Seymour's Tipping Point
“Change-Makers” vs "the Majority for Mediocrity”.
Life is cruel, life is tough
Life is crazy, then it all turns to dust
We let 'em out, we let 'em in
We'll let 'em know when it's the tipping point.
The tipping point.
Songwriters: Roland Orzabal / Charlton Pettus
Yesterday, we saw the annual pilgrimage to Rātana, traditionally the first event in our political calendar.
This symbolic meeting between Māori and the Crown was especially significant after a year of high emotions caused by David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill and other attacks on Māori by the coalition government. The various leaders made their way to the small settlement…
Hmm, one of those photos does not look like the others…
It turns out that while Christopher and Winston were busy in Rātana, saying, “It wasn’t us; it was the other guy,” David was in Auckland, giving his State of the Nation speech and sowing more seeds of division.
In fairness to the ACT man, Auckland Anniversary weekend means busy roads, so we can perhaps forgive the architect of all this division for not turning up with the other leaders. Instead opting to give his speech late Friday morning in Auckland for a quick getaway, to beat the traffic.
I assume that’s the case. Why else would the leader of the ACT Party fail to turn up to listen to Māori ahead of oral submissions beginning on his own bill?
Change-Makers and the Majority for Mediocrity
In his speech, Seymour announced that our country was at a tipping point between two invisible tribes: the “Change-Makers” and the “Majority for Mediocrity.”
So, who are these mysterious, invisible groups? David’s terminology and concept were a bit confusing. However, that could be my relative inexperience, as I didn’t grow up with invisible friends.
Was the “Majority for Mediocrity” a reference to coalition voters? The majority who voted for such mediocrity? That seemed plausible, especially given the calibre of ACT and NZ First backbenchers, but it turned out Seymour meant something else.
He said “Change-Makers” are those who “act out the pioneering spirit that built our country every day”, including by growing their business, buying homes for others to live in, and studying to improve their skills.
This was a bit confusing. I get that those growing businesses or studying are working to get ahead and good on ‘em, but I don’t really see any change per se; it’s simply individuals bettering themselves - and there is nothing wrong with that.
But what about this “buying homes for others to live in”? I think he meant landlords, and I couldn’t understand how they were “Change Makers”.
To be fair, the advent of landlords with large numbers of investment properties and successive governments who have aided and abetted them, have changed Aotearoa.
They’ve changed it from an egalitarian society where most could afford a home to one where homeownership is beyond the reach of many. However, I didn’t think that was the sort of change David meant, even though he undoubtedly supports it.
Reading between the lines, David’s “Change-Makers” are primarily interested in their own advancement, are happy to benefit from the work of others, and see their responsibilities ending with themselves. He could’ve just said, “ACT voters.”
The “Majority for Mediocrity”, according to Seymour, “Believe their ancestry is destiny, and other people are responsible for issues in their own lives. These people look for politicians who will cut tall poppies down.”
He added, “They would love nothing more than to go into lockdown again, make some more sourdough, and worry about the billions in debt another day.”
I find it hard to understand where David Seymour gets his ideas. Who is he meeting, who is he talking to?
What makes him think that most people believe ancestry is our destiny, others are responsible for our lives, we hate success, and we want to spend the rest of our lives in lockdown?
It’s just weird. Is he completely out of touch or simply feeding lies to those who are susceptible to his messages?
Yes, we respect ancestry and historic agreements, but it would be incredibly rude not to, even aside from considerations such as fairness and justice. No, we don’t think others are responsible for our lives, but we value a society that cares about the needs of others who might be less fortunate than us.
We certainly don’t hate success; we love seeing our country and people do well. However, we dislike greed and selfishness, if that’s what you mean. Rigging the game so that those who are already winning continue to do so is not our idea of success.
As for another lockdown, if the need arose, we’d do that too, but we don’t want to. We missed our family and friends just like everyone else, the events and opportunities lost, but we knew it was the right thing to do to protect our families and vulnerable members of our society, the elderly, and those with health conditions.
Seymour made a big deal about the last big lockdown and how the need for it divided people. Maybe there is some truth in that, in hindsight, but do you know what?
I’m not going to blame a government that erred on the side of caution when it came to keeping the population safe during a pandemic that killed millions. I’m just not.
Last one out, turn off the lights.
David said that people “with get up and go” are leaving the country. It’s true; there were an awful lot of departures last year - but Mr Seymour - who is running the country that they’re leaving from, for better opportunities? That’s right, it’s you.
“Motivated New Zealanders leaving is good news for the shoplifters, conspiracy theorists, and hollow men who make up the political opposition,” said the soon-to-be Deputy PM, which was also pretty odd.
Especially his calling the opposition “hollow men”, a label synonymous in this country with the malleable tools of neoliberal groups like ATLAS, for which Seymour is the poster boy.
He said young people were looking at the housing market and “wondering if they aren’t better off overseas.”
“Many decide they are. Those who stay are infected by universities with the woke mind viruses of identity politics, Marxism, and post-modernism.”
“Infected with the woke mind virus” - Sorry, what, now?
Then, and you might want to sit down for this bit, he said something that made sense.
“A bad housing market and a woke education system combined are a production line for left-wing voters.” That’s a bloody good point, David, and quite revealing, but let me slightly reword it for you; how about this:
“Making a basic need like housing unaffordable so a small number can get rich while others work hard to pay their mortgages for them, coupled with a well-informed population, should make people vote for parties with their interests at heart, ie the left.”
Is that better, David? It’s nice to agree, even if we use slightly different words. Some of the folks on my page also had a few words of review for Seymour:
Alison: “I don't remember infecting any of my students in that way. Did inoculate them with a healthy dose of critical thinking skills, though. I guess I was doing it all wrong.” I bet you weren’t Alison, I bet you weren’t.
Vicky: “A very odd little man and deceptively dangerous.” A sentiment echoed by many.
Sandy: “What he means is they have not become brainwashed by right-wing propaganda.”
Christian: “I think he's the most indoctrinated-sounding person I have ever seen. Knee-jerk reactions, wide sweeping statements about things he has a poor understanding of, just a lot of faulty logic and bias that's been drilled into him while he was being groomed at Atlas.”
Paul: “Some of us older types may have the same infection as we are concerned about the environment, the threat of major wars, social justice and the Treaty. I am pleased, although I was a Commerce student, we had a campus at Auckland University with people like Susan Kedgley and Tim Shadbolt, who were at the forefront of the student protest movement and enlightened us at the forums on the quad.”
Tricia: “My boy is off to catch the woke mind virus this year - I have spent the last 18 years weakening his defences.”
I thought that last comment was just wonderful. Long may we weaken our children's defences when it comes to learning critical thinking and consideration for others.
David said these were tough times and that we have tough choices to make, predominantly about not being so “squeamish” about privatisation.
C’mon Kiwis, think of the wondrous world of profit taking from essential services paid for by the public - can’t you see the potential?
It’s almost as delectable as releasing valuable public assets into the market's welcoming arms, ensuring they generate much more money. Don’t you love success?
Seymour would like people to be able to opt out of the public health system and buy their own private healthcare instead. He would also like to do something similar with education. As we’ve seen, David is not a fan of the well-educated. Even state housing is up for grabs.
“If something isn’t getting a return, the government should sell it so we can afford to buy something that does,” he said, showing a complete lack of understanding of the value that public hospitals, schools, and housing provide. Incomprehensibly to David, a value that is not focused on turning a profit but is about helping people. Other people.
So, what is it going to be? Do we fund universities and risk people becoming well-informed and questioning things, or should we adopt David’s voucher-based education system, which is unlikely to emphasise critical thinking?
That’s a rhetorical question. Chances are that if you’re reading this, you’re pretty down with being woke and think that public education, healthcare, and housing are good for society. In contrast to the survival of the fittest, offend whoever you like, sell everything, approach favoured by David and his anti-woke “Change-Makers.”
It looks like a lovely start to the weekend; I can hear the sounds of cricket on the field through the open door, and soon, I’ll sit out there with an alcohol-free beverage and see what else is happening in the world while I await your comments. I hope you have a lovely weekend, whether long or not; take care, all you lovely people.
For the rest of Auckland Anniversary weekend, you can get 20% off the regular price for 12 months if you want to become a paid subscriber and support Nick’s Kōrero. So that’s $80 for a full year, or $8 per month, a bit less than $2 per week, or around 30 cents per newsletter, and a very, very happy Nick. 🙂
If you take note of lyrics, you might like a tissue handy for this fabulous track from Tears for Fears - The Tipping Point.
Ngā mihi,
Nick.
Witty interpretation of that speech Nick. Yes Seymore lacks empathy, frames situations in binary thinking.
I think he is a dangerous person, a smiling younger Brash.imo
Really really evil. He is like a reincarnated Victorian teacher of arithmetic - encouraging division whenever he speaks. The shoplifting sneer is low, even for him, makes you wonder what he actually thinks about name suppression