Bogged down in Boomers
National Party leader Simon Bridges’ attempt to flex the party’s tired old law and order muscles by copying New South Wales’ bespoke Strike Force Raptor in order to crush the gang problem ended up crushing Bridges instead.
Bridges came back from Australia pumped after having absorbed the finer points of Scomo’s rightwing policies. The Nats, having had their originality thought glands removed at birth, needed to borrow and flesh out their vision with that of the sunburnt country.
The kite-flying of previous ‘‘discussion documents’’ back at home had created accusations that the documents were all mouth and trousers, dog-whistle politics, and would be watered down come election time. Believing that the tough-oncrime stance is a hardy perennial that plays well with voters, Bridges warmed to the theme of gang control by giving a section of the police force special powers to enforce the will of the state.
Some call that fascism. Mike Kennedy, a former New South Wales detective and senior lecturer at Western Sydney University, called it a nonsense. Contrary to Bridges’ magicked-up claims and stats about the success of Strike Force Raptor, Kennedy said the military-style force had been a complete disaster across the ditch.
Bridges’ myth of Kiwi gang extinction, rigged up as a vote-pulling prophecy, showed how out of touch he is with the electorate. Burgeoning gang numbers, due in part to the Australian Government’s deportation of Kiwis, who have lived most of their lives in Aussie, have created at tide of resentment toward our closest ally.
A welcoming hand may not be extended to those Australians wanting to immigrate to NZ to get away from the fires brought about by a coal-fired energy policy on collision with climate change.
Bridges showed a critical lack of elementary nous in wanting to borrow and impose a failed Australian law and order policy to crush the gangs. He would do well to remember that this year a devastating terrorist attack was carried out by an Australian, and that thousands of Kiwis living in Australia have few rights and are treated as second-class citizens.
Despite National having a 17-year-old as its candidate for Palmerston North, it seems bogged down in Boomers compared to the Greens and Labour, led by a young and groovy prime minister.
However, the coalition struggles under the dead weight of the unenlightened Ngati Redneckery of NZ First. If only Jacinda could remove them, like her wisdom tooth, from the equation. There would be some initial swelling, but are they fit for purpose for a world waking up to the need for radical change policies to keep it spinning?
Bridges has a habit of looking pathetic, but it’s hard to work up the energy to really dislike him. He has energy, and the media give him considerably more air time than the previous Labour opposition leader, while high-flyer Christopher Luxon hovers on the wing.
A snap election may see Luxon in as the next opposition leader eager to go for the top job. But would a conservative evangelical have the mind-set to cope with cascading, tipping point climate change disasters? Old-school-thinking politicians, wanting to preserve a way of life, will seem increasingly dangerous and irrelevant.
When Donald Trump was elected to the US presidency because of his ability to deliver a crucial number of votes in states like Michigan and Wisconsin, we knew he would be an unconventional leader. His colourful past and promises for the future show he cares little for long-established protocols and unwritten decencies expected from the White House.
A small part of me at times finds Trump’s tendency to disrupt staid conventions refreshing, or at least fun to watch from afar. His unpresidential ways and daily challenges to the status quo of Washington, DC, are mere entertainment compared to his recent affronts to the way his country works.
The delicate balance of the colossal US government is based on three constantly teetering branches of power. Like members of a family or other ecosystems, when one branch gets out of line, it’s up to the others to bring it into line. Trump’s impeachment inquiry is an apt example: the legislative branch is using its constitutional powers to challenge decisions by Trump’s executive branch, while the country’s judicial arm is being brought in to decide on the executive branch’s interpretation of those powers.
But as David Frum of The Atlantic explains, this system ‘‘is also perforated by vulnerabilities . . . supreme among those vulnerabilities is reliance on the personal qualities of the man or woman who wields the awesome powers of the presidency’’.
Frum points out that a British prime minister must hold on to power by maintaining the confidence of the majority of Parliament, and this can be lost in minutes. ‘‘The president of the United States, on the other hand, is restrained first and foremost by his own ethics and public spirit. What happens if somebody comes to the high office lacking those qualities?’’
Indeed. Humans have been talking about the idea of a just leader for as long as our species began gathering in groups. From Socrates’ point of view, a just person is one who can recognise their obligation to the state by obeying its laws. As the most fundamental entity in a moral sense, the state deserves our utmost respect. People who are just, the philosopher argues, know this and act accordingly.
An astute line of thinkers throughout history built upon Socrates’ ideas of leadership until at last, in 1215, the rule of the law was established.
The US Constitution and other founding documents of nations are born out of the premise that agreed-upon rules, not individuals, prevail, and no-one can escape subservience to them.
Trump is not convinced. Stonewalling all Congressional subpoenas, defying federal court