National’s fundamentals

87 comments on “National’s fundamentals ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Sabine 1

   6 November 2019 at 7:35 am

   why yes, it seems so.

   but then surely all those that said that the shit that went down in the US can't happen here, will reassure us that it won't happen here, right?

   And besides, its only women, children and all other non white non heterosexual men that will have their rights curtailed should this (or any other incarnation) come to pass. So why worry, Right?
2. mauī 2

   6 November 2019 at 8:31 am

   " ….that Trump is the victim of a conspiracy by “the administrative state”"

   "Loves Tulsi Gabbard."

   With him there, so it's not all bad.
   • Alice Tectonite 2.1

     6 November 2019 at 10:28 am

     Not content with licking Putin's, Trump's & Assad's boots, mauī starts eyeing up Luxton's boots…
     • Macro 2.1.1

       6 November 2019 at 10:44 am

       
     • mauī 2.1.2

       6 November 2019 at 10:50 am

       It's good for a bit of thought diversity. We can't have everyone towing the msm or Russell Brown line…
       • Anne 2.1.2.1

         6 November 2019 at 11:03 am

         Only if the 'thought diversity' is based on sanity and lucidity. What we've seen thus far is anything but sane and lucid.
         • Paddington 2.1.2.1.1

           6 November 2019 at 2:30 pm

           "based on sanity and lucidity"

           As defined by whom? It could be argued that much political discourse is neither sane nor lucid. In QT yesterday, Poto Williams was asked a series of questions to which her answers were most certainly not lucid (https://www.parliament.nz/en/watch-parliament/ondemand?itemId=209610). Yet Poto is no fool.

           Diversity isn't only a good thing when people agree with you.
           • McFlock 2.1.2.1.1.1

             6 November 2019 at 3:05 pm

             Diversity of thought isn't always a good thing if the minority opinion is stark raving bonkers.
             • Andre …

               6 November 2019 at 3:08 pm

               Even worse when the stark raving bonkers minority manages to elect a president.
             • Paddington …

               6 November 2019 at 3:59 pm

               As defined by whom? The majority?
               • McFlock …

                 6 November 2019 at 4:05 pm

                 What's more likely: that everyone around you is insane because they can't see the pink elephants, or that you're insane because you're seeing pink elephants?
                 • Paddington …

                   7 November 2019 at 12:06 pm

                   When you find some one who believes in pink elephants, let me know. In the meantime, there are many issues that attract conflicting viewpoints, some of which you and I may both find neither sane nor lucid, yet those viewpoints are a legitimate part of public discourse. That is, after all, how humanity progresses.
                   • McFlock …

                     7 November 2019 at 3:29 pm

                     Whether a viewpoint conflicts with one's own is irrelevant to whether it's stone cold bonkers.

                     And there's a continuum between "known fact" and "totally bonkers delusion", incorporating such levels as "a likely theory based on experience", "fair possibility, but let's wait and see", "long bow to draw", and "an extrapolated supposition based on a two hour youtube video from some guy who has a vibe I like".

                     A good indicator of nutbar syndrome is taking some of those other levels and regarding them as "known facts".

                     And I've encountered one or two people who look at the oompah-loompah and see a good POTUS. I've never yet seen them manage to strain the interpretation of presidential objectives into actually demonstrating that assessment, though. Seeing pink elephants and demonstrating sanity would be more likely.
                   • Paddington …

                     7 November 2019 at 6:13 pm

                     "A good indicator of nutbar syndrome is taking some of those other levels and regarding them as "known facts". "

                     Not every conversation is based on "known facts".

                     "And there's a continuum between "known fact" and "totally bonkers delusion" "

                     Yes, true, however we may well disagree about where an issue fits on that continuum. We will, I'm confident, agree about pink elephants. We may well disagree about many other issues. Trying to shut down a point of view simply because we personally find it bonkers is not healthy.
                   • McFlock …

                     7 November 2019 at 6:30 pm

                     Again, if yojimbo says something I think is bonkers (be it pink elephants or that Russia isn't murdering dissidents and defectors), I need to allow for the possibility that I am missing a fundamental piece of information or am indeed bonkers myself.

                     But if yojimbo says something I think is bonkers, specialists in the area think his proposition is bonkers, other apparently reasonable people think his idea is bonkers, the evidence yojimbo points to seems to fit a more simple explanation than the apparently bonkers theory, and the few people who support yojimbo also seem to be bonkers in other aspects, then I'm pretty cool with a general assessment that yojimbo’s theory is stark raving bonkers.
                 • Paddington …

                   7 November 2019 at 9:51 pm

                   So that would qualify at the "totally bonkers delusion" end of the continuum. So we refute it, and maybe learn or educate as we go.

                   But many arguments are far more nuanced than the existence of pink elephants.
                   • McFlock …

                     7 November 2019 at 10:35 pm

                     Oh, most definitely.

                     But there are more than a few stone cold bonkers theories on the internet, even on this website, being lobbied for attention and respect just because "diversity", and they tend to get in the way of discussions about the more nuanced and reasonable theories, "diverse" and "mainstream" alike.

                     Sometimes it's even intentional, like throwing a dead cat on the table.
                   • Paddington …

                     8 November 2019 at 10:59 am

                     On that, we can certainly agree. Thanks for the convo.
       • Sacha 2.1.2.2

         6 November 2019 at 11:39 am

         What 'line' would that be – something about transparency being a good thing? #gasp
         • mauī 2.1.2.2.1

           6 November 2019 at 3:07 pm

           It isn't about transparency however, it's about smearing someone as a conspiracy theorist no matter what they believe.
           • Anne 2.1.2.2.1.1

             6 November 2019 at 3:48 pm

             But if what they believe is known to be stark, raving bonkers then they deserve to be "smeared" as you call it. I call it being "called out" on their beliefs.
           • Sacha 2.1.2.2.1.2

             6 November 2019 at 5:30 pm

             Please re-read Lew’s 5.43pm tweet from above – sums up what I've heard on this:

             https://twitter.com/LewSOS/status/1191576809139130368
     • marty mars 2.1.3

       6 November 2019 at 11:32 am

       + 1 that guy's not a brainbox that's for sure lol
     • Andre 2.1.4

       6 November 2019 at 1:09 pm

       It's not boots that maui's been licking and eyeing up.
       • weka 2.1.4.1

         6 November 2019 at 3:10 pm

         [Ok, enough everyone. If you can't make a political point and just want to be shit to a fellow commenter, then consider this a warning I'm putting my mod hat on – weka]
3. Dukeofurl 3

   6 November 2019 at 8:53 am

   South Auckland seats for National are becoming a hot bed of the fundamentalists, who target seats that are likely to have new MPs.

   Pakuranga changed from the liberal Williamson( who retired) to fundamentalist Simeon Brown and now Botany.
   • mac1 3.1

     6 November 2019 at 9:54 am

     There is a constituency that the 'no friends' party is targeting with the inclusion of candidates who reflect that constituency.

     With the continued failure of conservative, religiously-influenced parties of the Right to negotiate the MMP 5% barrier- parties which do themselves no benefit by putting up some seriously flawed individuals who end up in the courts- I believe National is now attempting to attract that conservative constituency vote.

     There is a problem for National in that opponents will be galvanised by the prospect of a National party in the hands of such fundamentalists.

     They may also be damned by liberal voters for that association along the lines of, "I won't go near National as they're a bunch of religious nutters." Just as the Greens suffered by having anti-science pro-homeopathy advocates aka nutters.

     Labour wore a long sense of grievance from lefties who could not tolerate the rise of neo-liberalsim in the 80s. That grievance is still voiced by some.

     This brings me to my final point. The pre-MMP Labour party was subjected to the rise into predomination of a right-wing neo-liberal faction. The post-MMP National party is still a coalition of urban liberal conservatives and more rural and less liberal groupings. The rise of Luxon and Simeon Brown with others of that ilk within National tells me that it has not undergone a post-MMP shedding of single-issue faddists and fringeists.

     Instead National seeks consciously or otherwise to keep its status as NZ's largest party by welcoming a diversity which includes the religiously conservative, the corporate, the minority-bashing intolerants, the haters and the bigots.

     it may see benefit in that, electorally.

     I hope that enough Kiwis will see the inherent danger in a National party that is in danger of losing the control of its policy and practice to such a take-over by ultimately dangerous factions just as Labour faced with its neo-liberals.

     If we are the fair-minded and decent people we believe ourselves to be……………
4. Peter 4

   6 November 2019 at 9:33 am

   National’s fundamentals? Fundamentally they're a pack of fundamental orifices.

   The comment might upset the tender sensitivities of some and be condemned as destructive and negative and not adding to healthy, erudite debate but before you wander out into the world it is best to survey the landscape to get the lay of the land.
5. ianmac 5

   6 November 2019 at 9:35 am

   We do know that Luxon is:

   Pro-life, anti abortion

   Anti legalising cannabis

   Against euthanasia

   Pro medicinal cannabis

   Entitled to his opinions but being more right than English or Bridges does not bode well for a Liberal Democratic NZ.
   PS I think he is denial over Climate Change.
   • Sabine 5.1

     6 November 2019 at 9:51 am

     does his pro-life stance allow for birth control? Does it allow for abortion in case of incest, rape, or when the life of the mother is at stake? if he does not, then he is not pro – life but pro forced birth.

     against euthanasia – well the aged care sector is the last profit centre that still exist, and that applies to anyone else who can pay for health care – all others can die in a ditch as slow as it will be just without the right to decide their own passing. Again – not pro-life.

     against canabis, but for medicinal cannabis, cause hey i would like to control how you treat yourself, and again if you can't afford a doctor etc etc etc then you get to suffer. Again, not really pro -life.

     denial of climate change – not pro – life.

     yeah, he sounds like a right far right christian nut case that will never ever suffer the consequences of his believes.
6. Tony Veitch (not etc.) 6

   6 November 2019 at 9:53 am

   As the world lurches (or moves even quicker) into climate crisis which threatens an end to human life, expect more of these fundamentalist views to become more mainstream.

   People will become bewildered and overcome by the sheer enormity of the catastrophe and many will turn to rapture-preaching fruitcakes.

   Luxon may well be just the advance guard of a legion of beyond the darkness apostles.
   • Kevin 6.1

     6 November 2019 at 10:24 am

     Quality.
   • Ad 6.2

     6 November 2019 at 8:33 pm

     Apocalypse is where the religious hard right and catastrophist hard left finally meet.

     Though they may not recognize it when they do.
7. UncookedSelachimorpha 7

   6 November 2019 at 10:33 am

   Rich Christians in an age of poverty and need.

   Wouldn't be surprised if there was an element of 'prosperity gospel' going on as well.

   Yuk.

   Wonder how old Luxon reckons the earth is?
8. Anne 8

   6 November 2019 at 10:58 am

   Whether this is just another smart parachuting move that includes enough vote catching nods to the religious conservatives, or whether National already intend to go the whole Trumpian, climate-denying, trash-the-country-for-power path, who knows. Given the last decade, the latter seems just as likely as the former, so best we are prepared.

   When you look back on the so-called "pragmatic" decisions made by the Key government then it is clear the latter pathway is the one they have chosen to take. The National Party will change their core principles and policies in a flash if they see personal advantage in doing so.

   Once his court case is over and done with, I'm sure Winston Peters will be on to this one boots n'all. But he needs the back-up of Labour and the Greens. I hope he gets it.
9. tc 9

   6 November 2019 at 11:01 am

   I'm not seeing any issue here. National is the party of priviledge white entitlement, climate denial, bene bashing, cronyism etc. Luxon's a perfect fit.

   Their pockets are deep enough to top CL up between his highly paid AirNZ gig and his next CEO gig, that of the national parliamentary party.

   I'm enjoying Soimon defending his replacement whilst foaming at the mouth dog whistling. If he wins Botany it will be CL's second gig in a row employed in an area he's got zero experience in, classic cronyism/national party.
10. Macro 10

    6 November 2019 at 11:11 am

    Just as a precautionary aside I post this tweet which looks at Trump's "Spiritual Adviser" in the White House. We must never allow this sort of thing to happen here.

    https://twitter.com/Alyssa_Milano/status/1191560809933103105
    • Anne 10.1

      6 November 2019 at 11:20 am

      Playing straight into Trump's malignant narcissism.
      • Sabine 10.1.1

        6 November 2019 at 11:29 am

        its good for the bank account.
        • Phil 10.1.1.1

          6 November 2019 at 12:54 pm

          Only if Donny's not the one paying the bill.
          • Sabine 10.1.1.1.1

            6 November 2019 at 1:51 pm

            churches are tax exempt and if you call yourself Donnie you want in on all of the tax exempt tithing of the faithful.

            As for the shitface not paying bills, his voters knew that and they are ok with it. Same as with the divorces., the 5 children to three mommas, the playboy bunny, the porn star, the oogling of under age girls in dressing rooms, the creepy photographs of him and his underage daughter, and so on and so forth.

            So yeah, the shitface loves himself some prosperty gospel and if his voters so far approve of his shitshow.
            • Gabby 10.1.1.1.1.1

              6 November 2019 at 9:40 pm

              Well, he's everything they want for themselves.
    • Dukeofurl 10.2

      6 November 2019 at 12:05 pm

      I dont think from the Comments about Paula White you dont quite get what her job is , its what we would call a Comms Advisor

      as described by Washington Post

      "Florida televangelist Paula White, who has served as a spiritual adviser to President Trump, will join his administration in an official capacity, according to a senior administration official and another person familiar with the move.

      White, who already helps coordinate Trump’s evangelical outreach to key leaders, will be a religious adviser in the Office of Public Liaison, the part of the White House overseeing outreach to groups seen as part of Trump’s base."

      She was/still ? is a tele-evangalist so seems a good fit for spreading the message to Trump loving bible bashers
      • Macro 10.2.1

        6 November 2019 at 1:56 pm

        Actually I'm well aware of what her job in the White House is – it is the way that she acts as a vehicle to unify the lunatic fundamental religious right that is the terrifying aspect I hoped to show.
    • Andre 10.3

      6 November 2019 at 1:14 pm

      Can't stomach sitting through 4 1/2 minutes of that shite. Does it mention where she was going to set up a "prosperity gospel" megachurch with the stable genius grifter to fleece some more from the gullible?

      https://www.salon.com/2019/11/01/president-trump-wanted-to-build-a-megachurch-with-prosperity-gospel-preacher-paula-white_partner/
      • Macro 10.3.1

        6 November 2019 at 1:49 pm

        No I could only stomach 2 minutes before I had to turn it off. Its about the way she performs – her "beliefs" heresies actually. eg Trump is appointed by god and to defy him is to defy god. etc etc. She is walking on hallowed ground – because for some apparent reason she is a vector for the holy spirit. And of course tRump loves it.
    • tc 10.4

      6 November 2019 at 2:07 pm

      Spiritual adviser eh. No whiskey before 5, a vodka only zone up till then.
    • Lettuce 10.5

      7 November 2019 at 2:24 am

      She looks a bit like an older Stormy actually. How long till we find out Trump's been banging her too?
11. Stuart Munro. 11

    6 November 2019 at 11:52 am

    What we're really seeing is the triumph of low-church mysticism, over the better informed scholarly churches, at least among the undeserving rich. Scholarship is often disquieting – if one asks real questions the answers are wont to be unflattering of human egos. So no informed understanding of what the books are all about, just another reiteration of the parochialism that had churchmen on both sides support most of the wars in history.

    Fiat Luxton is neither a new beginning nor an act of creation – they might as well stick with Bridges – except perhaps for the purpose of extracting funding from credulous conservatives.
    • weka 11.1

      6 November 2019 at 12:12 pm

      thanks for that, I hadn't quite understood the low-church/scholarly church thing before. I'm sure there are issues the other way too (class, elitism), but it's a good one to think about.
      • Stuart Munro. 11.1.1

        6 November 2019 at 12:27 pm

        I don't really do it justice, but it was a big deal to my father – a theologian.
        • weka 11.1.1.1

          6 November 2019 at 12:31 pm

          I can imagine.
          • greywarshark 11.1.1.1.1

            6 November 2019 at 9:12 pm

            Would Lloyd Geering have been scholarly? He fits into the disquieting group.
            • Ad 11.1.1.1.1.1

              6 November 2019 at 9:29 pm

              Hell yes. One of our best and most challenging.
            • Stuart Munro. 11.1.1.1.1.2

              6 November 2019 at 10:58 pm

              Yes – and not alone in growing beyond his original institution. If one isn't self-critical one can't be much of a scholar, and difficult though it may be with low-end reporters constantly cruising for clickbait, I think the same is true of politicians.

              The best lack all conviction, while the worst

              Are full of passionate intensity.

              "Get some guts!" Key shouted, like a contestant in a jingoism contest.
        • Ad 11.1.1.2

          6 November 2019 at 8:31 pm

          Good to see that background.

          What were his theological fields?
          • Stuart Munro. 11.1.1.2.1

            6 November 2019 at 8:45 pm

            New Testament & Hebrew. He did the Fullbright thing.
    • Ad 11.2

      6 November 2019 at 8:51 pm

      Pretty easy to think of this government as "low church".

      – No ideological framework

      – Substitutes lists for achievements

      – Faint but growing eschatological drive

      – Can memorise verses but not meanings

      – Great rhetorical flourishes, poor on-ground execution

      – Perpetually delayed gratification

      – Hundreds of Bible studies/working groups, with no result

      – Active Youth Group (Greens), but actually run by Elders (NZFirst).

      – Achieves power and survives on charisma alone

      – Holds good conversion rallies
      • greywarshark 11.2.1

        6 November 2019 at 9:16 pm

        I hope Labour reads that Ad. There would be much to discuss in private, with no cellphones or sneaks around, while everyone examined the state of their beliefs and achievements.
        • Ad 11.2.1.1

          6 November 2019 at 9:28 pm

          And lashed with knotted switches
      • Stuart Munro. 11.2.2

        6 November 2019 at 11:13 pm

        To me, the low church problem is its susceptibility to certain predictable vices, especially egotistical or ill-informed leadership. Where they prosper is on the emphasis of an individual religiosity, the antidote to some institutional ills. So, while I agree with your list, I tend to critique in quality assurance terms.

        Is it reform, or satisficing?

        Are the benefits of funding reaching those they are designed to assist?

        Is the overall pattern of rapidly rising inequality and declining quality of life being meaningfully addressed?

        The answers are negative, but parts of the coalition will survive as being infinitely less awful than National – for a time.
12. veutoviper 12

    6 November 2019 at 1:39 pm

    I am not usually a fan of RNZ National's The Panel show but yesterday's show included an interesting 10 minute segment with Wallace Chapman and the two panelist of the day, Paula Penfold (Stuff Circuit investigative journalis) and Mike Rehu (sports and media commentator) discussing Christopher Luxon's selection as Nat candidate for Botany. They were also joined by Ben Thomas, former Nat Party staffer.

    Paula Penfold led off (after being called 'Paula Bennett' by Wallace!) with some good insightful points about Luxon's performance in his interview with Suzie Ferguson being less than spectacular. Mike Rehu then countered with a generous view that both Key and Luxon may have a "genuine sense of wanting to give back", but then Ben Thomas was a bit of a surprise as I fully expected him to come in as a cheerleader for Luxon. Instead he was much more along the lines of Paula's comments, and came across as a little bit embarassed to be doing so.

    Well worth a 10 minute listen IMHO.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/thepanel/audio/2018720828/the-panel-with-paula-penfold-and-mike-rehu-part-1

    For the time being, I personally am sticking with the view that I expressed yesterday on OM that "IMHO Luxon stands out as Jamie Whyte 2.0 – not Key 2.0. In looks as well as in his views. My money (Nil) is on him not lasting long – and possibly not even until next year's election."
    • Anne 12.1

      6 November 2019 at 3:58 pm

      My money (Nil) is on him not lasting long – and possibly not even until next year's election.

      If more weirdo stuff comes out about this non-mainstream church he belongs to, I think you could be right vv.
      • Sacha 12.1.1

        6 November 2019 at 5:34 pm

        That will play well amongst some of the Nat base, especially in that electorate. Expect the PR buffing of Luxon to continue.
13. Ken 13

    6 November 2019 at 5:32 pm

    Even the Nats won't support a religious whackjob who takes his advice from a guy who's floating around in the sky…….will they?????

    Please tell me they won't.

    How happy must the poor long suffering Nat MPs be who started at the bottom and took years to rise up the ranks, only to have this guy come from nowhere and gazump them?
    • Sabine 13.1

      6 November 2019 at 7:36 pm

      if they want the tax cut bad enough they will vote for them, and with them those that would like to ban abortion, those that would like to dismantle some rules and regulations they don't like, those that would just like to own the libs and so on and so on and so on.

      Don't ever think that the fundies of Gloriavale or the Brethren don't vote, they do and their wifes do to. See the US for inspiration if need be. 🙂
    • Herodotus 13.2

      6 November 2019 at 8:24 pm

      I look forward to those on the left then taking over the many aspects that is happening under the name of this guy floating around, opps that will not happen as so much that the govt defaults to other is compensated by those who act under his name or what he represents.

      Those with no knowledge need to invest some time into the history or our Labour party.
14. Ad 14

    6 November 2019 at 7:53 pm

    Jacinda Ardern was brought up in a fundamentalist household.

    Then went on to be global president of International Socialist Youth.

    No shortage of low-church hysterics there.

    Turned out fine.
    • Andre 14.1

      6 November 2019 at 8:00 pm

      You expecting Luxon to experience a similar epiphany?
      • weka 14.1.1

        6 November 2019 at 8:24 pm

        lol.
      • Ad 14.1.2

        6 November 2019 at 8:25 pm

        Has Ardern recanted?
        • Andre 14.1.2.1

          6 November 2019 at 8:41 pm

          Dunno if there was a formal recanting or renunciation, but:

          Ardern, 38, was raised as Mormon growing up in Morrinsville in the Waikato. But she left the church in 2005 describing it as conflicting with her personal views, particularly around her support for gay rights.

          https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/05/mormon-leader-russell-nelson-labels-jacinda-ardern-courageous-consensus-builder.html
          • Ad 14.1.2.1.1

            6 November 2019 at 8:53 pm

            I mean recanted from Socialist International. That's her religious impulse.

            Or even recanted from Tony Blair. That's her grounding.
    • weka 14.2

      6 November 2019 at 8:25 pm

      what was Ardern's family's church?
      • Ad 14.2.1

        6 November 2019 at 8:25 pm

        Mormon.

        Morrinsville Mormon.
        • weka 14.2.1.1

          6 November 2019 at 8:36 pm

          Are Mormon's inherently fundamentalist?

          What's Morrinsville Mormon?
          • Ad 14.2.1.1.1

            6 November 2019 at 8:41 pm

            A Morrinsville Mormon is a Mormon from Morrinsville.

            Whether all Mormons are fundamentalists I will leave to those who can plot their own hermeneutic loop.
            • McFlock 14.2.1.1.1.1

              6 November 2019 at 11:22 pm

              link above says she left the church because its doctrine conflicted with her humanitarian beliefs.

              The issue with Luxon is that he seems to still attend a church that has some pretty odd teachings.

              So if he takes those lessons to heart, whither the nat policy platform? Key's parachute from geofinancial heights was unweighted by personal convictions of any kind. Brash was tied to many anvils as he descended from the golden clouds, but some kooky attitudes that didn't mesh with many NZers was one amongst their number.
    • Stuart Munro. 14.3

      6 November 2019 at 8:31 pm

      The Mormons, whatever else, are decent scholars.
      • Ad 14.3.1

        6 November 2019 at 8:38 pm

        If by scholars you mean John Smith by way of John Bunyan and Fox's Book of Martyrs.

        https://www.salon.com/2012/10/31/who_really_wrote_the_book_of_mormon/
        • Stuart Munro. 14.3.1.1

          6 November 2019 at 8:54 pm

          No, though I read their book and thought it … improbable for a sixteen year old. It's more their genealogical records that earn them the reputation, though a lot of them do end up going the academic route.

          Judging by the quotes Heilman is only missing the snakes.
          • Ad 14.3.1.1.1

            6 November 2019 at 9:03 pm

            Mormon exegetical apologetics makes excellent comedy.
15. Ad 15

    6 November 2019 at 9:21 pm

    Quite apart from this obvious contribution to the common good, the NZ Labour Party was founded in large part by Christians. Evangelicals and non-conformists formed the backbone of the Party, alongside Anglicans and Catholics, as it came into being at the dawn of the 20th Century. The Women's Temperance Union was a fully Christian drive.

    The argument of which power is the Head of State's true allegiance has a good going-over during John F Kennedy's election.

    But even stronger than that, they can serve both, successfully:

    – John Bani. President and head of State of Vanuatu. Anglican Priest.

    – Walter Lini. Founding President of Vanuatu. Anglican Priest.

    – Scott Morrison. Prime Minister of Australia. Devout member of Horizon Pentecostal Church.

    – Kjell Bondevik. Prime Minister of Norway. Lutheran Minister.

    – Canaan Banana. First President of Zimbabwe. Priest and theologian.

    – Arnold Nordmyer. New Zealand Prime Minister. Presbyterian Minister

    – David Clark. Minister of Health. Presbyterian Minister.
    • Stuart Munro. 15.1

      6 November 2019 at 9:40 pm

      Institutions being what they are, religion is unreliable as a prediction of good governance. But it generally possesses, though not necessarily uses, a body of traditional knowledge or insights into the human condition that are valuable. Ideally it includes prospering communities also.

      Savage called his version of socialism Applied Christianity, and Popper recognized it as being significantly better than the governing norms of Austria. But the churches in general are in decline. It is predominantly the ethnochurches and the gospel of Mammon that are keeping their heads above water. I venture we shall wait a long time for a church like Waddell's to shake up our slumbering national consciences again.

      https://www.odt.co.nz/lifestyle/magazine/waging-good-fight
16. Graeme 16

    6 November 2019 at 10:40 pm

    I'm intrigued by his departure from Air New Zealand. From what I hear from staff there it hasn't been a happy place under Luxon, compared to Fyfe's management, but that was a hard act to follow.

    Could his departure have been similar to Don Brash's departure form the Reserve Bank, "If you want to change the world, go into politics" evidently from Michael Cullen. Similar sentiment expressed by John Key?

    Saw a Luxon decision reversed this week, Air New Zealand has reinstated a Queenstown CBD travel office after pulling out of town in 2013. Expecting a lot of other 'cost cuttings' to be reversed in favour of customer service as our airline undoes the damage inflicted.
    • Anne 16.1

      6 November 2019 at 10:50 pm

      From what I hear from staff there it hasn't been a happy place under Luxon,..

      I have a close relative married to an Air NZ pilot and he made similar noises. It definitely was not a happy place! Woe betide NZ if he ever becomes PM. He would make Rogernomics and Ruthanasia look like a Sunday School picnic.
      • Graeme 16.1.1

        6 November 2019 at 10:58 pm

        I'm thinking we're seeing the smiling assassin at work, maybe on several levels.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS