Kiwiblog And Cows
Kiwiblog has this rather entertaining post using cows to explain economic models:
SOCIALISM: You have 2 cows.You give one to your neighbour.
COMMUNISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and gives you some milk.
FASCISM: You have 2 cows, The State takes both and sells you some milk..
NAZISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and shoots you.
BUREAUCRATISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away…
A FRENCH CORPORATION: You have two cows. You go on strike, organise a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.
Noting that capitalism is missing, I think the following should be included in the interests of fairness:
CAPITALISM: You own pretty much all of the cows. In an effort to avoid tax, one of them is taken to Wellington to shit all over the steps of Parliament.
Powered by Qumana
Speaking Of “Media Beatups”….
Kiwiblog certainly seems to have got itself all worked up over an item that featured on One News last night, labeling it a “puerile and almost offensive” media “beat-up”. The item focused on apparent denials of climate change made by Maurice Williamson and Lockwood Smith to public audiences in recent times, which appear to put the two offside with National Party policy as well as John Key. Judging by his strong language, this is an issue which Kiwiblog obviously holds dear, but although he attempts to enlighten us on the political realities of decision making, he conveniently overlooks the somewhat unsubtIe distinction between “private” opinion and public statement.
It is obvious that there will never be an absolute consensus on an issue within a large group, and political parties are certainly no exception to this. The nature of political decision making often requires compromise, concessions, and the sacrifice of personal opinion and beliefs in order to promote the wider collective interests of the party. Indeed, it is often the case that MPs simply tow the party line and put their own views aside, and I doubt this fact is lost on the New Zealand public. Thus, given the range of opinions within a political party, it would be most unhelpful if the media were to go around each MP seeking their “personal” opinion once a party had decided, collectively, to take a particular course of action, as Kiwiblog correctly points out.
However, things change when opinions, which are privately held and have supposedly been set aside in the interests of the party, are expressed publicly by an MP acting in the capacity of a party spokesperson, especially if those statements seem to contradict their party’s policies. In such a situation, there is likely to be both confusion and apprehension within the electorate as to how such opinions will ultimately influence a party’s policies, and it is thus right for the media to seek clarification on behalf of the public. Such clarification is particularly important in an election year when the public is entitled to know how genuine a party is being when they release policy on a particular issue.
It is certainly curious when an MP claims they are committed to party policy, while at the same time dismissing the very foundations on which that policy has been formed. In the case of Williamson, his remarks were allegedly made during a presentation to an Automobile Association meeting. These statements were not made by Maurice Williamson the private citizen, but rather Maurice Williamson the National Party spokesperson for transport, and as such they are open to scrutiny by both the media and the public. To suggest otherwise, as Kiwiblog appears to, is nothing short of idiocy, and it is surprising that Kiwiblog’s rather enthusiastic advocacy of freedom of speech does not quite extend to freedom of the press. Or at least not when the National Party is shown in a negative light.
Powered by Qumana
On The Blogs
Things have been fairly quiet here at NZ Pundit over the long weekend, but some of the other blogs have been quite busy.
Poneke has a great piece on the quality of New Zealand television news, and comes to the conclusion that it is appalling. This has certainly been something I have noticed about TV in general over the past few years, and I guess it was always inevitable that the “dumbing down” of the media would find its way into television news.
The Standard also has an excellent article on the continuing saga of the New Zealand Fast Forward research fund, and the reaction of rural New Zealand to National’s plans to scrap it.
And for something completely different, Kiwiblog has an interesting piece on apparent disparities between arts funding for Auckland and Wellington.
Powered by Qumana
