Trotter Apologises for the Left

Foreward: I don't usually go for "attack" blogging. I have a general belief that consensus is built on well reasoned argument and earnest discussion. Trying to hammer someones beliefs to mirror your own doesn't work and only inspires a more staunch position from your opponent. However, certain comments from other blogs have goaded me into coming off the sidelines. I don't feel good about it but I like the comments, tone and thoughtlessness even less.

I admire Chris Trotter. You only have to read his commentaries in a range of publications nation wide or his blog to understand that he is well educated, a historian and can argue his case really well. And he uses words that are really big. I mean, massive! When I put the words into the online dictionary, you can physically hear the internet groan with the effort of trying to remember what these words mean. So when Chris throws out an article entitled "Oh, for a Well Mannered Left", I take notice.

The essence of his article, if I understood the definitions of some of the heavier words correctly, is that the Right has the ability to be courteous, magnanimous and generous in places because the right has it all already. They are the ones who have the power, the money, the education and the wherewithal. The Left, by and large, is a product of it's history: aggressive, combative, sometimes rude and in your face and generally a great deal more unruly due to the proletariat nature of its uprising (I can use big words too). Chris and I have even debated the nature of this before here and here. Ah, the good times.

But sometimes the Left just pushes it too far.


I've been lucky enough to have been, by sheer coincidence, not among the rubble last Tuesday in Christchurch. The site that I was working on was shut down on the Monday due to concerns about it's stability. When I was in there on the Wednesday just after, the places was a mass of bricks and splintered wood about 2 feet high. I also choose to live on a farmlet just outside Christchurch that is solid, has it's own well and has missed the predication's of the Earthquake that has razed my city and left thousands displaced. For the immediate week afterward, I was working night shifts with Civil Defense shoring up buildings and removing hazards to allow the USAR teams to do their job. It's been rewarding to help with the skills I have available and awful in its scope to see first hand the results of the "Earth Fart". I've enjoyed blogging as a relief from that work but to see the medium twisted in such a way and when people start to use the the situation to further their own agenda, I get pretty steamed.

The Standard has led the way in this.Cactus Kate has called them on it here, Inventory 2  and David Farrar at Kiwiblog has similarly joined the fray. And they're right. Marty G has outdone himself in restraining the impulse to be quietly humanistic however the opportunity has got to him and his fellow commentators to put the boot in with no thought for whats happening on the ground. Normally this is the cry from the left - that the rich bastards in power with the neo-conservative agenda ignore the plight of the average man, woman and child on the street.

A great example of this was Marty's post Shock Doctrine. He can't resist the temptation to politicize the event to spew forth a bunch of assertions, guesses and plain fantasy based on no evidence whatsoever. They are the Ken Ring's of blogging - jumping around, arms waving, scaring people into agreeing with them (bully tactics when you think about it) with no evidence or logic to back it up at all! Christ, even the book from which his post is derived is not exactly known for its rationality, balance and well reasoned argument (MacDoctor takes the book to task in this piece).

Similarly, two days after the quake, the bully boys went to work with a post entitled "Rebuilding" that had no other purpose than to try and slay the bloke who has been gifted the lucky job of overseeing the work at a macro level. Well done, lads! What a way to get behind the guys on the ground. What a way to get behind the country.

And it's not just the Standard bloggers and commentators. The eponymous and unique Greenfly/Village Idiot/robertguyton can't resist a swipe from the sidelines either at Keeping Stock.  His own brand of logic and reason is some of the best examples from the blogosphere as to why the left struggles to hard.

This country was built with egalitarianism as one of its core values. When push came to shove, you could depend on your worst enemy to drop tools and give you a hand when you really needed it! The stories that have come out of the city in the hours and days after the event, the stories of ordinary people doing extraordinary things has been amazing. It didn't matter what colour collar you wore. It didn't matter what ideology you follow. We were in the shit and we were just people helping other people. And thats a truer socialism that the gents over at the Standard don't seem to understand.

I am not saying that all are like this. I'm not saying it has been constantly like this. Many over at the Standard have been the most strident in gifting help, support and information. Likewise, some wacky Righties have been upholding their reputations as complete morons. And I do believe that it's right to talk about things like how we are going to respond, rebuild and how to pay for it.

But to lash out when there are people's bodies not yet cold, to bark from the soapbox when people are trying to get a handle on the situation, to lacerate the leaders when no one has had a chance to give it a go yet - well, thats just cold. And disrespectful. And Chris is right to apologise on your behalf.

Chris ends his piece with the following:

"I can’t help thinking that the revolution would come a lot sooner if the Left set about achieving its own radical objectives with its conservative opponents’ infinitely better manners."

 I can't help but agree. If you've gotta problem with that boys, get down here, I'll put a shovel and a hammer in your hands and we'll have a yak about it.


Update: Now they've mad the Whale mad too. 

Jim Anderton for Chch mayor??

David over at Kiwiblog raises the spectre of Jim Anderton running for mayor of Christchurch.

Christchurch City has, for some considerable time, been a Labour hotbed. We’ve had a consistent range of good Labour candidates (Brendon Burns being the possible exception riding in on the coat tails of his predecessor) along with an inner city population that is either apathetic of strongly idealistic.
This seems to translate to local government as well. The “on the ground” party machine kicks into gear as well for local body politics as for central. Their campaigning is superb. The grass roots organisation of 2021 (read local union and Labour party) is effective. The only aberration in recent times has been the election of Bob Parker.

Whilst Jim is a living breathing anachronism, it is this campaigning machine to be feared. And rightly so.
Whether or not one agrees with his politics (and I, for one, don’t), it doesn’t take away the fact that the campaigners and strategists can use Jim as a talisman. He has a long record of public service – especially for his electorate which is swayed by sympathy and a “he’s always been there” attitude election after election (being and electorate MP also gives credence to any claim). He is consistent in attitude and approach – an excellent quality in any dictator and has extremely high visibility and integrity (well, the socialist version of integrity perhaps).

The smooth, debonair ex – TV star? Or the grizzled, hardbitten man of the earth who speaks his mind (and others too, if you get offside with him) and has had 40 years of service to his people and his country?

A publicist’s dream.

Not good.

Having met Jim I can testify he engages well. So he should after 40-odd years of meet and greets. Don’t write this bloke off. I think he would be a terrible mayor that would see Christchurch regress to the 1960’s rather than looking forward to the 2060’s. However, his claim is strong and it will need a mighty effort from other quarters to unseat him should he get a toe hold.

Racist Labour?

Liberty Scott blogs here about Ruth Dyson's latest press release in her capacity as Labour's Health Spokesperson.

He laments the fact that Labour seem to believe that people simply cannot think for themselves. That without government there to enforce some dietary regime through whatever programs might be necessary, people simply couldn't grasp the idea that a better diet and exercise might help them lose weight.

I'm astonished. Changing your diet is impossible without the government. The carefully hidden knowledge that eating mostly vegetables, fruit, lean meat, fish and cereals, and avoiding high fat and high sugar foods helps you lose weight is something that almost nobody knows surely. In addition, without the government how COULD people go to the gym, or go for a walk or swim?

However, I'm interested in the fact that in the full press release Ms Dyson singles out Counties Manakau as her example. Is it these particular people that can't think for themselves, Ruth? And why would that be? Is it because Counties Manakau has a very high proportion of Maori and Pacific Island residents?

Ms Dyson says in her press release that it is because oh the propensity for the population towards Type Two Diabetes? Could be. Diabetes is slightly more prevalent in Counties Manakau than other places in New Zealand (116 hospitalizations per 100,000 people versus the 92 per 100,000 average across the country) but then again - no where near the record 246 per 100,000. So why Counties Manakau? According to the Counties Manakau District Health Board, there are at least 13 different, if not equal or greater health challenges to it's populace.

Before going too much further, I don't think that Ruth Dyson is a bad person. I believe that she is doing the best she can with what shes got in the Labour framework that she has chosen to inhabit.

And there lies the rub. Labour's condescension towards people - and Maori and Pacific Islanders in particular - is evident in their thinking, as Ruth has demonstrated. Labour seems to believe that they need to talk to Maori and Pacific Islanders as if they were children - sometimes wayward children - as demonstrated by their boorish and rude approach to morehu at this years Ratana service described by this article on Young Labour's website.

Labour clearly believe that this population segment cannot think for themselves. They obviously have no aspiration or intelligence and what they so firmly need is a clear and fatherly guiding hand. A Micky Savage-like figure to dispense justice, wisdom and to be told what to do. Why else would Ruth nominate Counties Manakau as her example? Why else would Shane Jones castigate Maori so for daring to rise up with their own representative voice? After all, says Phil Goff, they are only ordinary people, not intelligent freethinking individuals in their own right who have goals and desires and who, given the opportunity, would work tooth and nail to achieve them.

Labour just don't get it. They still can't work out why they were thrown out at the last election and this is a reason why. Their evident racism and condescension towards these "ordinary people" was wearing thin and people wanted someone who believes that we can all do well - no matter what race, colour or creed.

I keep on saying it: we need a coherent and responsible opposition in parliament for our democracy to work. At the moment, the Labour Party is neither of those two things.



Hat Tip: Kiwiblog, Liberty Scott

Statistics: CMDHB Website, CMDHB Health Profile, May 2001

Labour's Leadership Crisis

The Labour caucus is still having trouble with deciding how to deal with this new government.

David Farrar over at Kiwiblog posts how inane the opposition's attacks are regarding the Governments planned fibre roll out strategy to better serve our broadband infrastructure. As was posted on Kiwiblog a wee while ago, they were having a little trouble deciding a)how to attack JK et al and b) how to be an effective opposition. This proves once again that they still have issues (aside from rampant socialism that is :-)).

In the past, all oppositions did just that: the opposite - sometimes whether they agreed with a policy or not. Now, with JK at the helm and a more open and results (rather than politics) orientated government that is bi-partisan in it's approach, the traditional rules no longer apply. As exhibited with Clare Curran's approach to s92a, there is a glimmer of hope. Unfortunately, you still have A King and P Goff at the helm who authorise these "attacks" because they know nothing else. Thats how they have been taught. In politics when you resort to blatant untruths, such as we have here, you can tell that the party is failing to get any traction. They tried this in the election campaign (remember Mike Williams' little side trip) and the strategy didn't work then and, in the face of a disciplined government, it won't work now. This is another great example of where leadership is being tested for Labour and is failing. Bring on the likes of Shane Jones who is far more credible, focused and able to adapt while bring the likes of Jacinda Adern up with him. While not being a Labour supporter, New Zealand still needs a credible opposition for things to function well. I hope Phil Goff can get past his own hubris, see this problem for what it is and act upon it or, god forbid, he may end up having to be moved involuntarily.

Make no mistake, Andrew Little, for all his conciliatory words on Q+A two weeks ago about supporting Phil and Annette, is just the bloke to enact change when needed and be prepared to step on toes if he thinks it is in the best interests of his party. He is cognizant of the fact that to achieve a result for your point of view, a conciliatory approach works a lot better than an adversarial one. You only need to look at his style of leadership in the EPMU for that. Many employers have a great respect for Andrew and give him credence where the likes of the old guard such as Ken Douglas, would never have achieved his levels of success for his people.

The whole Labour movement needs to smarten up in this new era. It's spokespeople are still living in the wrong century - or at least their politics are.

One just needs to go to Chris Trotters lament of the demise of that era to realise that they are still beholden to the past rather than to the future.

The Labour Party is in a crisis, no matter how much they deny it. The current leadership just can't get a grip on the reasons why people changed their vote in such numbers and why the National Party retains such support post election. People want results - no matter who initially thought up the idea. National is delivering this. Labour is still stuck in the mindset that if it isn't our idea then it isn't an idea at all.

Phil Goff should remember Plato's Repuplic - that in the absence of any leadership at all, a new leader will emerge - whether he wills it or not.

Hat Tip: DPF, Kiwiblog