 |
| She’s Such A Scream! The Prime Minister’s enemies, those who want us to hate her, suffer from the not insubstantial handicap of being more than a little hateful themselves. Rendered nonsensical by their unwavering belief in the most absurd conspiracy theories, and dangerous by their relentless peddling of fake news about the Covid-19 vaccines, they stand exposed to the accusation that they are all exceptionally dark right-wing pots to be calling Labour’s kettle black. |
WHAT DOES IT SAY about the state of New Zealand politics that our prime minister is being branded as “evil”? “Nothing good” is the obvious, if insufficient, response. Calling another human-being evil signals that political discussion has veered away from the predictably ideological towards the dangerously metaphysical. Good and Evil are religious – not political – terms.
Escalating the depiction of one’s political opponents from the merely incompetent, simply ignorant and defensively dishonest, to the overtly mendacious, fundamentally corrupt and self-consciously immoral, makes politics, “the art of the possible”, impossible.
After all, competence can be acquired through experience; ignorance can be corrected through education; and the political consequences of dishonesty can be powerfully corrective. But, mendacity, corruption, and the deliberate choice of clearly immoral options, are failings beyond the remedial powers of most ordinary mortals.
I vividly recall watching the Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, waxing eloquent on the evil character of his Russian enemy. Zelensky’s depiction of President Vladimir Putin made the Devil himself look like a rank amateur. It was only when the journalist interviewing Zelensky pointed out that if Putin really was as bad as he was saying, then compromise would be impossible. How does one negotiate with pure evil? The question pulled the Ukrainian president up short. If only for a moment, doubt took command of his features. Is it ever possible to make peace with the Devil?
That is the problem with terms like Good and Evil: they tend to shut down the possibility of compromise and negotiation. Indeed, they render compromise and negotiation morally unacceptable. The threat posed by the individuals and/or groups described as evil is transformed into something viscerally existential. If “they” are not overcome, then “we” will be. The only options become: Victory – or Death.
Those who choose to characterise Jacinda Ardern as evil do so with a similarly binary political objective. In the simplest terms, they are hoping to rule out all other political options except the decisive destruction of the Labour Government and its leader.
Certainly, they do not want all those New Zealanders tossing-up whether to cast another vote for Labour to say: “On the one hand, Jacinda and her government have been pretty hopeless at keeping their promises on climate change, child poverty and affordable housing; but, on the other hand, they did a great job keeping the country going under Covid.”
Nor are Jacinda’s foes keen for voters to compare New Zealand’s economic and social performance with those of other nations. Once people grasp the fact that their own country is economically, socially and culturally out-performing a great many of the wealthy nations against which we like to compare ourselves, the idea of returning Labour to power doesn’t seem quite so unthinkable after all.
Transforming Jacinda Ardern into a hateful caricature, and loading her with responsibility for all the nation’s woes, will also serve to distract the electorate from the straightforward and eminently measurable response of her government to the most pressing (and potentially the most politically determinative) “bread and butter” issues bound up with the steadily rising cost-of-living, ballooning mortgage repayments, and the ability of working people to ensure that their wages and salaries at least keep pace with inflation.
If the data emerging from the Treasury and the Reserve Bank over the next 11 months indicates that the Labour Government is making a reasonable fist of managing the economy in unusually trying times, then the Prime Minister will have realistic grounds for electoral optimism. Doubly so, if her Finance Minister, Grant Robertson, is able to announce changes to the tax regime that penalise the rich and reward the poor.
It should also be noted that the Prime Minister’s enemies, those who want us to hate her, suffer from the not insubstantial handicap of being more than a little hateful themselves. Rendered nonsensical by their unwavering belief in the most absurd conspiracy theories; and dangerous by their relentless peddling of fake news about the Covid-19 vaccines; they stand exposed to the accusation that they are all exceptionally dark right-wing pots to be calling Labour’s kettle black.
Should Jacinda Ardern re-fashion herself as a humble witness to her own and her government’s shortcomings, and commit herself to achieving a very small number of extremely useful things, then her enemies’ accusations of evil are most unlikely to stick.
This essay was originally published in The Otago Daily Times and The Greymouth Star of Friday, 13 January 2023.
37 comments:
Quite right. Over-egging undermines credibility.
Chris
When someone’s behaviour is rationally inexplicable we are faced with difficult choices. It’s easy to default to one word definitions, ‘evil’ for example which as you point out has moral and religious connotations. It’s not a word I would use to describe our Prime Minister, however I have described her behaviour as sinister in relation to her gleeful announcement that she was intentionally creating ‘two different classes of people’:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdMSRolWCyQ
Furthermore, despite the Prime Minister stating that they were following the advice of medical and scientific experts in relation to the covid crisis and Pfizer vaccine, it has recently come to light that this was not the case, particularly in relation to the vaccination of young people 18 years and under, or to publicly warn of the risk of myocarditis. Minutes containing the advice to Government of the CV TAG meetings (medical and scientific advisors to the Government) can be found in the two articles below.
https://www.bassettbrashandhide.com/post/thomas-cranmer-covid-and-our-kiwi-kids-part-1
https://www.bassettbrashandhide.com/post/thomas-cranmer-covid-and-our-kiwi-kids-part-2
These are not ‘conspiracy theories’ or ‘fake news’, these are what we once would have called facts.
They raise many important questions.
Not least, why would the Prime Minister and her Government refuse the advice of her expert panel, particularly when it came to limiting the number of shots given to those 18 years and under given the risk benefit analysis did not warrant “two shots for summer” as their advertising promoted. why did they refuse to warn the public of the myocarditis risk for this age demographic?
Whose interests was the Prime Minister serving in making those decisions? It would appear not to be the New Zealand public who elected her, or their children.
Politicians are eventually held accountable for their policy actions. The New Zealand public will determine what words best describe the behaviour of our Prime Minister.
Given the propensity to hate and vilify left of centre or centrist women leaders all over the world – including Finland for crying out loud, it seems to me that there must be a misogynistic component.
If you go to the MSN news website and look at the comments, there's not one thing it seems to me that they won't blame on Ardern, or one fault that they cannot ascribe to her. Indeed there is some clown whose sole purpose in life is to write every day on one news story or another "this is the xx of – insert month here – and "Cindy" is the worst Prime Minister in the history of New Zealand" or something similar.
Interesting how they refer to her as Cindy, a rather demeaning diminutive at least when used on someone you don't know.
Is it just me or is it that right-wing female leaders often – as Elizabeth I did – emphasise "male" characteristics in order to divert criticism? Certainly Margaret Thatcher seemed to and AFAIK was insulted in sexist/misogynistic terms by people in her own party – before she came Prime Minister at least. She realised the depths of prejudice against women in power quite early on I think.
“There will not be a woman prime minister in my lifetime,” she told the Finchley Press in 1970. “The male population is too prejudiced.”
The hatred of Ardern it seems to me, is excessive, unjustified on a personal level, and widespread amongst the somewhat lunatic fringe of the right. Did they hate Helen Clark as much? Jenny Shipley? I can't remember to be honest but I suspect they did.
https://theconversation.com/from-queen-elizabeth-to-sanna-marin-young-women-in-politics-have-always-faced-prejudice-191306
To some people, Chris, evil no longer means what it once meant. Evil has joined words like unique, anticipate, and utilise – which once meant unique, anticipate, and utilise. Now, for many people, those words mean ‘slightly unusual’, ‘expect’, and ‘use’.
I think my grandfather would have called Ms Ardern ‘unreliable’. He would have said that she has failed to do what she promised to do. She kept secret many things that she probably had reason to know some parts of the electorate would not like. And she appears to refuse to accept responsibility when things go wrong.
One of my neighbours started calling Ms Ardern unreliable two or three years ago. But then, when unreliable brought about no change (and certainly no apology), he needed stronger words. And then stronger words again. And now my neighbour says that Ms Ardern is ‘pure evil’, by which he means unreliable, untrustworthy, and unwilling to accept responsibility.
Gureilla surgeon. The notion of Goodies and baddies among social media commenters is nonsense, Madness is bi-partisan Anybody from the centre recognises zealot from both side. its naive to think that women politicians should be immune from legal taunts.
Yes Jack, I was thinking the same thing - the devaluation of the currency of language has a lot to answer for. Of course the "literally Hitler/Stalin" comments, for example, should be treated with the distain they deserve. On the other hand the zeitgeist demands that even relatively innocuous descriptors ("that woman" for J Ardern?) are examples of heinous sexism, or something. Blatantly sexist insults (arrogant prick) towards men, not so much. It's hard to keep up.
Any economy that has had billions, yes billions of borrowed or printed money dumped into it without regard for how it is spent will look hunky dory, that is until it has to be repaid.
Stimulating an economy should be done by a government when appropriate but only in small doses.
The ridiculous lockdown required that government fund the economy by borrowing, lockdowns that merely delayed the arrival of an "over egged" virus that didn't ever seem remotely possible of killing 80,000 except within the minds of a small unqualified group.
Trust me Chris, if you were as astute an economist as you are an observer of social activity you would be trembling in your boots for the future of your grandchildren and our country as a whole.
Regarding tax as a method of income distribution from the rich to the poor is also rather naive. What you risk is killing the goose rather than generating more eggs. Imagine the good that could be done by boosting basic education allowing more to prosper through lucrative employment within our country rather than looking for imports to fill those roles.
As for evil, I'm not sure that is the word many would use, mysoginistic or otherwise, but taking pleasure in dividing a society on racial or medical status is rather hateful wouldn't you say. Imagine your response had these edicts emanated from the mouth of John Key for example. Would you have been so benignly supportive?
Ardern may not be EVIL but she has certainly been complicit and weak ergo incompetent particularly in relation to Mahuta and the Maori caucus. For that reason alone she and Labour MUST NOT be re-elected. She has also shown a lack of empathy and compassion in many circumstances which belie her kindness mantra. She has been incoherent and can't give a straight answer. As Thomas Cranmer's latest research is showing, politics overruled public health and safety during the Covid vaccine rollout
I thinks "liar, narcissist, sociopath" cover Ms Ardern's personality and conduct as PM adequately. The mandates, the secret He Pua Pua co-governance agenda, and now the evidence emerging that expert concerns about the health risks of the vaccine for young people were deliberately suppressed by "the One Source of Truth" are utterly damning. And that's before we get to her government's sheer incompetence and waste.
For someone who got themselves vaccinated Brendan you seemed to spread misinformation about it.
"Myocarditis and pericarditis are rare but serious side effects of the Pfizer vaccination. A study from Israel published in the NEJM shows no increase in any other kind of adverse cardiovascular outcome following the Pfizer vaccination. In comparison, the risk of myocarditis, pericarditis, myocardial infarction and arrhythmia are all increased as a result of having the COVID-19 virus. (DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2110475)"
I think this is a source that possibly trumps something published by three extreme right-wingers with an axe to grind. Because it's by actual cardiologists. And personally I rather are doing followed the advice of cardiologists than Bassett, Brash, and Hide. None of whom have a medical qualification – indeed Bassett's qualification is in – I can't believe I'm about to say this – labour history.
Disappointing to see you publishing this Chris. Brendan is constantly trying to slip in vaccine misinformation to the most irrelevant of topics.
In spite of your attempts to whitewash the D evil Chris; the black cloud will continue to envelope the people of NZ unless it is removed.
The poster: 17 January 2023 at 12:29 is reiterating what I believe the bulk of Kiwis are experiencing.
As for the reference to the lunatic fringe at 11:43 I would suggest he take a long hard look at who is who.
As someone who was othered by our Prime Minister and who experienced terrible treatment at the hands of my fellow New Zealanders because she had demonised people like me and made it socially acceptable to discriminate, coerce and snitch on people like me I can only call her actions evil. She divided us as a nation like never before. I will never forget at a cafe that I used to go to weekly having a staff member yelling at my daughter and I while forcing us to leave the premises as if we were lepers. No Politician has ever had that kind of impact on my life before so it is not surprising that we would describe her as evil. Families were broken up because of her actions. Couples split up because of her actions. Businesses were destroyed because of her actions. My body my choice was her mantra when killing innocent babies but when it came to my right as an adult to make my own medical choices she said do as you are told or lose your ability to earn a living. That is evil. Good people do not force people to lose their homes and livelihoods. Evil people do.
Ardern is evil ... in effect.
Therein lies the problem Chris.
How do you describe a government who was elected to do X and in many cases didnt seem the least bit interested in X but did bring you Y which not only appeared unheralded and unexplained but was actually the antithesis of what many (most, most likely) didnt want.
A government which when questioned called all comers all sorts of nasty names and point blank refused to talk about it. A government that wouldnt give any truck with those who would oppose them (protestors) and who even stopped the media from covering the protestors points of view. Who have reverted to lies and obfuscation more times than I have had hot dinners during the same period.
Your point that referring to someone as Evil is counterproductive is correct as well as your point that it is a refrain used for political gain by the other equally vile side.
Are they simply incompetent or inexperienced or are they something by degrees much more heinous?
And what of the loyal supporters who spent their lives believing in a cause (in my case at the cost of very real dollars in my pocket) to find themselves and their ideals derided and laughed at. Dinosaurs and fools that we are.
I refer to our PM as evil because I am that angry (and I know others who feel the same) and I cant conceive of a government who runs under a Labour party manifesto reducing our country to the strife and poverty and excess ridden place that we have become. Was it all Ardern's fault of course not but coming into government the priorities were clear as were the needs.
We had waited a decade to start to right the wrongs but were duped instead. I dont know why it happened, hubris and arrogance perhaps, something darker who knows. But I think that to do some of the things the PM has done so callously and to repeatedly not listen, hints at something a little more serious than oh, the govt's just useless.
LETS NOT GET TOO HUNG UP ABOUT TERMS (semantics) SUCH AS EVIL. WE GET THE POINT ... WITHOUT THE SEMANTICS.
Oops Caps
This woman Ardern in the minds of many is seen as an EVIL influence, hardly an unsurprising fear when her position gives her the potential powers to create evil where only good, reason, altruism and love ... are supposed to usually reside.
Her ideological socialist views ... do that and are correctly seen as evil ...evil intent/consequences, evil harm, evil intent... all are closely aligned "to my mind".
Thus potential for evil in her governing powers/actions is enough to justify use of the word
The answer is YES.
Thanks Brendon, Podium of Truth indeed. I guess evil must have a component of malevolent intent, we're getting there.
BTW, you can access essays by Cranmer directly on his Substack https://cranmer.substack.com/
Cranmer is a nom du plume but surely one of our best political and social commentators - certainly head and shoulders above the rubbish in the legacy media.
His investigation into the real costs and obligations implicit in the water "reforms" is great work: https://cranmer.substack.com/p/three-waters-and-the-debt-that-will
Dear GS
With Chris’s indulgence, and in one small attempt to rid the world of misinformation / disinformation I am taking a moment to correct your post.
You appear to be labouring under the impression that I have taken the Pfizer gene therapy (their description). It is typical of you to impute beliefs and actions to me, and also others who post on this website that are without substance and wide of the mark. I’m pleased to advise you that I have not taken the vaccine in question, and consequently remain completely free of its reputed benefits and risks.
I was however effectively marginalised by our Prime Ministers 'two classes of people' policy, as were my teenage grandchildren who were shut out of pools, libraries and school sporting activities.
I’m conscious of Chris’s guidelines regarding the Pfizer product and as my post contained no mention of the vaccine’s efficacy or safety it fully satisfied his criteria.
First rule of medicine. First do no harm
First rule of medical consent . You must give the patient enough relevant information that they can make a rational choice of treatments
Jacinda failed miserably on both counts.Myocarditis is rare but potentially lethal.the risk of dying from Covid in the under 20's is also rare
The patient should have been informed
Dr Matthew Campbell
I rarely share the political perspective of @Brendan McNeill, but I always value his commentary. It's a credit to Bowalley Road, and your efforts Chris, that people of different political views may have a reasonable discussion.
Living in Melbourne, during lockdowns, we religiously watched daily briefings and the regular question answering of the Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton. In full credit to his integrity, when the first question was raised over the long-term impact of the vaccines, he answered that no one honestly knew but, we knew that the impact of covid infection was a much greater risk. At the time, the medical advice was that two shots would protect everyone from the virus in perpetuity.
We now understand that protection gained from vaccine is time limited and the rate at which recombinations are occurring is faster than modified vaccines can be developed. We also know that Pfizer has been fighting in court to block the release of testing data it obtained in drug trials and there are uncomfortable questions about the potential of mRNA to induce autoimmune issues. There should be space for ongoing public debate of these issues.
Yet, one of the latest batches of twitter file releases clearly shows that the FBI was working with the social media platform to supress any criticisms or concerns related to vaccines, including concerns from qualified experts. We understand the same censorship was being used with Google, Facebook and Microsoft. This level of censorship is frightening, and it’s been used with multiple issues over the past two years.
Be it with labels of "evil" or "misinformation spreader" or "conspiracy theorist", It has become too easy to slap labels on people who have opinions we don't share and dismiss them without taking the time to listen to what they are saying.
GS, it sounds like you didn't even read, or failed to understand, that Cranmer essay before flinging accusations of misinformation about. The guts of it being the decision by government to ignore the advise of Covid-19 Technical Advisory Group (CV TAG) not to proceed with vaccination for young people, essentially that, in their view the risks outweighed any potential benefits.
Here is a link to their strongly worded memo to that effect. Obtained under OIA request.
https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/20211209_-_cv_tag_stance_on_mandating_vaccinations_in_under_18s.pdf
Crikey Dick, this place is getting as hysterical as MSN. In what way is Ardern socialist? Please give some examples of means of production she somehow nationalised? At least something that was in private hands anyway.
"Liar, narcissist, sociopath"? Leaving aside the fact that you're not a psychiatrist, and that all politicians at the very least shade the truth – how on earth can you call Ardern a sociopath? How about explaining? Although somehow I doubt if you know the actual medical definition, but you can look at top. How have you managed to diagnose her narcissism? Please reply with examples.
You know, sometimes I despair at the exaggeration in what's meant to be a cool and rational discussion. Although I must say Chris you are doing a very good job at keeping the abuse at low levels these days which I do appreciate – it was driving me away from this site.
Goodness me I see Larry Morris has died. RIP – Larry's Rebels gave me hours of listening pleasure in my youth. Although they may well be responsible for my lack of acute hearing these days. :)
The Prime Minister of a Country has the responsibility of protecting their citizens from foreign or other threats and invasions. The Covid virus was an invisible enemy that challenged science around the world. Jacinda is the only leader in the world that protected her citizens.
Right wing fools like Boris, Trump, FOMO, Bolsanaro, and others thought they could ignore science and carry on as usual. They suffered millions of unnecessary deaths. The Tory/Act parties here didn't believe in science and thank god they were not in Govt as they would have had Aotearoa in the same predicament - based on the UK and USA, there would have been about 15 to 20,000 Covid deaths in NZ, as it was, there were only about 50.
I tick 3 boxes - over 70, Maori and immunocompromised. So thank you Jacinda, Ashley and the Labour party for ignoring the right wing Tory fools and conspirators and saving my life. Can I suggest that the many grumpy old men (like me) I hear on talkback ZB and read in the herald who have a hatred for Jacinda, REJOICE and appreciate this great country of Aotearoa..
The Prime Minister of a Country has the responsibility of protecting their citizens from foreign or other threats and invasions. The Covid virus was an invisible enemy that challenged science around the world. Jacinda is the only leader in the world that protected her citizens.
Right wing fools like Boris, Trump, FOMO, Bolsanaro, and others thought they could ignore science and carry on as usual. They suffered millions of unnecessary deaths. The Tory/Act parties here didn't believe in science and thank god they were not in Govt as they would have had Aotearoa in the same predicament - based on the UK and USA, there would have been about 15 to 20,000 Covid deaths in NZ, as it was, there were only about 50.
I tick 3 boxes - over 70, Maori and immunocompromised. So thank you Jacinda, Ashley and the Labour party for ignoring the right wing Tory fools and conspirators and saving my life. Can I suggest that the many grumpy old men (like me) I hear on talkback ZB and read in the herald who have a hatred for Jacinda, REJOICE and appreciate this great country of Aotearoa..
Helen Clark as mentor and little union voice to balance - PM Jacinda seems to have found the primrose path - wisdom; 'If it ain't broke don't fix it; if it is broke appoint a committee to get facts, appear to fix something to show that 'this is an active government'. Be seen looking thoughtful among the peeps.
I wouldn't say " evil" because that requires some imagination on her part. How about "vile"?
Being more than a bit very selective memory about treatment of woman leaders aren't you GS. How did the opponents treat Margaret Thatcher or Jenny Shipley? That was the precedent. Or is it different when the left do it?
All those who offer themselves as secular ‘saints’ risk an overreaction from those who find that they fail to live up to their image. Perhaps less inappropriate grinning in the face of policy failures and damaged people, and more straightforward engagement over the issues would assist this PM at the present time. She may find inspiration in Kirk’s handling of the press many years ago: calm and thoughtful engagement.
Chris if you had bothered to read my post above you would have noticed that I did mention Margaret Thatcher. Which rather makes a nonsense of your last statement.
I apologise Brendan I seem to have confused you with David George at some stage. If you are unvaccinated good luck – but at least it shows the courage of your convictions.
Jesus Christ Trev – what you mean vile? That's a disgusting epithet to use on someone who is essentially – I think – a personally decent woman. Vile is something I wouldn't even use about Margaret Thatcher, who cancelled school milk for poor kids. (Well, actually I might. But I'd be right to do so, because it was a vile act.)
What a statement though right? Adds nothing to the discussion just an epithet. No thought behind it, no explanation. How would you like it if I just came on here and said "Trev – fuckwit." You'd be offended and quite rightly so.
You'd at least think I should provide some sort of explanation as to why I think you're one wouldn't you? Some sort of carefully considered and reasoned exposition. Statements like that just – I'm sorry – lower the tone, such as it is. :)
Responding to your 'below-photo'. Yeah.
Why I entered Labour briefly and voted for Little agin her man.
Her screwy-up face on the news he lost.
Short-term Labour.
I've come to this too late whereby I doubt the people who have disagreed with Chris and have indeed proclaimed Ardern is evil, will read this.
But anyway, on the the continuum of evilness, where does she sit when compared to Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Pol Pot who systematically murdered millions of their own people? Adolf Hitler?
I have zero respect for people who indulge in hyperbole and exaggeration, thinking that by doing so their outrage increases their validity. This immature way of thinking and expression is now entrenched, ubiquitous and exemplifies people's inability to proffer rational arguments.
Well I've just read it Mark, and I think you're spot on.
Yes GS, you probably did get confused. I've had two shots of the covid vaccine. I regret it now and had some serious doubts at the time but there were other factors not of my choosing.
Chris Trotter
Is this what you were talking about: the Maori troops in Capetown?
[3:50]
Calling New Zealand, Brigadier Hargest. 1944-03-24 ; News Roundup. 1944-03-27.
https://www.ngataonga.org.nz/collections/catalogue/catalogue-item?record_id=165537
To: John Hurley.
Thank you so much, John. Your link does, indeed, lead to the story I referred to on-air this morning (23/1/23). It is extremely helpful to finally have the reference.
Brendan McNeil didn't take the vax but did mention rationality in his comment. Oh, that's good fun. GS coming in to wish him 'good luck' was the cream on the pie. Only good luck saved the anti-rationalist.
That we have to address these fools is the freemarket's fruits. Know-nothing Fascism is there only way of continued control for a slight bit more in time. We offer the possibility of a future.
Post a Comment