- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Friday, September 23, 2005

GUEST BLOG: New Zealand v. Nu Zeelind

GUEST BLOGGER: Martyn Bradbury

--------------------//MB//-----------------------

Playing the Deliverance duelling banjo as our new national anthem.

I think we have been damaged. This election wasn't about Tax cuts, it wasn't about silly billboards it was about Whitey.

Whitey lives outside the cities, he doesn't understand why "Maaaaaoris" get so much, he fires up that the fags can get married and wraps anything he doesn't get as bloody poofy political correctness ­ this election was about two different white cultures. One is at home with race and has a liberal social attitude because they actually live and mix with those communities in large cities, the other sees those communities as a threat, a non specific "other" who is out to destroy the social hierarchy Whitey has enjoyed uncontested since 1840.

What no one is wanting to point out is that our country cousins have actually taken a step backwards. National's policy was based on a racial fallacy, aimed at NZers intrinsic egalitarian nature. Don twisted the "why should 15% of the population get 50% of the say" garden variety pub argument and turned it into a full blown attack on the values of liberal urban New Zealand. National legitimised the chip on Whitey's shoulder into racism.  These liberal urban values have been about broadening the franchise of democracy to many groups in NZ Society who had previously had no say whatsoever. This in turn has created a tension within the white community and a fear that their values and views were no longer relevant.

The response by National voters was an attempt to re-assure themselves and re-assert their conservative social values upon the rest of us. The election result suggests that they failed; but the righteousness created in the heat of this debate has turned into a deep anger. From the cities is a genuine surprise and hurt that our country cousins would attack so viciously, and from our country cousins the embarrassed angry reaction of someone who has just spent 20 minutes raving about "bloody Maaaaoris" only to be greeted by horrified silence.

The insecurity of identity that snowballed this ugly display of race baiting is something white New Zealanders need to confront; but that's something most simply can't do. Until some resolution, the rest of us can just thank our lucky stars that we live in the city, because there really is something very wrong and very bitter wandering the countryside.
     
--------------------//MB//-----------------------

5 Comments:

At 23/9/05 1:41 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

hooray, you got it in one. As a City pakeha born and bred I have no worries about Maori or immigration because every day I benefit from all these people. But down country where I visit quite a bit (my partner is a country girl), people don't travel, and have very odd views about cities and the people who live there. The country folks kids get educated in the cities then tend to stay in the cities wheras the people that stay reinforce the stay behind attitudes (and average age goes up, old=more consevative). you can sum it up with the 'JAFFA" attitude that prevails in country NZ. They have a massive gripe about your place of birth and won't go there. But you got to theirs and take your money while taking the piss.

Cheers, I enjoy your writing. Good luck with the magazine..

 
At 23/9/05 2:25 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I thought most people in NZ lived in cities? Is the "country lobby" as significant as you're suggesting, or merely one of many factors? How could these country voters have had such an impact? Didn't a fuck-load of city dwellers actually agree with them? Auckland Central stayed red, but Northcote went blue. Are there more chardonnay socialists in Pt. Chev than on the Shore? Maybe it was more about tax than you'd like to believe Bomber.

 
At 23/9/05 6:22 pm, Anonymous Graham Watson said...

Wrong brother,

How does this post equate with the huge increase in National's party vote in urban centres, both metropolitan and urban?

National has always enjoyed rural support, its gains were primarily urban.

Your post is trendy leftist dogma, and wildly inaccurate. The majority of Labour voters, rural and urban, also agree with the egailtarian proposal that there should be one law for all. National rightly want to remove the racially divisive institutions in New Zealand, the relic of an imperialistic colonial past.

Its time for our country to embrace all countries and get with the 21st century.

Honour Brother!

 
At 3/10/05 8:52 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a bloke who has posters of murderers like Mao and Che on his wall, I always treat your opinions as a parody of the left. Yeah, that's the way to understand and heal the rift with the provinces - insult them and call them Whitey. Wow! Radical stuff! Maybe it's because these people actually work their fucking arses off while the Government treats them with contempt that they are sick of try-hards like you. Maybe they should be running around with a microphone making cheap rip off programmes like "Stake Out". Will than make them more "right on"? Man?

 
At 14/10/05 11:41 am, Blogger peterquixote said...

pq action when you need it

knows what you means about insecurity of personality tumeke, well we send Judd a letter requiring resignatiuon as president ACT, long long long holiday for evers for Judd,
also we think the foreshore policy is eat all you like whiule you there,

 

Post a Comment

<< Home