Last year the leader of the New Zealand Labour Party was a colourless nonentity by the name of Andrew Little. Before the last election he and his associates knew this and Labour's pollings were very low.
So he stepped down and gave eleadership to his deputy, a strikingly pretty woman named Jacinda Ardern.
The figures immediately surged.
I was not impresed at the time, late last year. It was clear that her policies were not in play as regards the popularity surge, only either that she had a pretty face or those irrationally addicted to Identity Politics thought a woman as PM made a difference when the rule of female Prime Ministers the world over has shown that it does not.
Then came the election.
Incidentally I was not going to vote, having posted on this blog that I am moving to an apolitical stance as politics is about the art of the possible as, by my amendation of Bismarck's famous quote to this effect, practised by the contemptible. Politics is a filthy game and to call its practitoners "honourable" as is done in my country is an insult to language
For some years I supported our new electoral system, Mixed Member Proportional Representation. The reader can google the term to find out how it works. I now hold that it was widely popular as the antics of politicainas were getting on everyone's nerves and it was an irrational reaction to dump the system rather than dump the clowns who were so acting. But at the time, in the early to mid 90's, I was a Labour party activist, an actively canvassing door knocker, believe it or not, highly, for me at least, politicized; and I insisted that if it were not proportional it was not representative. My older self would retort to that young fool if such could be done that none of it is representative, proportional or othertwise, as democracy is merely a fiction as politicians obey their paymsters not their constitutents.
The thing is our right wing party got more votes than the Labour party - our notionally left wing party which has still not repented of its total betrayal of its own principles back in 1984.
But under MMP one of the minor parties held the balance of power and was able to , or rather its leader, Winston Peters of New Zealand First, was able to select the government by choosing which of the two major parties he would ally himself to. Rather than doing what one would expect to be the decent thing and ally with the biggest party on election night, the right Wwng National Party, he chose, after weeks of holding the country to ramsome, the Labour Party. Some 20 years ago he had allied with the National Party under the results of the first MMP election, after a simlar long delay, but I suspect that bad blood lingers there between the two of them now.
Thus, while I have loathed Right Wing politics all my life, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth that the right wing party was excluded not by populart vote but by whoring and horsetrading behind closed doors in what are now smoke free rooms . I do not rejoice that a party I loathe is ousted by such dirty means; and I do not approve those who approve said dirty means as long as by them the Nats are out of power. If the Left is no better than the Right what difference does it make? They only peddle different forms of filth
So a person whose pretty face caused Labour's popularity to surge, for it was an immediate surge, not the result of a carefully considered study of her personal record, policy acts or decisions, was selected as our prime minister, by the grace of a minor player who fancies hmself a Kingmaker, and this because of the vagaries of a system itself chosen in reaction to the corruption and stupidity of politicians over 20 years ago.
As a historical aside I ask should I at least hanker for the return of the fate of failed King makers? Google the name Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, The King Maker and read of his end
Now I have no idea whether Jacinda Ardern is capable or not, but I stand by my reasons as to why I think she caused a populartity surge and was selected - not elected - as PM.
And now for my purpose in posting here. A recent scandal has broken whereby the honeynmoon between the country and her - and then, I venture, her party - is now over.
It seems it is not only church groups that have rural youth camps. The Labour Party had one some time ago. Alcohol was freely available to its teenage particicants - itself a criminal offence in my country. If the allegations are to be taken at face value some drunk teen girls were indecently assaulted by a predatory young male of 20. It is not my purpose here to wonder if the allegations should be taken at face value, rather to comment on the political response to the whole issue
The incident was not reported to police, though as we are not a rape culture such things are indeed illegal here, neither was it reported to the partents of the children so assaulted - and they were children, let us not pretend otherwise; and to all appearances, the nub of the scandal, they tried to hush it up, or in a darker term for the same thing they instituted a a coverup.
Of course the news got out. The honeymoon is over. The Party has taken a hit.
And Ardern's response?
full politlcal speak, saying nithing but appearingt to acknowlewge real responsiblity,
She said among other things "mistakes were made"
note the impersonal and passive voice.
Not "we messed up" or some active personal use of words whereby I or we did something, but the passive voice, as if mistakes simply fall from the skies.
She is distancing herself by her very use of words.
She has learned the poltical game well and is on the way to becoming as filthy as her predecessors.
She may never take a bribe in her career. She may never outright lie to the House. But this shows corruption in the proper sense whereby it should be viewed, that is to say in the broadest possible sense.
It is absurd to join a corrupt sytem to attempt to reform it from within, for as the Bible says bad company corrupts good morals. And I value what little integrity that remains to me at my age after a lifetime of sin to want to throw it away by trying
So my move to an apolitical stance continues as my contempt for the Left grows to equal that I have always had for the Right.
"You follow Me," He said, "Let the dead vote for the dead or quarrel with the dead"
Always this is the best advice ever offered
So he stepped down and gave eleadership to his deputy, a strikingly pretty woman named Jacinda Ardern.
The figures immediately surged.
I was not impresed at the time, late last year. It was clear that her policies were not in play as regards the popularity surge, only either that she had a pretty face or those irrationally addicted to Identity Politics thought a woman as PM made a difference when the rule of female Prime Ministers the world over has shown that it does not.
Then came the election.
Incidentally I was not going to vote, having posted on this blog that I am moving to an apolitical stance as politics is about the art of the possible as, by my amendation of Bismarck's famous quote to this effect, practised by the contemptible. Politics is a filthy game and to call its practitoners "honourable" as is done in my country is an insult to language
For some years I supported our new electoral system, Mixed Member Proportional Representation. The reader can google the term to find out how it works. I now hold that it was widely popular as the antics of politicainas were getting on everyone's nerves and it was an irrational reaction to dump the system rather than dump the clowns who were so acting. But at the time, in the early to mid 90's, I was a Labour party activist, an actively canvassing door knocker, believe it or not, highly, for me at least, politicized; and I insisted that if it were not proportional it was not representative. My older self would retort to that young fool if such could be done that none of it is representative, proportional or othertwise, as democracy is merely a fiction as politicians obey their paymsters not their constitutents.
The thing is our right wing party got more votes than the Labour party - our notionally left wing party which has still not repented of its total betrayal of its own principles back in 1984.
But under MMP one of the minor parties held the balance of power and was able to , or rather its leader, Winston Peters of New Zealand First, was able to select the government by choosing which of the two major parties he would ally himself to. Rather than doing what one would expect to be the decent thing and ally with the biggest party on election night, the right Wwng National Party, he chose, after weeks of holding the country to ramsome, the Labour Party. Some 20 years ago he had allied with the National Party under the results of the first MMP election, after a simlar long delay, but I suspect that bad blood lingers there between the two of them now.
Thus, while I have loathed Right Wing politics all my life, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth that the right wing party was excluded not by populart vote but by whoring and horsetrading behind closed doors in what are now smoke free rooms . I do not rejoice that a party I loathe is ousted by such dirty means; and I do not approve those who approve said dirty means as long as by them the Nats are out of power. If the Left is no better than the Right what difference does it make? They only peddle different forms of filth
So a person whose pretty face caused Labour's popularity to surge, for it was an immediate surge, not the result of a carefully considered study of her personal record, policy acts or decisions, was selected as our prime minister, by the grace of a minor player who fancies hmself a Kingmaker, and this because of the vagaries of a system itself chosen in reaction to the corruption and stupidity of politicians over 20 years ago.
As a historical aside I ask should I at least hanker for the return of the fate of failed King makers? Google the name Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, The King Maker and read of his end
Now I have no idea whether Jacinda Ardern is capable or not, but I stand by my reasons as to why I think she caused a populartity surge and was selected - not elected - as PM.
And now for my purpose in posting here. A recent scandal has broken whereby the honeynmoon between the country and her - and then, I venture, her party - is now over.
It seems it is not only church groups that have rural youth camps. The Labour Party had one some time ago. Alcohol was freely available to its teenage particicants - itself a criminal offence in my country. If the allegations are to be taken at face value some drunk teen girls were indecently assaulted by a predatory young male of 20. It is not my purpose here to wonder if the allegations should be taken at face value, rather to comment on the political response to the whole issue
The incident was not reported to police, though as we are not a rape culture such things are indeed illegal here, neither was it reported to the partents of the children so assaulted - and they were children, let us not pretend otherwise; and to all appearances, the nub of the scandal, they tried to hush it up, or in a darker term for the same thing they instituted a a coverup.
Of course the news got out. The honeymoon is over. The Party has taken a hit.
And Ardern's response?
full politlcal speak, saying nithing but appearingt to acknowlewge real responsiblity,
She said among other things "mistakes were made"
note the impersonal and passive voice.
Not "we messed up" or some active personal use of words whereby I or we did something, but the passive voice, as if mistakes simply fall from the skies.
She is distancing herself by her very use of words.
She has learned the poltical game well and is on the way to becoming as filthy as her predecessors.
She may never take a bribe in her career. She may never outright lie to the House. But this shows corruption in the proper sense whereby it should be viewed, that is to say in the broadest possible sense.
It is absurd to join a corrupt sytem to attempt to reform it from within, for as the Bible says bad company corrupts good morals. And I value what little integrity that remains to me at my age after a lifetime of sin to want to throw it away by trying
So my move to an apolitical stance continues as my contempt for the Left grows to equal that I have always had for the Right.
"You follow Me," He said, "Let the dead vote for the dead or quarrel with the dead"
Always this is the best advice ever offered
No comments:
Post a Comment
You can disagree with me, even spiritedly. But keep it civil as I am the one hurt by cruelty. I must protect myself from nastiness and will block or ban users if I must. And it would help if you offered reasons for your disagreements. If they are good I may respect you. If they are sound I may even change my mind