Posts by Jeremy Andrew
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Translation: They don't have the often brutal subjugation of indigenous peoples and the confiscation (or dubious purchase) of their ancestral lands in their recent history.
Nah, most of them have that in one shape or form - generally longer than 500 - 1000 years ago though - after that they had to go abroad to indulge their conquering urges.
Not denying the brutal subjugation in any way, but the major characterising feature of the colonisation in NZ, Aus & the Americas was the unbalanced levels of warmaking ability/technology of the parties involved. Europe reached a comparative balance of power centuries ago, since then any two sides fighting in that neighbourhood had more-or-less similar attitudes and tools towards making war. Once Brits and French and Spaniards and Portuguese with guns met cultures still using stone-tipped spears they, of course, prevailed. In the same way that the roman legions rampaged across the warring tribes of Europe in the days of Julius Caesar.
I've just completely lost track of whatever point I might have had, but I've spent the time typing this, so I'll post anyway :-) -
Them trying to transform that unfairly universalised nationalist identity into a national ethnicity is just...
I really don't think anyone would try and create a standard for New Zealand ethnicity based on how well one fits into the Barry Crump/Fred Dagg mould. Sure, there's a kind of national archetype built around that model, in the same way that Steve Irwin and Crocodile Dundee are seen as quintessentially Australian, and the americans have their cowboy mythos.
No one seriously expects a city-living, latte-swilling Aucklander, Melburnian or Angelino to have the first clue about shooting a deer, wrestling a croc or roping a steer, but the frontier is part of the heritage of these countries in a way that Britain and Europe and much of Asia don't really have.
They don't have the conquering of a wild hinterland in their recent history. Sure, its only a minority of kiwis, aussies and yanks that actually 'go bush' on any regular basis, but it is an option either real or imagined and definitely idealised. -
Now I've tapped that corner of my memory, the names come flooding back:
Dribbly Cat Attraction
Give Me Back My Laughter You Bastards (GMBMLYB)
Semi Lemon Cola
Queerfish -
Ahh, the great band names of the past, I remember seeing the Calamari Bushmen on posters around Tokoroa in my youth.
Some names just stick in your head, even if you never hear a song by the band. Hapuka Lips Now is one forever lodged in the 'useless info' corner of my cerebrum, no idea what they played, just a catchy name. -
but this does have a very high reading on the "chicken entrails" meter
Quuick! Get to the quack-phone and call Penn & Teller!
-
I know I had been vaguely aware of them via some airplay on good of waikato student radio, but the extra publicity cemented them in my mind as a band to watch for.
-
but where were the local equivalents of Depeche Mode or Art of Noise?
They came later...
Does anyone else remember the storm in a teacup that erupted when the Headless Chickens won the Rheinech Rock Awards way back when? There were plenty of commentators of the opinon that they weren't guitary or rocky enough.
-
Of course, one can't really blame the corporations as such - its like blaming the shark when it bites off your leg while you're surfing. Its what they do, its how they're made, its corporate Darwinism - survival of the profitablest.
-
Jeremy, But technically the relationship between, say EMI and Coldcut, should be a profit sharing one.
Hence the sociopathy diagnosis. Technically the relationship between Telecom & Ihug should be a profit sharing one, the relationship between Foodstuffs Inc & their suppliers should be profit sharing, but inevitably the larger 'partner' will do its damndest to screw the biggest portion of the profits in their direction - even to the point where short-term profits are sought even at the loss of longer-term profits: see Telecom's recent history.
The smaller the company, the more likely actual people are making the decisions, the larger, the more likely 'policy' will decide how they treat partners/clients/suppliers/people. -
Simon, you're right, the relationship is more like McDonald's and their staff. Minimum wage all the way, man!