End Game
Where are we heading, and more importantly why and what can be done?
Related articles below
Introduction
Recently, I’ve been having some delays in putting pen to paper.
It’s not because I’m short on words -
Verbosity seems to be one of the banes of my life.
And it’s not because there isn’t enough content: I just whipped up a long list from the past few days.
So, a lot of political developments - and those are relatively easy to write - but it’s the complexity of the bigger picture that strikes at me.
And holds my attention.
i.e. Where are we going? What does it look like? What do they ultimately want?
It’s akin to a question Bill asked me here on Substack, and has been on my mind since - ‘answer Bill…’
Beliefs
Before we get there, I want to quickly re-clarify some core beliefs I hold.
I started writing after I took a closer look.
This government were already in power.
After I examined their background, narrative, and policy, what drove me to write was: “Information and transparency will help my fellow Kiwis and our country”1
We could be better prepared to defend against misinformation and lies - i.e. avoid what happened in Brexit and Australia’s Voice Referendum.
Knowledge would allow us to make more thoughtful choices and rally for a stronger direction together.
Knowledge is power, so the more folks are educated and understand the nuances, the more we can anticipate and work together in solidarity.
By the way, this is what I mean re: Brexit and Voice Referendum:
To me, freedom of selection is essential for us all - but freedom is only real if decisions, choices, and trade-offs are upheld with honesty, transparent implications, and holds integrity and the well-being of this nation and all its people, at its core.
That is my belief.
What’s The End Game?
And that brings me to the “End Game.”
And not just the Avengers movie type.
Quite simply, what is their goal? What do they want to achieve? What might it look like?2
The answer in its most basic form is quite simple —
What they want is control which they can personally benefit from.
That’s it, really!
And control means they can do what they want, irrespective of impacts, under a delivered pretext3
Control for them is driven by self interest - and not the interests of the collective4 or long term welfare.
i.e. It’s not driven by the typical values, metrics, measurements, goals and standards one might expect of traditional good governance and public service.
If this hypothesis stands, it stands to follow, they are only interested in furthering benefits to those who provide them benefits e.g. donors or people, society or organisations that promise a lucrative path ahead.
As one example of donor relationships- we have seen that the wealthiest individuals in New Zealand and nearly all property developers only donated to National, ACT & NZ First.
One of these donors is Winton Property Development, who donated to National and saw Chris Bishop fight for them against our government when he was in opposition, and once in government grant them fast-track approval to build on land, that is classified as a “flood plain” in South Auckland - likely without having to consult with local authorities.
As another examples - Fisheries have donated bigly to New Zealand First for years. Last year, in November, Greenpeace urged National not to give the fisheries portfolio to New Zealand First given the financial links. Of course Luxon did anyway.
And in his role as Fisheries Minister, Shane Jones immediately pushed blanket 25 year consents for every fish farm in NZ - allowing them to escape all environmental oversight and any scrutiny, backtracked on NZ’s commitment to deep sea trawling limits and ocean protection, and tried to stop the rollout of cameras on commercial fishing boats because one of his largest fisheries donors thought they added ‘red tape’ and costs to their operations.
To successfully enact their goals, it is fundamentally necessary for them to keep large swathes of people satisfied, satiated and otherwise distracted enough, so they can deliver on their real agenda.
This means 3 themes are necessarily emergent:
Controlling the narrative is foundational. They must control the narrative e.g. presenting harmful policies as “good for the country” e.g. smoke free repeal where the government repeated tobacco industry talking points . It also involves ‘flooding the zone with shit’ - i.e. disorienting the population with an onslaught of misinformation and PR announcements.
Taking down opponents is criticial - Expertise and transparency is a threat under this set up - therefore we see doctors and nurses who speak up about Health NZ get labelled “sabotage” and “resistance”. We see the New Zealand judiciary called “activist judges” and “elites” for doing their job, and receive threats from the sitting NZ government to shut them down. We also see a sitting govenrnment attack media such as TVNZ, and individual journalists such as Mihingarangi Forbes and Jenny May Clarkson.
Grow a home base of supporters who favour party over country, and grow a culture of emotional reactivity in NZ based on misinformation and manipulation. This playbook is leaned on more by those that flank the National Party i.e. New Zealand First and ACT. But National partake as well e.g. with their proven lies about Health NZ, education, blaming Labour for their austerity budget choices.
If you want to know what that end result looks like in practice, look to the empire of Rupert Murdoch and those who consume his news.
A former socialist, Murdoch has made billions from cultivating rage and influencing society, drawing immense power to himself and his empire.
His strategy involves harnessing disinformation / misinformation to cultivate grievances and then target those who are often unrelated to the root causes e.g. immigrants or left wing governments
The same strategy was applied during Brexit.
This article could go for a long time as each of these points can be extrapolated further and further.
I’ll try to avoid that.
But the above “goal” may show you why a government could be fundamentally and ENTIRELY uninterested in evidence, facts, inputs, and research backed expertise - in almost every singular policy it touches. (Examples are in the footnotes.5)
The above hypothesis also demonstrates why academics, health experts, doctors, nurses, teachers, justices, lawyers, professional journalists and independent newsrooms are all, metaphofically, cannon fodder
i.e. any risks to them controlling the narrative must be diminished and if necessary removed - because they speak what the government does not want to hear, and it does not want the general population to believe.
Before I wrap up, please bear with me here because I need to do a little fine print stuff.
It’s important.
For those of you who aren’t explicitly aware, the New Zealand government has three branches of government to ensure the appropriate separation of powers. These are called “checks and balances” to make sure power is not consolidated and therefore abused by one body.
The three branches are:
The Executive: The Ministers and their government departments. They run things like finance, bringing proposed laws to parliament that must be approved by the Legislature, and choosing and enacting policies.
The Legislature: Members of Parliament (MPs) and the Governor-General. The role of the Legislature is to make laws (legislation), and to scrutinise the Executive.
The judiciary: The judiciary are judges and the courts. Judges interpret the law in cases that come before the courts by hearing and deciding cases, and they can review decisions of government.
What we’ve seen with this government’s continued attacks on e.g the Waitangi Tribunal, judges etc. are unconstitutional, and speaks to a playbook we’ve seen used in the USA i.e. undermine or stack the judiciary to remove the separation of powers and consolidate powers to the politicians in power.
And by instigating a culture of misinformation, PR, and personal attacks - with ancillary support from allied organisations e.g. Taxpayers Union - they introduce a culture of personal intimidation that influences the Legislature i.e everyone is fair game in this environment - and misinforming the electorate makes them useful to right wing causes to attack MPs or journalists or schools etc. who do not abide by their wishes.
What Does The End Game Look Like In Practice?
In practice it looks like the agenda of whoever and whatever the Executive are working for.
In our system of government, a good way of reviewing it is to follow the money i.e. donor interests, but also dark money backers, sponsorships, related networks of ideology.
This has been explored in other articles on this publication such as Corruption First Strikes Again, Nicola Willis’s Very Unserious Bungling of the Kiwirail Interislander Cancellation, Knives Out fo Kainga Ora, and Pharmac Director, Climate Change Commissioner, Health NZ Directors - The latest to quit this month
But the TLDR version is - under this government, the theme of donors includes oil and gas, tobacco, property development, fisheries, agriculture, road contractors, early childhood education, and far right wing conservative ideologies.
And we’ve seen their policies invariably support those sectors - at the expense of counter parties.
In practice the ideology of the money behind it is manifested in an:
Anti-environment agenda - i.e. rolling back climate protections that accepts responsibility and takes action on climate change and preserving natural reserves and wildlife. Ignoring investment in public transport, bicycle networks and natural reserves and conservation.
Anti-transgender agenda - e.g. implement a Human Rights Commissioner and Race Relations Commissioner with proven anti-transgender links
Privatise and corporatise. As Luxon has already said, nothing is off limits for privatisation under his government - health, roads, schools, hospitals, water.
Centralise power in the hands of a few elites in power e.g. the fast-track bill
Appointing ‘cronies’ who share a loyalty to their party, irrespective of qualification or suitability e.g. Stephen Rainbow
Publicly attacking opponents and undermining experts
Remove constraints on corporations and wealthy interests under the guise of “reducing red and green tape”.
In an excellent Guardian article from June, the modus operandi of the right network related to our government, was listed as:
A crash programme of massive cuts; demolishing public services; privatising public assets; centralising political power; sacking civil servants; sweeping away constraints on corporations and oligarchs; destroying regulations that protect workers, vulnerable people and the living world; supporting landlords against tenants; criminalising peaceful protest; restricting the right to strike. Anything ring a bell?
Anything ring a bell, indeed.
“If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States.”
- Henry A. Wallace, former Vice President of the United States
The end game for the far right agenda is ultimately and wholly unconcerned with what happens to our hospitals, our doctors and nurses, and top talent.
It’s unconcerned with climate change, emissions and ‘woke’ things like animals, seas and forests.
It’s unconcerned about the true long term cost of any of its decisions that don’t affect themselves as individuals.
In my opinion, it doesn’t care if more people die, and more suffer under poverty and hardship, or the debts and crises it is building up to. They don’t care what the evidence shows - nor the stories of those who come forth to share.
It is predicated on control of power by the true elites - and not the co-opted word the right use to describe those with information and expertise.
So long as they can find new people or groups to blame, accuse and abuse, the grift can go on for a long time….
This is why the best template for what it will look like is a replica of the UK Tory Britain and the US Republican America: increasing transfer of wealth to the wealthy, reduced regulations and costs to businesses, less environmental care and increase in environmental destruction, continued dismantling of core health infrastructure and removal of top talent, continued appointment of ‘cronies’ irrespective of qualification, more hardship in the population, and increasing efforts by the wealthy and powerful to exert control.
While we are less mature on the continuum towards right wing characteristics of the US / UK, it doesn’t mean we are not moving there - and as quickly as they can do it.
New Zealand’s unique Te Tiriti / Treaty of Waitangi is also a wrinkle they need ironed out.
POST SCRIPT
What Do You Do With A Drunken Sailor?
The advantages Aotearoa New Zealand retains are, and what you can do:
We have a small population - and that means you who are reading this have power to share and inform what you know - with calm words and rational evidence based thought.
Use your voice where it counts calmly and sensibly. Misinformation thrives in the absence of expertise and facts.
Advocate for those that cannot do so - such as the mental health sector, the doctors and nurses and allied health practitioners in our health system, the disabled, the poor, the vulnerable etc.
Find platforms and share critical information if you are able to.
Create community groups and stay connected and close so you can share your voice
Inform others of the background behind groups such as Jordan William’s associated groups - Free Speech Union, Ratepayers Alliance, Taxpayers Union, Hobsons Pledge, Curia Market research.
Forge alliances and look for unselfish individuals and groups to collaborate with. To me, left, right and center is unimportant, we should identify each other by our values.
Pool resources and make submissions as groups
Liaise with media networks and journalists
Take breaks from the news to ensure you are in a good place - self care is essential.
“Before mass leaders seize the power to fit reality to their lies, their propaganda is marked by its extreme contempt for facts as such, for in their opinion fact depends entirely on the power of man who can fabricate it.”
- Hannah Arendt: The Origins of Totalitarianism
“The .. liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself.
That, in its essence, is fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any other controlling private power.”
- Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd President of the United States, 1933 - 1945 (the longest serving President of the USA until his death in 1945)
"Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal."
- Martin Luther King
“The tsunami of wealth didn’t trickle down. It surged upward.”
- Warren Buffett on the lie of trickle down economics
Post Script Summary:
We are in the palms of a corporate, wealth and far right wing ideology takeover by stealth from within our government.
We are not the first.
The UK Tories veered far right since Brexit and the rise of Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak, advised by “right wing” think tanks under the umbrella of Atlas.
The USA will see an effective authoritarian state next year, supported by the right wing think tank Heritage Foundation’s eyes and ears.
Right wing networks, media channels and astroturfers are working hard to unseat Albanese and Labour in Australia.
These groups all rely on apathy, confusion, misdirection and disinformation and those who say “Don’t be silly. Let’s focus on the cricket instead.” or “Don’t exaggerate. Everything is fine.”
Confusion is their mainstay, ignorance is their strength, and power is their only motivation and goal.
We can only try.
Related Articles:
One of my first articles when I migrated to Substack was: ”New Zealand deserves better than marketing” - an article warning about the risks in the Fast-Track bill.
[That bill has now passed its second reading - ready for law soon. Earlier this year, Chris Bishop said - “There are people out there wanting to use the law…lobbying is not illegal, and it’s not necessarily a bad thing.” .]
What are they doing as they lead us into a wider and deeper recession, a four year high unemployment rate and rising, more debt (not to save lives or build infrastructure), “a sustained productivity slowdown”, the intentional dismantling of our public health system as the government privatises health by stealth, torpedoing our climate progress and plummeting NZ’s international environmental ratings in a short 12 months - leading to NZ potentially kicked out of international climate coalitions and breaching trade deals, ignoring abuse in care as it happens and policies that continue to harm our most vulnerable - from those who rely on food banks, to the disabled, to domestic violence victims, to tamariki to high needs children…
That pretext is inevitably - for now - presented as “good for Kiwis, and good for New Zealand”
By collective, I mean society as a whole - particularly the middle and lower socio-economic class - which forms the large majority of every society. In all decisions, there are trade-offs. There are no unlimited resources in our world, and therefore, each decision that is made has an inevitable trade off.
For example, during Covid, New Zealand made a decision to mandate vaccines, and to choose to protect the vulnerable. That was based on the available science at the time, and was a strategy followed by countries around the world including Singapore, Hong Kong, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia.
For example, in a government’s budget, money usually goes to services such as mental health, the disabled, elderly, domestic violence, because even though there is no ‘monetary return’, we are driven by two facets:
a/ Social responsibility - most people understand and support with supporting others. It is the humane and right thing to do.
b/ Positive community support and intervention not only helps those in need, but brings widescale social benefits and reduces other social costs e.g. crime, time off work, higher costs if left untreated etc.
Not making this investment is short sighted as e.g. costs of incarceration are approximately $200,000 per individual per year, and crime for example, goes to police, health and justice budgets.
Where self-interest reigns supreme, we might see a corresponding drop off to supporting our vulnerable populations, as they are frequently the least powerful
For example:
Boot camps not only not work, but they draw out abuse and harden those involved. [also confirmed by Sir Peter Gluckman] They are doing it anyway.
Section 7AA overwhelmingly helped vulnerable tamariki - they repealed it anyway.
Health privatisation is proven to kill, increase private profits, but decrease patient care and quality. Luxon and Reti praise it as others point to this government manufacturing a crisis as an excuse to privatise healthcare.
Climate change. This government’s dismantling of our progress and policies is as devastating as it is real. Treasury even warned them that climate change costs will be significant, let alone costs to life, property and nature. Head in sand result.
The Hikoi was a call to unity in the face of lies. Just keep saying who was on it. Lol Not just the Maori Party. It was all people from every where who stood and welcomed them, or walked with them. Seymour has "been seen!!" and nothing he can say now will change that. We stand in unity.
Yes they are definitely trying to split Maori off, depicting them as an unworthy race of people.
But, he's being thick in making that tactical error.
I went to Bastion point to add my support and I was delighted and amazed at the number of non Maori support both there and on the approaches.
It would be an interesting exercise for some guru to quantify non Maori support at the various assemblies. I know my granddaughter her Canadian husband and two great grandsons attended at Welly.