Friday 2 February 2024
'I Totally Support The Houthis, As A Jew’ - Norman Finkelstein
"If IsraeIis don't want to be accused of being like the Naz1s, they simply need to stop behaving like Naz1s."
- Norman Finkelstein
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPwGRpkyDSo
Thursday 1 February 2024
Oppressive and biased "moderation" continues to make The Standard an unattractive and sparsely attended site
You're banned! And you! And you! And you!
Posted by Morrissey
Populuxe15
Despite being resolutely a Knight of the Brotherhood of the Limp Wrist, I think I love you Queen of Thorns….
Rogue Trooper5.1
you are progressively becoming more Poplar with moi
- Aw, gosh, shucks *blushes* cheers RT
just saying5.1.2
cha nui?- oui
Blue6
I can skip the walking on water. But I do have some non-negotiable requirements that Shearer is currently not meeting.
1. I expect the Labour leader to be in control of their caucus.
I don’t expect MPs to think they can get away with backstabbing colleagues in the media, leaking information that the leader has said only they are allowed to comment on, commenting on whatever they like regardless of whether it’s their portfolio or not (and dumping all over potential coalition partners while they’re at it), or attacking their own allies and members.
If MPs do engage in this behaviour, I expect them to be publicly disciplined. And if they are not, it shows that the ‘leader’ is not actually in charge and is happy to be undermined by their own caucus.
2. I expect the Labour leader to be able to communicate their ideas.
Enough said.
3. I expect the Labour leader to hold Labour values.
Bashing beneficiaries may be trendy, but it’s just not cool.
4. I expect the Labour leader to lead the opposition.
Instead of leaving it to Russel Norman and Winston Peters. Every article you read these days has these two front and centre for comment from the opposition, rather than Shearer. Except for the articles focusing on Labour’s infighting, of course.
5. I expect the Labour leader to know what they are doing.
Instead of, say, claiming knowledge of a certain tape which they do not have and have never seen.
****
Shearer is in a weak position, where his continued leadership relies on keeping the support of the people who have been his biggest headaches.
Shearer is in a weak position, where his continued leadership relies on keeping the support of the people who have been his biggest headaches.
It’s not a great place for the party to be in, but until someone else can build a more stable support base, I guess we’re stuck polishing a turd.
-
David H6.1.1
HAHAH thanks Queen Now I have to clean out another keyboard, And coffee coming out thru the nose fucking smarts when it’s hot.Great article as usual. Keep up the good work, and yes I do occasionally visit your site for a read, I find it enlightening.
Olwyn6.2
I would emphasise point 3. And I expect Labour values to be the motivating values of the caucus, not merely the brand.I am also concerned with where authority lies, and by authority I do not mean tough guy antics, I mean the centre of decision making. Half of the cabinet appear to have rank but little authority. Modest left-leaning expressions, such as Cunliffe’s suggestion to his own electorate that Labour will not amputate your leg, are greeted with alarm, while Shane Jones bags the Greens and Hipkins says what he bloody likes. It would be all too easy to think, under the present circumstances, that Matthew Hooton has the final word on things, as some sort of advisor. A man whose stocks would rise sky high if he was able to deliver unto his friends a second right wing for when the other right wing goes to shit.So my concern is not with Shearer’s vocals, but with what is happening to the party under his watch.felixviper6.3
“If MPs do engage in this behaviour, I expect them to be publicly disciplined. And if they are not, it shows that the ‘leader’ is not actually in charge and is happy to be undermined by their own caucus.”Yep, or it shows that they approve. Either way it’s not good.Ennui in Requiem6.4
Blue, in response to point 3 I thought it might just pay to refresh commentators on this post with exactly what Labours principles are (taken from their website).All political authority comes from the people by democratic means including universal suffrage, regular and free elections with a secret ballot.• The natural resources of New Zealand belong to all the people and these resources, and in particular non-renewable resources, should be managed for the benefit of all, including future generations.• All people should have equal access to all social, economic, cultural, political and legal spheres, regardless of wealth or social position, and continuing participation in the democratic process.• Co-operation, rather than competition, should be the main governing factor in economic relations, in order that a greater amount and a just distribution of wealth can be ensured.• All people are entitled to dignity, self-respect and the opportunity to work.• All people, either individually or in groups, may own wealth or property for their own use, but in any conflict of interest people are always more important than property and the state must ensure a just distribution of wealth.• The Treaty of Waitangi is the founding document of New Zealand and that the Treaty should be honoured in government, society and the family.• Peace and social justice should be promoted throughout the world by international co-operation and mutual respect.• The same basic human rights, protected by the State, apply to all people, regardless or race, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, religious faith, political belief or disability.Might pay to criticise Shearer (and any other recent Labour leaders) on their adherence to the above. Also perhaps any Labour policy directions might be reviewed in light of this.
Tiresias7
John 11:35
- biblos.com: night
Pete8
I wonder if David Shearer is the kind of guy who can lie in bed at night and think “Maybe I shouldn’t be doing this. It’s too much for me”. Is he capable of that kind of self-reflection? I mean, you know if you make a gaffe in conversation. You know if you’re in a job and feel it’s not the right fit for you. You know if your skillset is not a good match. And if he hasn’t realised this. If he hasn’t had a moment of introspection, then I really do fear for the future of our country. Because if that man is the next Prime Minister, and he continues behaving like a petulant child blaming his failings on anyone but himself, then there is no hope. The waka of state is caught between the Scylla of John Key’s malevolence and the Charybdis of David Shearer’s incompetence.
- I think a major factor standing in the way of such self-reflection could very well be a cadre of sycophants/puppet-masters who keep shutting down any negative self-talk. “No no, David, the speech was great, don’t listen to the haters.” “David, our focus groups really liked these key messages, it must be that the media are conspiring against you. Did you hear Duncan Garner was seen to nod at David C in the corridor?” “David, no one reads blogs!”
- And don’t forget to keep some of your invective for that snot nosed schoolboy Gower.
- Oh, Paddy Gower. I think I wrote a blistering post about his shitty “journalism” on job numbers in his first month on the job. I’m sure he never saw it, but it makes me feel like we have ~history~ together.
- I don’t think real self-reflection works that way QoT. For a start, with genuine self-reflection you take reassurance from those with a vested interest (even those who want to soothe your dobuts with the most noble intentions) with a big grain of salt. And you seek further information, not mollification. It’s just not that easily fobbed off.I must admit to being sick of hearing the failings of those in leadership roles being blamed on their underlings. Not just Shearer either. It seems those with real power get endless excuses made for their fuck-ups while those with none get no passes at all.
- Oh, real self-reflection, absolutely. But I’m just thinking about even the most basic flickers of doubt which anyone in an important position feels from time to time. Unless they’re like the protagonist of American Psycho.As for underlings … you may find my post tomorrow a little annoying on that front, but (you can probably already see clearly enough!) rest assured I’m not holding Shearer blameless for anything. As a lot of people have pointed out in comments on other posts, the flipside of that is that it can’t all be his fault.
Murray Olsen8.2
Pete, that sort of self-reflection is very rare in people, and much rarer than those who go into politics to massage their egos. Shearer should be embarassed to be in Parliament, taking a salary for being leader of the opposition. Any opposition to Nact’s neolib policies still alive in the Labour Party survives in spite of Shearer, not because of him. What is it that he opposes?
At a guess, I’d say Shearer will be much more likely to blame others for any future electoral defeats than examine his own limp role in an unnegotiated surrender. He’s as weak and as useless as wet toilet paper.
Okay, people, the derailing was fun and all and gods know I love seeing a high comment count, but further litigation of Morrissey’s petty bullshit is off the table.
Morrissey9.1
I note that you obliterated three of my comments entirely, and replaced them with your own witless comments.Your display of anger was impressive, but any sensible person would have simply treated my little diversion with a quick “Fuck off!”It’s not as if you are adverse to such language.[lprent: Which was pretty much what I did when I noticed it. You have noticed your ban right?Don’t leave more comments because I usually just double the ban length on each comment.I couldn’t give a damn about the language any more than QoT would. It was running a diversion on a post and directing the diversion at one of my authors that I don’t like. Commentators I can live without. People capable of putting up interesting posts are a damn sight more precious. ]- A general note to future readers: sometimes moderation happens after the fact (otherwise you’d all get stuck in auto-moderation, such as I run on my own site, but on TS it would be completely impractical.)So when you choose to derail someone’s post, it might pay to scroll back up and see if they’ve left you any helpful advice, such as multiple, repeated, clear, bold-typed warnings about your behaviour and its inevitable consequences.
- …but on TS it would be completely impractical.So it would. I happened to just be looking at the numbers of comments a few hours ago (estimating backup deltas). This years comments to date..
wk dy num
1 Friday 261
1 Saturday 263
1 Sunday 249
1 Thursday 210
1 Tuesday 194
1 Wednesday 268
2 Monday 294
2 Thursday 377
2 Tuesday 417
2 Wednesday 5663099 comments in less than two weeks? FFS: I read over at The Hand Mirror (good blog) Julie stating their stats for 2012..In 2012 The Hand Mirror published 247 posts, received around 1700 comments (I think that excludes spam), and passed the 600,000 page views mark.My italics… That is why this blog has it’s ratehr harsh moderating style. we simply don’t have time to be anything but harshIf anyone needs it the SQL for that table isselect weekofyear(comment_date) as wk, dayname(comment_date) as dy, count(*) as num from wp_comments
where comment_type = '' and comment_approved=1
and year(now()) = year(comment_date)
group by wk, dy
Kiki
Excellent post, QoT.
I wish I had both your clarity and force of expression.
There’s another aspect to the attempts to get people into line behind Shearer that I can’t understand.
We’re told that there is still ‘time’ for Shearer and Labour to make headway, politically, before 2014 yet there are not even suggestions, let alone promises, that this will be done or what form it will take. It’s all ‘steady as she goes’ as if how ‘she’ is going is particularly steady. This is a good way to make doubters even more nervous.
Governments generally have to be winkled out, issue by issue, mistake by mistake so that the narrative becomes irresistible till it takes on its own momentum. Labour under Shearer don’t seem to understand this role the opposition has in establishing a discourse of failure around a government. I guess they occasionally try but none of them seem capable of constructing that discourse in a way that strikes a chord and rallies the disaffected to them.
I said when Shearer was selected as caucus leader that if he didn’t make a pretty rapid ‘Orewa-like’ spike in the polls based on his ‘back story’ and ‘not a politician’ persona – I think Lanthanide pointed out that it wouldn’t need to be that dramatic, and I agreed – then Shearer would be painted, and tainted, as nothing but a place-holder and all of his weaknesses would be forever available to cane him with whenever necessary.
Shearer didn’t produce any discernible improvement in Labour’s polling, apart from resurrecting the polling figures Labour had in the early part of the election campaign in 2011. The polling remains the same a year on, with a bit of poll-by-poll shifting of votes between Labour, the Greens and NZF. National are still polling very close to their election night level (yet wasn’t it National Party voters that the choice of Shearer was meant to appeal to?).
It seems that the recipe for success from here on in is the belief (faith?) that Shearer will, eventually, grow on the public – and no change in his approach is therefore needed.
Further, the same appears to be the case with the overall caucus performance – it too will somehow grow on the public as being competent, substantive and the performance of a ‘government in waiting’. Little needs to change.
That may happen – but it’s an exceptionally risky strategy to assume that nothing needs to be done.
The problem for Shearer supporters, I suppose, is that to suggest that something doesneed to be done is to concede the very criticisms that are being called disloyal or undermining of ‘the left’s’ chances at the next election. But that’s the corner you paint yourself into when you adopt a paranoid stance to criticism.
Then, of course, there’s the worry that the next Labour-led Government, if under Shearer, will itself be simply a ‘placeholder’ filling the gap between right-wing ‘reformist’ governments.
Why doesn’t the Shearer camp throw the doubters some scraps of hope – a few rhetorical mango skins, as it were? Why the reluctance?
If I were Shearer I would address (already would have addressed) the party members publicly – in a significant speech – and basically admit a ‘mea culpa’.
I’d say that, ‘yes’, I wanted to make a much bigger impact than I have, that I wanted to communicate my passion for a just and egalitarian society far better than I have. I’d say that I not only understand the frustration but I also take my share of the responsibility for it – but, from here on in, no party member, no New Zealander, need be in any doubt that I stand for working people and for those who struggle week-by-week to stay afloat or have been totally cast adrift by our society and economy and that I am not ashamed to say so very loudly. If there has been confusion over that in the past there should be none now. I will not support policies that allow people to be sacrificed for the supposed sake of the economy. And I will act decisively if caucus members forget that I owe loyalty to all our party’s members and to Labour’s longstanding purpose – and not just to them.
etc., etc..
Said with conviction and with the confidence that you could meet the expectations you had set for yourself, I think it would come across very well even to the apolitical members of the New Zealand public. It would also fit with the ‘he’s just an ordinary guy’ meme, if done well – proper apologies generate respect.
As they say, it’s not rocket science.
- It seems that the recipe for success from here on in is the belief (faith?) that Shearer will, eventually, grow on the public – and no change in his approach is therefore needed.Absolutely pinpointed one of the problems there, Puddleglum. There’s the occasional “he may surprise you yet” comment but it’s not come to anything so far in his leadership.
One Tāne Huna10.2
+1 PuddleglumThanks to QoT.
xtasy11
As much as I dislike Shearer, and I made it very public, I feel it is time for some here to get clearer on policy and challenge the man on this, than to continue the rants about his mumbling and so on. I want the man gone, but it will not happen with just ratting on him like this. Qualified criticism is needed, he must be exposed and challenged more.
As a migrant from Europe for over 20 years now, I still do not quite get the Kiwi psyche here.
Why is it so hard, to speak your bloody mind, not just rubbishing, to some degree insulting, but to say straight out, you are talking fucking bullshit, man or woman?
I get this all the time, this endless attempt to make it right for everyone else. Now QOT certainly does not fit that agenda and is very outspoken, and I hear her voice, but I expect also from her a bit more qualification of arguments.
One major problem is that the larger public is totally BRAIN WASHED! We have shit media here, we have endless commercialism, advertising funding media that is so corrupt and dependent on this, it is not delivering the role of the so-called “4th estate”!
I see and hear it every bloody day. I turn on the radio in the morning to hear the summary of news. What I get on National Radio is not great, but the only reasonable summary I can obtain. I tune to Radio Live, 1 ZB and others, I get shite, shite, shite and more shite!!!
So turn on the TV and see the same shite there. Information is not communicated. It is NOT wanted to be communicated, as the media is mostly private, or controlled by persons favouring privatised media, and who are totally biased. Hence we got shit Key in government, for a bloody second term. I know NO country in Europe, where the population (also more ignorant and brainwashed there) would put up with such poor media, lack of information, education and else and vote for such shit government. NZ is run like a damned dictatorship, by a damned elite.
Yet some here even start debating about supermarket prices and so forth, partly perhaps justified, but where is the big picture? I see NONE.
A country full of lost, soul-less, increasingly desperate, mercenary competitors, all fighting for the few morsels that drop off the table above, where the key stake-holders sit, eat, make decisions and shit on the ones below the table.
When are you getting the grips of what all this is about???
Politics, activism and more is about more than some idiot “Shearer” or fake, corrupt Key. You must get a scheme working to reach the bloody people though. I see none of this happening. So sadly Shearer, the lost idiot, devoid of employment alternatives, will keep his “domineering” reign on Labour.
Get out of damned Labour and start a bloody NEW PARTY, thanks, you are all wasting your times, as caucus the carcas of values, will see to it.
rosy11.1
Hi xtasy, I understand your frustration with the way New Zealanders psyche. We are indeed, as a society, the passionless people Gordon McLauchlan wrote about all those years ago. I hadn’t realised he’d written an update until I read your comment btw. It’s probably worth getting a hold of. As is some earlier writing on the New Zealand culture like John Mulgan’s ‘Report on Experience’McLauchlan reckons the “Smiling Zombies” have now graduated to “Frowning Zombies” and that New Zealanders are superficially cheerful.Don’t let the societal lack of concern feed into an idea that individuals are not concerned. We do have a shit media, as you say, and little idea about how to counteract it. I think that part of the problem for New Zealanders is a cultural heart and identity, which is so readily on show in much older European countries that you might be familiar with. Certainly it’s one of the major differences I see. Even in well-to-do, peaceful countries the visibility and acceptance of public action about political issues has been a major learning experience for me.But as for leaving Labour – no, I won’t be. With the changes to membership input I feel the basis is there to take the party to a truly socially democratic one. It probably won’t be in February though, more’s the pity. While we can’t afford another term of National, we also can’t afford a term of ‘not’ National in the form of a centrist Labour. But change will happen.- “But change will happen.”If it does, it won’t be until after 2014, and likely to be a messy split rather than a glorious unite.
No joy in 2017 for the fractured party either. - Red Blooded (Stuart’s popping round for a cup of tea) however, I’m open minded enough to read both sides of the jam sandwich.
- rosy: Thanks for pointing out Gordon McLaughlan’s new book!
- Your very welcome. I’ll have to get hold of it myself
Fortran11.2
+1
SouthDeezViper12
You think David Shearer is competent enough to be on the front benches, let alone lead a political party? Faggedaboutit.
QOT.
You have nailed it.
The strength of the left is it is made up of people who try to be “part of the solution”, who think! Which is why we do not always agree.
Lock step sycophancy is usually the domain of right wing “authoritarian followers”.
National do unthinking following of memes and slogans, well!
When Labour starts doing the same it means they are trying to be National light, and sleepwalk to victory when it becomes, their turn. To do much the same as National, but, “with anesthetic”
Parachuting in a colourless apparatchik whose only leadership skills seem to be destroying competent rivals, will not win elections.
David Cunliff spoke to me and my ideals with the anesthetic statement.
Nothing Shearer has said or done, inspires anyone, from outside, that we have a credible, leader in the making.
For Labour to get my electorate vote back I want to hear some bold Labour policies and see a leader who actually believes in them.
They, it used to be we once, until, Labour abandoned their principles in the 80’s, could start with workers rights. It is in the party name after all.
40 Hour week.
Protection for so called “independent contractors”.
Liveable welfare for those dumped by the market.
Restore the right to strike.
Recognise that the private sector has failed in what is supposed to be their strength. Take up the economic slack with employing directly to rebuild NZ.
They, it used to be we once, until, Labour abandoned their principles in the 80’s, could start with workers rights. It is in the party name after all.
40 Hour week.
Protection for so called “independent contractors”.
Liveable welfare for those dumped by the market.
Restore the right to strike.
Recognise that the private sector has failed in what is supposed to be their strength. Take up the economic slack with employing directly to rebuild NZ.
- Comments like yours are one of the reasons I think IrishBill’s Year of Policy post is going to bring some really good, solid results in terms of what people want to see from a Labour/leftwing election campaign. A lot of us seem to be looking for the same kind of basic, principled policies!
- Lock step sycophancy is usually the domain of right wing “authoritarian followers”.Bryce Edwards summed up the macho, authoritarian nature of the Shearer/ABC Labour leadership in this comment about a possible Labour/NZF dominted coalition:….As with David Shearer, Peters receives much praise for his ‘decisive’ handling of Brendan Horan. It seems ‘strong leadership’ is more important around Parliament than wimpy concerns about natural justice. Look forward to the trains always running on time under a NZ First/Labour government…..And the words “strong leadership” certainly deserve the scare quotes. The passion and swaggering aggression shown by Shearer has been exclusively meted out to the people whose interests Labour purports to represent, including its own members. And the fire in his belly and these supposed “leadership” traits arise exclusivly in his own power/career interests. He hasn’t gotten hot under the collar about anything National has done, and in fact shows a disturbing obsequience towards those with any kind of power including his supposed opponents.
marsman14
QoT you are as always spot on with your observations, another great post.
King Kong15
Those on the left often crow about how they have got this MMP thing cracked but I’m not so sure.
Alot of people on here (including QoT) are anti Shearer because he will not lead the Labour party in a massive lurch to the left.
If Labour doesn’t represent your political ideals then support a party that does. Under MMP supporting a minor party is not the complete waste of time it used to be. The problem is that those who should just shut up and support the Greens or Mana also want the popular electoral support (twice that of the Greens) that the Labour party has and the power that comes with that. But of course the only reason that Labour has this popular support is because it is a centrist party not a bunch of dogmatic socialist loons (well not all of them).
So I guess my point is, find a party that fits your ideology and if you truly believe that they have the answers to the country’s ills then surely the votes will follow. Stop trying to hijack someone elses train.
- Yeah Labour is doing very well on the centre-right. That’s why they’re polling so high.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)