantage.

And that is the gift of foresight.

We’ve seen how this story plays out overseas in the UK and the US.

We’ve learned how populist campaigns do their work to divide and conquer, and how divisive rhetoric can damage not only the people it is targetting e.g. Maori as one example, but also an entire country.

I believe that the people behind such antics do not care about the welfare or prosperity of New Zealanders, but instead are playing for other purposes.

As we’ve seen in the UK and the USA, a country’s self-destruction is the least of concerns for people who would play in this space.

I wrote on my Substack that the CEO of Warner Bros Discovery (WBD), which runs over 100 media entities including CNN, said that he didn’t really care who won the US Presidential election, so long as they were M&A and business friendly. That’s all that mattered to him: who would be best for business.

We live in a world influenced by those who are most moneyed up.

And if any side starts to play misinformation wars on a people, the other side is put on notice that the rules of engagement have changed.

And in that regard, everyone loses. i.e Aotearoa New Zealand is not immune from this risk.

So let’s use this opportunity not only to fixate our eyes and attention on the US, but also look within, and see how our people can rise to the challenge of those who would divide us too.

New Zealand is worth it.

73 comments on “Mountain Tui: Trump’s shooting reveals a hidden danger for New Zealand too ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. aj 1
    15 July 2024 at 10:49 am

    Great article.

    This was about all we saw from the right of politics in the last 6 years

    And that is why some parties will actively promote ignorance, misinformation and populist slogans

    • Maurice 1.1
      15 July 2024 at 12:03 pm

      .. and the right saw from the left. All seen from the view point and perceptions of the observer.

      Start being "inclusive" and learn to love those in the Right!

      • Mountain Tui 1.1.1
        15 July 2024 at 12:27 pm

        Very important to be inclusive and recognise our common humanity and kinship, but very, very important to know what motivations and values are driving others too. Discretion is required.

        Example, one aspect, from the article –

        "It’s almost impossible to work with people who are not there to work with you. If they exist only to score political points, or serve the interests of corporate donors, billionaire interests, or even other countries with deep pockets, then there is no working political system.:

  2. Obtrectator 2
    15 July 2024 at 10:54 am

    M&A = Mergers & Acquisitions? Or some other variety of alphabet soup? (There seem to be several.)

  3. KJT 3
    15 July 2024 at 11:53 am

    A member of the "ruling class" gets winged and everybody is pontificating on how terrible it is.

    How many ordinary peoples lives have they blighted or ended?

    Little concern about the deaths in the USA from those who cannot afford medical care or shootings of school children, but endless angst about the injury to a clown who is on record advocating political violence.

    Chickens and roost, come to mind.

  4. bwaghorn 4
    15 July 2024 at 12:18 pm

    Taxpayers’ Union to the NZ Herald as “the Act Party in drag

    I reckon a close look at fed farmers would reveal the same outcome.

    • Belladonna 4.1
      15 July 2024 at 3:53 pm

      And the right would say that Greenpeace is the Green Party in drag.

      Of course advocacy organizations have similar positions (and even personnel overlap) to the political parties they identify with.

      • bwaghorn 4.1.1
        15 July 2024 at 9:52 pm

        The difference is fed farmers havnt always been far right, not long ago one of the heads men was very progressive!

  5. Dolomedes III 5
    15 July 2024 at 1:32 pm

    "see how our people can rise to the challenge of those who would divide us too"

    Those who would divide us? That's newspeak for "those who disagree with contemporary woke orthodoxy".

    Yes Trump's rhetoric is often divisive. But it's frankly dishonest to suggest that "divisiveness" belongs to any particular political shade. What could be more divisive than some of the recent antics of The Maaori Party. For example:

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2024/05/te-p-ti-m-ori-refuses-to-back-down-after-its-mp-accuses-govt-of-trying-to-exterminate-m-ori.html

    [if you had bothered to explain your thinking, instead of making a belief declaration and expecting people to read an article and try and makes sense of your point, you probably wouldn’t be moderated. But from your comments in the past few days, it looks like you are doing the same pattern that you’ve been moderated for in the past. And there are quite a number of moderations. 2 month ban, double the last one, for basically trolling a new author’s post and not reading the room. For future reference, it’s rude to derail posts with your own agenda, and we value authors here – weka]

    [I was going to write a second explanatory mod note off the back of your Trash comment, but honestly, I can’t be bothered. No-one owes you anything when you’ve had this many chances. If you want to comment here, learn how it works. First rule is don’t waste moderator time or piss us off. Ban extended to 4 months – weka]

    • adam 5.1
      15 July 2024 at 1:42 pm

      So the destruction of the foreshore and sea bed in Taranaki – Thus removing the ability to gather food and have an income is not extermination of culture and a people?

      What planet are you on Dolomedes III?

      • Belladonna 5.1.1
        15 July 2024 at 2:30 pm

        The quote was in reference to repeal of a section of the Oranga tamariki act – nothing to do with the foreshore and seabed in Taranaki (or elsewhere)

        But your comment is a brilliant illustration of the divisiveness of the far left, as well as the far right.

        • Mountain Tui 5.1.1.1
          15 July 2024 at 3:33 pm

          The quote was clearly in reference to the wider subset of actions taken by this Government, hence the phrase "This government will not stop…."

          • Belladonna 5.1.1.1.1
            15 July 2024 at 3:38 pm

            On a debate on the OT section repeal bill. Nothing about Taranaki mentioned.

            But a perfect example of extremist rhetoric from the hard left (even disavowed by Willie Jackson, the leader of the Labour Maori caucus).

            You should be embracing this as an example of the way that extremist language ratchets up on both the right and the left. It fits right into the thesis of your article.

            • Mountain Tui 5.1.1.1.1.1
              15 July 2024 at 3:56 pm

              I didn't mention Taranaki.

              • Belladonna …
                15 July 2024 at 4:37 pm

                Didn't say you did.

                Adam, however, to whom I was responding, did.

                • adam …
                  16 July 2024 at 5:21 pm

                  And the moderates sit in the middle complaining about a powerless far left, whilst those in power destroy society.

                  Plus I'm quite aware of the speech of my local MP. And when/where it was delivered.

                  In the face of business as usual from the hard right, Māori know the game is on. This Tory love in have their dicks out to kill culture and thus a people. Struggle Without End if your missed the memo. And you not being an ally, says more about you.

                  I love how you proudly never watch Māori Media Belladonna.

                  So I'll do this link because well you might just find it a bit more palatable for your so called moderate/centrist sensibilities.

                  Comes with a trigger warning to all the snowflakes.

    • Mountain Tui 5.2
      15 July 2024 at 3:31 pm

      "Yes, but what about them?" is a type of deflection

      But still, you have to look at whether that type of approach is part of the core approach and ethos. That's a huge difference here.

      And also it's important to note that the right didn't used to be like this. McCain, Romney etc had different ways of looking but not this type of dirty lies and disinformation to manipulate a people.

      Very different stuff.

      About TPM, their rhetoric has to be examined within this Government's very clear and present disrespecting and roll back of Maori rights and voices.

      As I said in the article, context, facts and nuance matters

    • SPC 5.3
      15 July 2024 at 11:57 pm

      The term "contemporary woke orthodoxy' is itself both a pejorative term and an attempt to divide those on the left.

      "Those", can be shown to include yourself.

    • weka 5.4
      16 July 2024 at 9:02 pm

      mod note.

    • weka 5.5
      17 July 2024 at 9:42 am

      2nd mod note.

  6. Stephen D 6
    15 July 2024 at 2:16 pm

    Slightly off topic, but the Taxpayers Union’s polling is more than likely to be a bunch of made up bullshit!

    Dirty politics has no boundaries.

    • Mountain Tui 6.1
      15 July 2024 at 2:29 pm

      They use polling as an effective strategy to get their name in the media, over and over again, to gain trust with public perception.

      It's smart.

      The only question is why our news media is so complicit with potential dark money organisations.

    • Belladonna 6.2
      15 July 2024 at 2:35 pm

      Evidence?

      If your suspicion was correct, the Curia/TU polling would be markedly and consistently different to all other political polls. Newsflash. It's not.

      Any more than the Talbot-Mills (which also does polling for Labour) ones are. [Although given that these are 'leaked' rather than released, we never know exactly what the polling parameters are. Perhaps that's dirty politics at work, as well]

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_New_Zealand_general_election

      • Mountain Tui 6.2.1
        15 July 2024 at 3:19 pm

        Stephen said more than likely, but the reality is much more nuanced.

        They often run polls that are designed in a way to solicit the response they want e.g. on Fast Track and the tax cuts National borrowed $12 billion more for.

        On general popularity polling, they follow a similar methodology to others.

        It's all about increasing their profile and reputation so when they need to use their tricks, they are well positioned, in my view.

        • Belladonna 6.2.1.1
          15 July 2024 at 3:32 pm

          Then, as Stephen has provided no evidence for his claim, likely or otherwise, we're all free to conclude he's wrong.

          Claiming that polls are 'biased' because they don't give you the answer you want (or the answer that your echo chamber comes up with), is a fast track way to political isolation and irrelevance.

          I'm sure that the TU *is* benefiting from the publicity boost that they gain from their polling (and the reporting on it). Which begs the question why the 'corporate client' that Talbot Mills polls for, doesn't do the same thing…..

          If you want to argue that advocacy organizations (which is what the TU is) shouldn't be allowed to have any publicity – why wouldn't other advocacy groups, such as Greenpeace or Forest and Bird, or (overseas) XR – be treated the same?

          • Mountain Tui 6.2.1.1.1
            15 July 2024 at 3:58 pm

            A lot of strawmans.

            But to make this quick, here's an example,

            "Do you want free money in your pocket"

            Yes or no

            Or

            "Do you want tax cuts that will be paid with an extra $12bn in borrowings that will have to be repaid with interest in future?"

            Let's not insult everyone's intelligence here, even if Taxpayers Union love to do it.

            • Belladonna 6.2.1.1.1.1
              15 July 2024 at 4:36 pm

              In what way is this a straw-man argument? Unless, of course, you embrace the right=bad, left=good paradigm.

              In which case there is no point in debating.

              [lprent: You are right, but looking at it in the wrong way. There is no point debating with you because you didn’t treat the response as being important.

              You asked for examples, and then got some. You didn’t explain why you found them insufficient. You may disagree with them. In which case you need to show why disagree that these valid examples. You haven’t. Instead you want to just run away.

              I prefer authors to write posts rather than dealing with your damn issues. If you ask and get answered, especially by an author – then treat it as being important.

              Let me encourage you, banned for 2 weeks. Essentially for making me take the time to explain this to you again. Don’t play fuckwit troll games with authors. ]

            • Dolomedes III 6.2.1.1.1.2
              15 July 2024 at 4:36 pm

              Are you sure they were strawmen? I hope you haven't misgendered any hypothetical straw people.

              [lprent: Bad idea trying to get a troll rise off an author. It irritates me becasue it wastes my time. Count yourself warned. ]

              • lprent …
                15 July 2024 at 6:22 pm

                See mod note.

              • SPC …
                16 July 2024 at 12:04 am

                Another clear effort to divide the left, again identifying as one of "those" people. The term strawman was developed prior to the contemporary era, but is still in common usage.

                • Dolomedes III …
                  16 July 2024 at 9:39 am

                  No, just a test to see if the contemporary left has a sense of humour. The test is clearly negative.

          • Drowsy M. Kram 6.2.1.1.2
            15 July 2024 at 4:23 pm


            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Taxpayers%27_Union#Use_of_false_identities

            The NZTU is what it is – self-interest rules on a Spaceship of Fools.

            Imho, Forest & Bird's advocacy is admirable; the NZTU's less so – ymmv wink

            Journalist John Armstrong commented that "Forest and Bird knocked the Government sideways with leaked information revealing the extent of National's plans to open up land currently off limits to mining companies" and that the Government was suffering from hysteria if any one was.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_%26_Bird

            • Belladonna 6.2.1.1.2.1
              15 July 2024 at 4:32 pm

              Imho, Forest & Bird's advocacy is admirable; the NZTU's less so – ymmv

              Well, yes, that's the whole point – the list of 'radical' organizations differs depending on your political stance.

              Which is why, IMO, that defending extremist rhetoric from any organization is dangerous. What's sauce for the goose….

              • Drowsy M. Kram …
                15 July 2024 at 4:57 pm

                Well, yes, that's the whole point – the list of 'radical' organizations differs depending on your political stance.

                Seems to me that F&B has advocated consistently for the well-being of Aotearoa's (seriously degraded) natural environments and native species. From what "political stance" might F&B be viewed as a 'radical' organisation?

                Which is why, IMO, that defending extremist rhetoric from any organization is dangerous.

                Not seeing any "extremist rhetoric" in this thread (@6); ymmv wink

                • Belladonna …
                  15 July 2024 at 5:11 pm

                  "Stop the war on nature"

                  https://www.forestandbird.org.nz/campaigns/stop-the-war-on-nature

                  Pretty sure no one is bombing geckos, or machine-gunning kakapo.

                  How about you give an example of an organization, that you politically disagree with, which is doing their advocacy well.

                  • lprent …
                    15 July 2024 at 6:42 pm

                    Salvation Army. Has a lot of pretty obnoxious people in the organisation, and a rather weird philosophy. But does good and has effective political advocacy.

                    Environmental Defence Society. Personally I find that straight conservationists are a pain. They tend to try to create a stasis and concentrate on defending existing conserved territories. I find most of their efforts quixotic because everything always changes and if you don't target at root causes, the you'll get another shock – as they're finding out at present where blue-green doesn't mean that this government listens to them.

                    There are many…..

                  • Mountain Tui …
                    15 July 2024 at 9:48 pm

                    I see you have used Forest and Bird as an example of "extremist rhetoric."

                    Yet the context of their call to help prevent environmental degradation was on the very site you linked.

                    "On 7 March 2024 the Government introduced a new Bill to Parliament (under urgency) called the Fast-track Approvals Bill.

                    The Fast-track Approvals Bill is an omnibus bill. It proposes to establish a permanent fast track approvals regime for a range of infrastructure, housing and development projects that are considered to have significant regional or national benefits. Read more here.arrow_outward

                    Forest & Bird believes this new bill is anti-nature, anti-democracy, and will leave a mess for future governments to clean up.

                    The Bill will override the Conservation Act, Reserves Act, and Wildlife Act, as well as the RMA and law governing the Exclusive Economic Zone. It would also allow Ministers to refer developments – ranging from aquaculture, dams and mining as well as roading and housing – to an expert panel which only has the ability to make recommendations to the Minister. Ministers have the power to greenlight projects and ignore the panel as they see fit."

                    For example, this Govt has indicated they will approve an Australian company TTR to do seabed mining in NZ after failing to succeed in our courts for over 10 years.

                    TTR plans to extract up 50 million tonnes of the seabed EACH year for 35 years in shallow water between 22km and 36km off Pātea.

                    AFTER extracting iron, titanium and vanadium the mining ship would discharge 45 million tonnes of sediment.

                    ____

                    Important to note Chris Bishop did not deny it would hurt the environment, and potentially badly, but he put that down to a price and his party were willing to pay.

                    https://www.reddit.com/r/NewZealandWildlife/comments/1dj4qr9/chris_bishop_fast_track_bill_will_facilitate/

                    _____

                    There is no reasonable comparison here to the misinformation perpetuated by Taxpayers Union, and cherrypicking words and context to present your argument, is proving my point.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    15 July 2024 at 9:59 pm

                    Forest & Bird believes this new bill is anti-nature, anti-democracy, and will leave a mess for future governments to clean up.

                    The Bill will override the Conservation Act, Reserves Act, and Wildlife Act, as well as the RMA and law governing the Exclusive Economic Zone. It would also allow Ministers to refer developments – ranging from aquaculture, dams and mining as well as roading and housing – to an expert panel which only has the ability to make recommendations to the Minister. Ministers have the power to greenlight projects and ignore the panel as they see fit.

                    Pretty sure no one is bombing geckos, or machine-gunning kakapo.

                    The rate of non-human species extinction (now far above natural levels, and accelerating) has little to do with bombs and machine guns, their chief purpose being to facilitate the killing of humans.

                    Humans kill many things in many ways – I can only speculate about how anyone else might feel if they found themselves on the receiving end of extinction-level killing, but I wouldn't like it.

                    'Human exceptionalism' finds itself increasingly at odds with the health and well-being of the natural world – we (some more than others) are despoiling/soiling spaceship Earth in a truly desperate struggle to, if not "get ahead", then at least cling to fragile achievements.

                    Will Homo sapiens be an evolutionary success? I believe 'yes', but, like a petulant and entitled teenager, we have a lot of maturing to do, with many hard lessons still to learn.

                    How about you give an example of an organization, that you politically disagree with, which is doing their advocacy well.

                    ACT's advocacy has been politically effective of late, resulting in their best electoral successes to date, exceeding 96 / 99 / 02 results.

                    The tobacco lobby has also been effective of late – only months ago the industry in NZ was apparently "on it's knees", and look at it now.

      • lprent 6.2.2
        15 July 2024 at 6:10 pm

        The questions I have been asked by TU/Curia polls in the last couple of years were pretty slanted in the political questions dropped in amongst a pile of how is the world going for other non-political polls. Have I listened to…, have I watched…, have I seen.., and then the loaded political question that is pretty much what do you feel about – only giving one side of the argument. ie What do you feel about Maori on 3 Waters – not How do you feel about 3 waters funding model..

        Haven't had calls to me since I killed the landline. all but one elderly person had figured out how to use a cellphone and stopped treating calls to Auckland like a toll call. Must be bloody hard to get a sample these days.

        My partner now gets regular polling on her cellphone, probably once every two months. Must be one of the few people who answers the cellphone to unknown and unsolicited numbers (I usually don't – if it is important they can txt) and responds to surveys.

  7. Ad 7
    15 July 2024 at 4:44 pm

    It's been un-hidden for a while.

    The occupation of Parliament grounds for 2 months in 2022 has disabused everyone of the existence of a permanent radicalised underclass.

    The only thing novel is that Nicole McKee is now an actual Minister preparing a wholesale rollback of firearms controls, and all Coalition parties are rolling back Maori cultural support.

    The result is honestly there's far less civic dissent under this government than under the previous one, and their polling is fantastic, so maybe you might want to accept that they're at last partially right before fanning yourself with some minor US drama.

  8. roblogic 8
    15 July 2024 at 8:46 pm

    Insightful:

    Every single serious problem in this country is rendered damn near insoluble by the collapse of consensus reality —@seanilling

    Our culture and our communities are under attack and splintering by the manoeuvres of an elite class that has abandoned its loyalty to nation and people. At least monarchs tried to make their kingdoms stronger, not destroy them from within.

    The 'unity' that Ad claims is merely a hiatus. National is turning NZ into a corrupt property ponzi and destroying the frayed remnants of the public sector. The police and skilled workers and the whole younger generation are exiting en masse.

    It's the revenge of the boomers and fuckwit macho men who think they own Aotearoa, but we are all about to be royally screwed as the incompetent Nats implement Trussonomics.

    The pandemic is not over. The next outbreak is a pandemic of stupidity and an attempt by the far right to overthrow democracy (which will ultimately fail but will cause everyone immense pain and hardship)

    Apologies for the bleak comment, I've been re-watching "Mr Robot"

    • Res Publica 8.1
      15 July 2024 at 10:30 pm

      I'm afraid I agree with your pessimism, roblogic.

      But the big question is: having spent the better part of 150 painful years clawing our way to a society that at least acknowledges the ills of the past, and has the potential to forge a fairer, more just future; how do we defend it from the siren song of rage?

      Because if we want to have even the slimmest chance of that future coming to pass, we must fight for it. Tooth and nail. History is littered with examples of tolerant societies that collapsed under their own weight when it came to defending liberal ideals from reactionaries.

      • roblogic 8.1.1
        18 July 2024 at 5:03 pm

        The only answer that springs to mind is a metaphor.

        Pounamu is formed under immense pressure and heat. Its fibres and imperfect materials are all crushed together, and come out strong and beautiful when held up to the light.

        There have been two New Zealands living side by side for the last 40+ years – and inequality is driving us further apart. But as more and more of the workers and middle class join the the precariat, solidarity against a rapacious and irresponsible elite will become the only way forward.

    • Grey Area 8.2
      16 July 2024 at 5:37 am

      No apologies needed. Our future is bleak.

      What concerns me now is whether many of us are going numb to the incessant anti-democracy, racist, transphobic, anti-environment, anti climate change action moves of our current coalition government.

      I was hoping for the rage to continue to build but it appears it's not, and I include myself in that.

      • Dolomedes III 8.2.1
        16 July 2024 at 6:47 am

        What exactly is "racist" or "transphobic" about the current government?

        • Grey Area 8.2.1.1
          16 July 2024 at 6:58 am

          Transphobia might be a stretch apart from Peters’ toiket crusade, but you can't hear the racist, as in anti-treaty, anti-Maori tone of this government, particularly from ACT?

          • Dolomedes III 8.2.1.1.1
            16 July 2024 at 9:37 am

            What exactly is racist about wanting equality of all NZers before the law, or about wanting to stop distortion of the treaty by activist judges? I support certain special rights for Maaori, like rights to practice traditional harvesting. But in most things we should all be equal before the law.

            There is nothing remotely anti-Maaori about this government.

            • roblogic 8.2.1.1.1.1
              16 July 2024 at 12:34 pm

              you are either a liar or a complete fool to try and cover for this racist government

            • gsays 8.2.1.1.1.2
              16 July 2024 at 1:12 pm

              " There is nothing remotely anti-Maaori about this government."

              I'll have two of what you are on.

              The disestablishing of Te Reo public service department names.

              Seymour's selective picking of phrases from Te Tiriti for 'relitigating'. With the help of an advisory panel that didn't have an expert of Te Reo involved.

              The scrapping of the Maori Health Authority.

              Then there is the enthusiasm from my bigotted relation who is looking forward to this new government "sorting out them Marrys".

              • Dolomedes III …
                16 July 2024 at 5:59 pm

                Why does Seymour need an "expert in Te Reo"? All too often, "expert" turns out to mean an activist. And judges and politicians have been redefining the treaty for decades, so why single out Seymour's initiative?

                What on earth is "racist" about insisting on prioritizing English names of government departments? About 96 % of people born in NZ can speak and understand English, but the corresponding figure for the Maaori language is 5%. So English first makes sense if you want the public to understand. https://www.ethniccommunities.govt.nz/resources/our-languages-o-tatou-reo/language-spoken-by-birthplace/

                Scrapping the Maaori Health Authority wasn't racist, it was a surprisingly sensible policy coming from the Nats. Where exactly was the evidence for establishing a separate health authority for Maaori? What is the evidence that it would have accomplished anything apart from wasting buckets of money? The Maaori Health Authority would have been infested with activists and ideology, and unscientific practices lacking a proper evidential basis.

                I can't help you with the "bigotted relation", sorry.

                • gsays …
                  16 July 2024 at 6:06 pm

                  Try again but with "nothing remotely anti-Maaori" lens rather than a "racist" one.

                  To help you with my bigotted relation, he picked up on the coalition's dog whistling even if you didn't.

                • roblogic …
                  16 July 2024 at 7:48 pm

                  It's a purge of Māori culture and language and an attempt at whitewashing history. Because Mâori claims stand in the way of massive land grabs and privatisation (plunder) that NACT1 want to perpetrate.

                  This government came to power on an unprecedented campaign of racist fear and lies about 3 waters/ co-governance, as if a Māori elite was somehow going to run away with our water supplies

                  There has been a long campaign of resentment simmering away by right wing bloggers and lunatics on The Platform, against Matariki, Matauranga Māori, Te Reo names for places and government departments, against accurate history in the school curriculum, against the Māori Health Authority, against Kainga Ora, and for a Fast Track Bill which is in violation of Te Tiriti

                  Colonial NZ wants to sideline Māori when there is money to be made, but trot them out as good little native mascots for rugby games.

                  That shit ain't gonna fly no more

                • Incognito …
                  16 July 2024 at 9:25 pm

                  FFS, you disingenuous troll. Let’s just pick one turd out of your swamp.

                  Where exactly was the evidence for establishing a separate health authority for Maaori?

                  A 7-year lower life expectancy for Māori.

            • Michael Scott 8.2.1.1.1.3
              16 July 2024 at 2:11 pm

              We keep getting into debates about what is racist and the equality of all NZ'ers. This will continue until we arrive at a definitive answer as a nation as to whether Maori ceded sovereignty – or not – according to the Treaty.

              Te Pati Maori and the Greens stand firmly in agreement that Maori never did cede sovereignty. Act and NZ First are in the opposite corner.

              The two main parties seem to want a bob each way and this is what is causing the divide and confusion.

              We won't move forward as a nation until we address this.

              • Dolomedes III …
                16 July 2024 at 6:06 pm

                The comments of chiefs at the signing make it clear they knew the treaty meant recognizing the authority of the British monarch over them. Some of them were uncomfortable with the idea, but signed anyway. And Sir Apirana Ngata was in no doubt that the chiefs ceded sovereignty. And what did Hobson say? "We are now one people".

                But let's try a thought experiment. What if it were eventually "agreed" that Maaori did not cede sovereignty. What exactly would the implications be? We hear a lot about "tino rangatiratanga", but what did that expression mean in 1840? And how would we implement it now in the 21st century?

              • Mountain Tui …
                17 July 2024 at 12:01 pm

                Au contrary, this is a made up situation that deserves exactly zero attention.

  9. SPC 9
    16 July 2024 at 12:17 am

    The class war being engaged in will become more obvious when they move to change the the rules for foreign investment.

    This elite live here because we have no CGT or estate tax. This is what foreign investors would find attractive.

    The do not care if citizens move to Oz (hold down the MW, remove Fair Pay Agreement legislation and worse), they can replace them with migrants (easier to exploit in the workplace).

    And migrants are easier to mobilise against the "indigenous people" of the Treaty.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.