Hard News: Not doing justice
170 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 7 Newer→ Last
-
I disagree with the commentators here asking to that criticism of Labour or the campaign be silenced.
Despite a powerful mandate from the membership to make significant policy change and urgently needed renewel the party has instead chosen to prioritise the protection of poorly performing incumbents.
The key policy plank of the 2014 campaign - free healthcare for people 65+, doesn't seem to have any supporting research showing how this can be implemented, or even why this policy is particularly necessary in the first place.
Caucus and discipline on this campaign is appalling. Trevor Mallard has actively worked to spike several media cycles, and him and many of his colleagues have refused to even stand on the Party list. Only a few months ago a senior Labour leadership figure like Shane Jones effectively defected in support of National.
Labour is heading towards a new historic defeat.
If the Labour membership don't start demanding higher standards of the Parliamentary wing then Labour as a major political party is likely to be supplanted by the infinitely more professional and disciplined Green Party sooner rather than later.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
[Mallard] and many of his colleagues have refused to even stand on the Party list
That is surely a good thing?
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
Gibson said in this morning's radio i/v he repeated what a constituted said to him, not understanding the full background of the term.
BTW I know the word but I didn't realise the sensitive meaning of it either.I may be being sensitive here, but if you read Gibson's whole comment, with the part about John Key's "sneer" and his role in the GFC, it was as if he had drawn the classic antisemitic cartoon.
Also, if Labour candidates could stop blaming their constituents for putting bad thoughts in their ears - see Shearer after the "man on the roof" debacle - it would be dandy. What are they, children?
-
It's not possible for Labour to not stand someone in any electorate
I'm kinda hoping the Labour (and Green) candidates in Epsom will have their nominations withdrawn at the last minute. Or change their names by deed poll to: Party Vote Labour But Vote For Paul Goldsmith
Overseas, running for an unwinnable seat is regarded as training for aspiring candidates, and you're usually expected to do it at least once before getting an chance at actually being elected. You don't get shoved in one forever just because you're from the place.
-
Matt Crawford, in reply to
I think refusing to stand on the list indicates that that these candidates are not genuinely campaigning for the party, rather acting more selfishly. The electorate are being fed the coded message loud and clear: "this candidate does not necessarily endorse head office".
The template has been set by Harry Duynhoven's campaigns in New Plymouth, where Labour branding was all but absent at times. The message "I do not agree with the list-setting process" has certainly been implicit from various Labour MPs this time around.
I give Rino Tirakatene a pass here - the Maori electorate seats are different and special. I can understand why a candidate may not wish to appear as a general list MP if a Maori electorate has turned them down. -
I think refusing to stand on the list indicates that that these candidates are not genuinely campaigning for the party, rather acting more selfishly.
I think it can also be seen as the opposite: A party in need of rejuvenation getting younger candidates move up the list and electorate candidates test whether they truly have their local support. Likewise, standing as high on the list only could also be seen as selfish but may be argued as necessary for an essential member of the cabinet.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
I think refusing to stand on the list indicates that that these candidates are not genuinely campaigning for the party, rather acting more selfishly. The electorate are being fed the coded message loud and clear: "this candidate does not necessarily endorse head office".
Where would you place Mallard, then? At 50? How would a former Minister take being told quite so plainly the party doesn't want him, when his LEC still does and he has the good fortune of living in a safe seat? So long as there are no mechanisms for Labour to get rid of people like that, having him way down the list isn't going to make him any more faithful to the leadership.
-
I was also severely underwhelmed by Gibson on Morning Report doing the usual "I'm sorry people were offended" passive-aggressive voice b.s. rather than just saying "I'm sorry I was offensive. Full stop. Period. Will stop talking now."
When are political types going to understand that using your weasel words is never a good look?
-
Tim Michie, in reply to
With Gibson's repeat offensiveness Cunliffe may be called on to act on the 'last warning' given. If so, I don't think Labour would shed too many tears at that point.
-
Matt Crawford, in reply to
It's a pickle alright Gio.
I don't imagine any LEC that has loyally supported a successful local candidate will take kindly to being asked to please go back and produce someone better. Or quite what the best course for Labour to take when an LEC in a deep blue seat like Rangitata collapses.
I just don't know enough about Labour processes to understand just how things could be improved, if at all.
Back to the Rangitata problem - I think Cunliffe handled it well. Also, I think most New Zealanders don't have the familiarity with The Merchant of Venice or the use of "Shylock" as an antisemitic slur to reject the explanation offered by Steve Gibson.But something is definitely weird when looking at the amount of antisemitism being daubed across National billboards. It wasn't like this last time.
-
When the former candidate, Julian Blanchard, tired of competing in an unwinable seat (which has become even less winnable with recent boundary changes), the Rangitata LEC seems to have collapsed and Gibson, who had only recently even joined the party, became the new candidate.
I’m reliably informed that much the same applies to Labour’s Horowhenua candidate. They’re on a hiding to nothing there and needed someone to “take one for the team.”
Which just shows how much as changed there since Judy Keall held it for Labour in the ’90s.
-
I did find it hard to believe anyone could have a sense of what “Shylock” means, but not know Shylock was Jewish, so thanks John Morrison for volunteering it to be possible.
As far as “[doing Labour] a favour then and [trying] to be a bit more on message during an election campaign” goes, sod that. One of my huge problems with the Labour Party in recent years, and with most politicians, is the sense that at some point they’ve had their ability to be real surgically removed. When you ask a question you get some bland communications-advisor-crafted “on message” response. Questions they haven’t prepared an answer for are given some margarine* answer until they can check with head office what the approved reply is – they can’t answer on their own because they’re either scared of knuckle rapping, and/or they don’t know what the answer _should_ be, based on core values.
Difference doesn’t mean division, it means diversity. Diversity is a good thing. The Labour Party is an old and venerable institution and should have room in it for such diversity. Why isn’t it possible to appeal to a wide range of people by including a range of people and opinions, rather than a single opinion that’s meant to be all things to all people?
*oily, bland, filler...
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Also, if Labour candidates could stop blaming their constituents for putting bad thoughts in their ears – see Shearer after the “man on the roof” debacle – it would be dandy. What are they, children?
That was exactly my thought when I heard it. It was kind of pathetic.
-
Brodie Davis, in reply to
But something is definitely weird when looking at the amount of antisemitism being daubed across National billboards. It wasn’t like this last time.
Seems like Confirmation Bias to me. It has been rasied in multiple areas so it seems a lot more obvious.
-
That interview was atrocious. Gibson’s clearly been given a bollocking, but he just came across as absolutely clueless in a “I’ve never had to think about why being a dickhead’s a bad thing” way. Just a train wreck. Should never have been selected in the first place.
[Edited to add: And Greg Presland might have been bright enough to twig that a candidate using racial slurs on Presland's Facebook page was something that needed some kind of response, especially if it's true that comment remained up until a few days ago.]
-
I have to agree that it seems somewhat odd to say "I can use Shylock in a sentence" without it entailing that "I know what 'Shylock' refers to." It is, after all, a quintessential anti-semetic stereotype. It's also not as if it is an everyday word used in a loosely pejorative way in the avenues and alleyways of Aotearoa. If people went around saying "Shylock this!" and "Shylock that!" in a way which indicated that they didn't know that it's a troubling slur (as some people want to claim about their use of "gay" as a loose pejorative), then maybe Gibson's response might (and I stress "might") hold water. However...
-
Anti-Semitism, the racist fantasy that capitalism, inequality and exploitation can be blamed on Jews is one of the oldest and most destructive of the myths of race hatred that are pushed to divide the working class.
A myth that reaches brain-hurtingly toxic levels of ironic stupidity when you take into account that, at the other extreme, fascists blamed Bolshevism on the Jews. Shot from both sides, as Howard Devoto might put it...
-
Sacha, in reply to
It has been rasied in multiple areas so it seems a lot more obvious
Exactly as intended by those who laid the foundations of the meme some months back.
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
It’s also not as if it is an everyday word used in a loosely pejorative way in the avenues and alleyways of Aotearoa.
For whatever it's worth, there's a Shylocks hairdressers in Upper Riccarton.
-
I'm sure somebody already mentioned this on one of these threads, but never mind.... This is disturbing:
But Mr Watson posted on Facebook this afternoon that he had just had a "super interesting chat with The Electoral Commission just now".
"It appears we may be gagged."
He later posted that "the story is the Electoral Commission have advised a Access Radio station not to play Planet Key as it may be a contravention of the act."
-
and him and many of his colleagues have refused to even stand on the Party list.
Shock horror. Terrible. But wait. On the other hand, Bill English is a List Only man? Hell clearly this must mean he is not brave enough to face his electorate. Or something weird. Conclusions conclusions.
Are there others who are List only or Electorate only? -
Difference doesn’t mean division
It does to Paddy Gower. The mainstream media assiduously cultivates only one legitimate truth and interprets anything else as dissent.
I disagree with the commentators here asking to that criticism of Labour or the campaign be silenced.
And lo, at the first suggestion of a bit of discipline during the campaign all people want to do is have a bitch about a caucus faction. So much for vote positive. I don’t mind criticising the health policy, but at least do it within the context of actually trying to win the damn election – and that reality is old people vote, and getting them to vote Labour is therefore kinda important.
But the problem is our media is so bad even our media commentators have forgotten what real journalism looks like and just talk about the people talking about nothing. So here we are, spending an entire day discussing whether or not the fag-end of democracy – a candidate selected unopposed in an unwinnable seat in the back of beyond – has actually read (and understood) The Merchant of Venice.
I have to agree that it seems somewhat odd to say “I can use Shylock in a sentence” without it entailing that “I know what ‘Shylock’ refers to.” It is, after all, a quintessential anti-semetic stereotype.
Jesus, what world do you live in? Reality check time: not everyone is a high falutin’ dinner party intellectual like the PA crew. I would say that the name Shylock is more or less unknown to the majority of Pakeha New Zealanders, let alone the PI and Asian ones, and expecting everyone to understand his character in the context of 16th century anti-semitism or else suffer the scorn of the chattering classes smacks of intellectual snobbery. The guy is at least having a go, which is more than anyone here has achieved so give him a break.
Everyone sits around wringing their hands at the trivialisation of politics, when the trivial issues are all they seem to want to can talk about – probably because we’ve all actually forgotten how a proper media would discuss an election.
-
I have no doubts that Steven Gibson was genuine in his ignorance that that Shylock shyster was a Jew. As he said, he's a rookie at this stuff, and hasn't learnt to fake sincerity.
Morning Report 7.10am - re-listened and still found it compelling. -
I would say that the name Shylock is more or less unknown to the majority of Pakeha New Zealanders, let alone the PI and Asian ones
A lot of us came across it in 7th form English, which not everyone takes, but it's not one of the more obscure plays. And there were definitely PI and Asian kids in my class.
And while Shylock's a problematic stereotype from a time gone by, he does get some damn good lines:
Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs,
dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with
the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject
to the same diseases, heal'd by the same means,
warm'd and cool'd by the same winter and summer
as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed?
If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us,
do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?
If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that.
If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility?
Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his
sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge.
The villainy you teach me, I will execute,
and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.(Act III, scene I)
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
Racism is not trivial.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.