Posts by Dennis Frank
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The situation in Iraq derives from the sunni/shia divide, more then a millennia of dualist sectarian culture-polarising, makes ulster folk seem enlightened and peaceful in comparison. The idea that westerners could help was always ridiculous.
Also, democracy only takes root in nations where people are sufficiently evolved. Trying to enforce it on cultures locked into pathological vioence is idiocy.
-
I suppose a conspiracy theorist would assume that a black spider lurks at the centre of the interweb. As someone who had their psyche taken over by the deep-green thingy back in '68 (underground newspaper feature on agribusiness poisoning the soil in the USA) I can vouch for the fact that some of us have never lived in caves.
I got my head around the novel idea that the monarchy could be part of the solution rather than part of the problem when I acquired a copy of the book Charles issued a few years ago, detailing his beliefs and practices. I was genuinely astonished at the extent of his enterprise through recent decades. There is no doubt that the guy has more acuity and flair than his public image suggests, nor that he is not merely an authentic dark greenie, but he also has established a track record of remarkable accomplishments in that arena.
I think he's smart enough to hold off till we see which way the wind blows, post brexit, and assess whether the new PM is providing the necessary moral leadership. I suspect he would only issue an advisory if the incomer seems clueless.
-
From the Guardian: " Johnson once said that there was more chance of him being reincarnated as an olive or finding Elvis on Mars than becoming prime minister. And thanks to the moves of his erstwhile friend, that appears to be a more accurate prediction than he could have imagined."
-
I see two scenarios looming - potential futures. The first takes the form of a government `in the national interest' that reconciles the tory divide by bringing UKIP back into the fold via collaboration between Boris Johnson & Nigel Farage. Watch for this media report:
"Our political reporter has been advised by a tory insider that Boris is organising meetings on a secret project code-named XTC. He's making plans for Nigel."
The second occurs when folks realise that the referendum, being non-binding, is merely indicative of the public will, and the small margin is a mandate for a creative solution. The longer the players contemplate the problem, the more attractive this escape trajectory will appear.
-
Speaker: A Disorderly Brexit, in reply to John Palethorpe,
Yes, that's an excellent summary and overview. I trust you will apply your considerable acuity to the political terrain of Aotearoa, where endeavours of the intellect are always conspicuous by their absence!
That `third way' of the blairites was an exercise in fakery. They recycled the concept from the early green movement a quarter of a century prior, and then pretended neoliberalism could front differently wearing it like lipstick on a pig.
I'm no leftist (nor rightist) so returning to the Greens 19 years after leaving them in disgust at the leftist takeover has tested my capacity for tolerance, but so far so good. Their own credibility problems are rooted in their lack of authentic representation of the broader green movement in this country. Best intro to that for a recent immigrant like yourself would be Christine Dann's history of green politics thesis (online pdf).
-
How about a game-player perspective? Labour Party members still playing the antique democracy game, recycling the 19th-century conceptual strait-jacket in the millennium in the hope that everyone will be that simple-minded forever.
Labour MPs playing the parliamentary numbers game, knowing their power-plays are closer to political reality than the morons who elected them.
Corbyn, trying to be authentic while conforming to the antique prescription, but not smart enough to know that you can't lead a team if you don't win the support of your fellow-players. Even worse, not using his position to be a statesman and articulate the common interests of the electorate.
Does it suffice to conclude that leftist sectarian pathology is congenital, and leftists cannot transcend it? Corbyn may lack the insight required to act as game-changer, advisors who are that sophisticated, or both. I liked the imagery of the game of thrones played by teletubbies mentioned earlier as it seems to capture the situation as seen from my distant perspective. Britain needs a player with a sense of humour right now, to slice through the crap with a few well-chosen words...
-
I wish the guy well in his attempt, but any establishment lawyer is unlikely to produce a constitution that serves anyone other than establishment interests, right?
Take the oath to serve the monarch that all MPs must take in order to participate in parliament, for instance. Bet he retains it! I can't become an MP because I would refuse to take that oath. However, if there was an opportunity to swear to serve the public interest, I'd do so willingly!
I also can't see any validity in a constitution that defines the British Crown as the head of state (an abstraction of the concept of monarchy). I would only see validity in a constitution that defines the state as the national expression of the people as a whole, as sovereign over the land of Aotearoa.
I see no merit in retaining the old double-dutch name the settlers recycled from the discover of this country. Born here & growing up in the fifties I never understood why everyone dismissed double-dutch as gibberish in conversation, yet thought it okay for the national name. Not merely slow-learners, more like a nation of retards.
And why would anyone with half a brain (or more) think it was acceptable for the Maori to retain their traditional patriarchy? Pakeha eliminating the vestigial entrenched privilege system of their patriarchy ought to alert Maori to the prospect of making similar progress. Subservience forever is inappropriate for human dignity.
Hiding behind the Treaty isn't going to work. The Maori aristocracy ought to consider the merits of providing an exemplary role-model for the future. Clinging to the Treaty like a toddler clinging to its security blanket sends the wrong message!
My advice to Sir Geoffrey: don't propose any new constitution for Aotearoa in which the Treaty of Waitangi functions as a strait-jacket on the body politic. Nothing wrong with citing it as the founding document of our nation, nothing wrong with using it as the basis of our bicultural evolutionary trajectory, a racial partnership model. The concept of dual sovereignty was most certainly endorsed in the Treaty, but I would only accept continuation of that as an ideological component of a new constitution if it is constrained and subordinated to a primary clause that vests national sovereignty in the people of Aotearoa as a whole; and local sovereignty to the people of the Maori tribes - over their lands held at the time of the Treaty (minus what they've subsequently sold) - not to their rulers!
-
Speaker: A Disorderly Brexit, in reply to Caleb D'Anvers,
Caleb, thanks for that link to Ashdown's exit poll you posted earlier. It illuminates the motivation of voters authoritatively (more than 12,000).
The identity politics section reveals that 79% of leavers identified themselves as English not British, whereas 60% of remainers identified themselves as British not English.
Of the leavers, 81% thought multiculturalism is a `force for ill’, 80% thought the same of immigration, likewise for social liberalism, 78% likewise viewed the green movement as a `force for ill'(!), 71% had that same view of the internet(!), 69% had it of globalisation. Yet the leavers’ view of capitalism was balanced: 51% negative, 49% positive!
Of the remainers, the favourable views ranked as follows: 79% immigration, 71% multiculturalism, 68% social liberalism, 62% globalisation & the green movement. They had the identical balanced view of capitalism as the leavers, while they also had a balanced view on the internet (51% for, 49% against).
Their is no evidence here of any rebellion against the capitalist system: rather, voters seem entirely neutral about that. Looks like the rebellion derives from a cultural divide: a massive chasm, more like. The testimony of those polled reveals a schism in the nation polarising those who embrace multiculturalism, immigration, globalisation & liberalism, against those who loathe these things. Much like the USA…
-
Yeah, that fella Mark Blythe gets it; an excellent concise analysis, thanks guys. Dunno if global trumpism has the legs to last the distance tho - unless it gets defined as more generic than the model deriving from such a flawed avatar.
Any chance any of the political players & power blocs currently on the global stage will decide to advocate our common interests? Too hard, or too old-fashioned? Sectarianism is merely an unsatisfactory refuge for simple-minded leftists & rightists. Democracy was captured by elites long ago but usually they conduct the sham sufficiently well to sucker mainstreamers - they'd better get more smoke & mirrors into play asap...
-
Some good points made above. Assimilation does indeed depend on a variety of factors. A more nuanced view is helpful when the blogosphere is full of simplistic analyses. It's human nature for some contributors to recycle the pc leftist view that unlimited migration must be allowed, and assume anyone who thinks it is bad for society is a xenophobe or racist.
Since the right thinks unlimited migration is required for economic growth, we get left/right collusion, which alienates and disgusts centrists. Since centrists have been around a third of the electorate in western countries for years, the antique binary political frame fails to represent reality. When both wings of the establishment screw up all over the place, centrists are likely to catalyse the outcome. It's happening.
Kinda weird that there's no book yet published that explains identity politics. Likewise that it's obvious psychological motivations produce political alignments, yet political psychology seems unable to coalesce as an academic discipline. Assimilation of migrants does not mean they lose their prior identity, merely that they develop another to use concurrently. In fact we all acquire a new identity that derives from our presentation and interaction in any group involvement. We are walking portfolios of multiple identities. This ain't rocket science, just a fundamental fact of group psychodynamics that nobody wants to admit is essential to contemporary sociological analysis and commentary.