by frog
There was some good coverage of Green Party Mangere Candidate Reverend Mua Strickson-Pua last week on Tagata Pasifika, including a short discussion on the Section 59 Amendment Bill. The bill has been controversial in South Auckland among pacific peoples, with organisations on both sides arguing its merits vociferously.
Mua Strickson-Pua, who is a Presbyterian minister, poet and hip hop artist, stated:
From my perspective it had to be done. Children were dying. Children were being assaulted. And we were not picking up on that. We were losing young lives.
Meanwhile, down in Te Pahu, the last Green Party candidate has been announced today, for the seat of Taranaki King Country. Rob Hamill, who won the Trans-Atlantic rowing race in a world record in 1997, and earlier this year starred on a ‘proud to be Green’ billboard with Jeanette, won’t even be a political novice. Earlier this year he was the highest polling candidate in the WEL Energy Trust elections, helping his Power Discounts Team to sweep ACT President Garry Mallett’s Power Rebates group from office.
Published in Campaign by frog on Tue, October 14th, 2008
Tags: frogblog, green party, Jeanette Fitzsimons, new zealand, Rev Mua Strickson Pua, Rob Hamill
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
I guess it’d be seen as a bit of a coup to get Rob Hamill to stand for the Greens. The party now has two celebrities standing for it (as, of course, Whale Rider star Rawiri Paratene is the Green candidate in Maungakiekie). And the party has had the actors Miranda Harcourt and Robyn Malcolm publicly endorsing the party too. It seems that the Greens are making very good use of celebrity politics. I’ve commented on this in a blog post at: http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2008/10/green-party-cel.html
I argue that this trend is part of the ‘Americanisation of New Zealand politics’. Such a shift, according to some political scientists, is ‘a despicable trend that epitomizes the banal and the mindless in public life, empowering image over substance and producing pseudo-charismatic leadership’. When the Greens (and other parties) attempt to trade on the names and star power of celebrities, or even when they have celebrities run for office, the party is essentially advertising its weakness. It’s run out of ideas and is instead looking for more emotional and superficial ways to sell itself. Of course there’s also a strong dose of political opportunism involved. Political leaders want to take short cuts to gaining popularity, and selling their message, so they think, ‘When a celebrity talks, people listen’. With the Greens struggling in opinion polls in 2008, and struggling over their loss of ideological identity, it’s likely that they’ve seen celebrity endorsements as a quick fix.
Bryce
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Surely that’s not to say Bryce that these “celebrities” might not actually legitmately BE Green supporters? Surely they are allowed to campaign too?
Unlike the US I’d say that many more “celebrities” here actually have to work for their money too. Where would you draw the line between “well-known” (since every party likes their candidates to have a profile) and being a “celebrity” (with all the famous for being famous implied) ?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
We don’t put them at the top of the list; we are not asking people to vote them into parliament. These well-known, hard-working ‘celebrities’ are prepared to declare their philosophy and put their name to the cause – it’s their contribution as it is that of the other 60+ candidates. They are simply part of the diverse range of talented people who are Green.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Jingyang and Janine – of course I’m not suggesting that celebrities shouldn’t be allowed to campaign. Far from it. And parties should be totally free to use celebrity endorsements on their billboards. I’m just commenting on the trend and what it represents. And when parties are vacuous and empty it should be commented on. Take the pre-election ‘Proud to be Green’ billboards, for example. They featured Hamill and actress Miranda Harcourt. These said nothing, and looked like they could be selling mobile phones or a TV programme.
As I say in my blog post, this trend shows that there’s ‘an institutionalised blurring of the boundaries between politics and sports, showbiz and the arts’. Voters can be the judge of whether this is a good thing or not. It’s just the inevitable next step in the commercialisation of politics. And it’s perhaps surprising that the Greens are at the forefront of this.
But at least the Greens haven’t gone the whole hog – as happened in Italy – where they elected a famous porn star to Parliament!
Bryce
http://www.liberation.org.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bryce – Surprised that the Greens are at the forefront of a successful advertising campaign with their billboards and support from respected, successful New Zealanders? Don’t be. You’ll be puzzling at the calibre of the new Green candidates as well – extraordinarily talented people, standing up and speaking out for the environment. These are exciting times indeed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think Bryce is on to something, but I would perhaps add that having the endorsements of well know NZers does a lot IMHO to weaken the ‘fringe’ perception of the Greens as a bunch of crazy morris dancing basket-weavers etc. While they probably have lost a fair bit of that since being in Parliament, there are still plenty who won’t look at their policies on the grounds that the Greens are probably a bunch of dreadlocked loons who want us all to eat organic lentils instead of steak.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>who want us all to eat organic lentils
Individually labeled, stating origin…..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yes StephenR, I think you’re right – the intention of the endorsements is to make the Greens appear more mainstream.
It also speaks to the the ideological/political uncertainty that the Greens are in. The party is in the process of shifting away from those margins (or the perception that it is leftwing), it’s lost its monopoly on climate change issues etc, and there’s no longer any defining identity issue for the Greens. When parties face such crises of identity they thrash around looking for something to save them. For this reason I quote in my blog post, an expert on celebrity party politics, who says: ‘When a party is lying on its back, it starts looking around for potential saviours to pull it out of oblivion. In these circumstances, criteria such as ideological purity, appropriate gravitas and grass roots experience quickly lose relevance’. Hence there’s a strong dose of political opportunism involved. Political leaders want to take short cuts to gaining popularity, and selling their message, so they think, ‘When a celebrity talks, people listen’. With the Greens struggling in opinion polls in 2008, and struggling over their loss of ideological cohesion, it’s likely that they’ve seen celebrity endorsements as a quick fix.
So, no, we shouldn’t be surprised that the Greens are the party that is way out in front of this ‘Americanisation of politics’. But it represents something kinda empty and sad. It’s a pity that the Greens’ don’t have confidence in their own political programme and ideology.
Bryce
http://www.liberation.org.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bryce, do you have to work hard on inventing these elaborate fictions, or do they just come to you in dreams?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
‘How dare he’, eh?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bryce,
What is wrong with a porn star being elected? Greens are inclusive of all people, so porn stars are acceptable. A “live” show would certainly add a few true blue males to the Green vote!
/tongue back in cheek.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bryce – repeating your assertion over and over is a brilliant ploy! Don’t read or take notice of anything said by green posters here, there is no need, when you can bulldoze your idea through. It’s a technique that works equally well for others that pester and big note here, so why shouldn’t it work for you. I’m fascinated too, by your claim that the Greens have adopted the ‘American way’, given their obvious support for everything that our buddies in the good old US of A do. Great thinking!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hi Greenfly – I apologise if I haven’t dealt with any points raised by other participants in this thread. I’m genuinely happy for you to point out which ones need to be addressed. I honestly didn’t intentionally avoid answering any issues. So please highlight which ones you want responses to.
But I can’t apologise for repeating my argument, because I don’t think I have. I’ve actually elaborated further on a number of points. Obviously in any debate or discussion a participate is going to reiterate points or expand on things. I’m tempting to think that you’re looking to avoid the discussion by just attacking the messenger (ie me!) rather than the message. Of course Vallis is up to the same old tricks, which is a bit sad. Can’t Greens debate the actual issues without descending into such personal attacks?
Also, I clearly communicated that the Greens political marketing campaign has adopted a *strategy* that is part of the “Americanisation of politics” – I’m not sure how you could read this as saying you support “everything that our buddies in the good old US of A do”. Again you seem to be intentionally confusing the issues, as I’m sure you couldn’t be that unintelligent.
Bryce
http://www.liberation.org.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think your right Bryce. The child pawn bill boards come to mind.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bryce
The point that politics here is “Americanized” has to do with what the major parties and the money have done to the politics here. Green voters have almost invariably been people who look forward generations at a time and who THINK about what they are doing.
Expecting to get over single digit percentages of the vote by asking Joe six-pack to to cogitate on something more important than Rugby is a losing game everywhere. Recognizing that, the ads getting slicker and the “vacuous” nature of the adverts getting more obvious is simply gonna happen and while you take it to the Green party at least we have a shot…
Our recognition of the reality of campaigning in this environment appears to be giving us a little traction. We haven’t changed our principles, we haven’t altered our policies (except to provide a few more of them). I joined a “Political Party” not a “movement”. There’s a difference.
The problem is that you are attributing this change to some failing at the core of the party. “the party is essentially advertising its weakness. It’s run out of ideas”
That’s simply a wrong conclusion from the observable facts.
Idealism is no substitute for having members of parliament representing your ideals as effectively as possible.
This isn’t a “movement”. It is a Political Party., A unique one in many ways. It has not given itself over to banality as you suggest. Its advertising may be less intellectual than you like but it does the job.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Of course Vallis is up to the same old tricks, which is a bit sad. Can’t Greens debate the actual issues without descending into such personal attacks?”
Fair enough Bryce, we could all do with a bit less of the personal. I was gobsmacked at your detailed analysis which suggests some deep study or inside knowledge of the Green Party. And yet, so far as I know, you know very little, possibly nothing, about the issues and dynamics that concern us internally, let alone our motivations and intentions, making your conclusions mere conjecture. And yet you seem extraordinarily comfortable holding forth as though your logic is so compelling as to be obvious. I find your surety on these matters to be either disingenuous or delusional, not to be too personal about it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bryce – you sound like such a reasonable chap. Hope you don’t mind if I include a selection from your comments, just to give a ‘feel’ for how you are portraying your hosts on this blog.
“they thrash around”
“When a party is lying on its back”
“party is essentially advertising its weakness”
“Greens struggling in opinion polls”
(perversely, I was under the impression that the Greens were doing well in the polls!) perhaps I am, as you say, unintelligent.
and then quiz you on the integrity of this comment
“And parties should be totally free to use celebrity endorsements on their billboards” – ‘totally free’ … you must have a different interpretation of ‘totally’ than I do.
I did find the responses from Valis and bjchip illuminating though, despite my limitations.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hi BJ
You draw the differences between “a movement” and “a political party”. This is a very interesting observation. And in a sense I think you’re right. I would see it slightly differently: you can have on the one hand, ideological policy-oriented political parties, and on the other, office-seeking pragmatic parties. So the difference isn’t between parties and non-parties, but between different forms of political parties. The office-seeking type is the one that puts more emphasis on getting into office and using whatever business-model marketing techniques it can to sell itself. The policy-seeking party concentrates on trying to change opinions in society even if this is a slow process and means being rather unpopular at times.
The Green Party has clearly shifted into this second type of party whereby the main interest is getting as many people into Parliament and trying to be part of a government. And all policies have to be subordinated to this goal. And this is being reflected in the current Greens campaign. And I guess, as you say, idealism in the Green Party is dead. And once you take the disparaging stance that the public are dumb, then you are already on that slippery slop of political cynicism which allows you to justify any dumbed-down politics and opportunistic short-cuts to power.
Valis – I’m not pretending to know exactly what’s going on inside the Green Party (although I do have a number of sources), and so I never said anything like that. I’m just an observer of politics and am “calling it as I see it”. Obviously I could be wrong about it all, or elements of it, but just because I’m not inside a political party doesn’t rule me out of trying to understand the Greens. Surely you (and others in the Greens) do that about every other party?
Bryce
http://www.liberation.org.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hi Greenfly
I think you might be being a bit precious! While I’m all into online civility (and like others I occasionally let myself down!) I don’t believe that there is anything wrong with critiquing a political party on their own blog. The great thing about Frogblog (and many other blogs) is the free-ranging debate and discussion. It’s not like we’re in some sort of high-society aristocratic polite and stuffy function where you can’t say what you truly think in case the host is offended!
So feel free to come over and comment strongly and robustly about my blog posts at: http://www.liberation.org.nz
Cheers
Bryce
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Love your work by the way Bryce.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bryce
We KNOW you see things differently, you aren’t a Green
Hmm… Do you vote Green? Could I persuade you to…
Never mind
The problem is that the Green party is, as you observe, not all one thing, nor all one way. We have our Quixotic moments still, and there are significant limits to the “whatever” in the “whatever business-model marketing techniques it can to sell itself” area.
Nor have policies been subordinated to the goal. Much to my personal annoyance the idealists still write policies. I didn’t say Idealism is dead, just that it gets argued rather than simply accepted. It has very few real limits placed on it. The only real change has been the manner in which the appeal to the voters is made.
As far as reckoning the public “dumb”, I didn’t say that either… I said that they didn’t think, not that they couldn’t. The public is by and large, not INTERESTED in engaging in detailed analysis of policy. If you couch your appeal solely on such an interest your party will fail to gain a foothold of any sort in Parliament. Which describes a lot of the policy/ideological parties. I liked calling them “movements” because it clearly distinguishes them from the actual serious efforts made by the actual parties.
The line about “political cynicism” provides a lot of value judgment words about things like “political short-cuts” to power. As though there was a “proper” way to do this? What might that be? Educating everyone in Aotearoa on the importance of their vote and the need to carefully think through every policy on offer?
There’s a lot of value in trying to do the education thing but to hold that it is the ONLY right way to get voters to support us would be …. unwise.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
still laughing at the idea of Bryce’s “sources” – what’s he going to do next, reveal the hidden green agenda – that secretly we really do care about a fair go for all kiwis and protecting this beautiful country? I can’t wait to buy the book.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Fair enough Bryce – again, you seem so reasonable. Pity you have to sprinkle your commentary with snipes at your hosts. Nothing wrong with ‘critiquing a political party on their own blog’ at all and I’m sure the authors and moderators of Frogblog aren’t concerned but regular green readers like myself find it an unnecessary and repetitive. I guess it comes down to differing levels of online civility. I visited your site and read your piece on celebrity endorsements. I hope you do get some readers willing to comment on your work. You’ve put a lot into it.
I’m sue you won’t mind my mentioning how much I enjoyed your wee slip up in describing, “slippery slop of political cynicism” it seems to suit
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’m sure I’m not sue!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Valis – I’m not pretending to know exactly what’s going on inside the Green Party (although I do have a number of sources), and so I never said anything like that. I’m just an observer of politics and am “calling it as I see it”. Obviously I could be wrong about it all, or elements of it, but just because I’m not inside a political party doesn’t rule me out of trying to understand the Greens. Surely you (and others in the Greens) do that about every other party?”
I would hope I’ve largely learned *not* to do that about other parties. Of course we muse and guess and even have to sometimes make political decisions based on what we think is going on. But I try not to imply certainty in public about what is happening even behind the scenes. In one small recent example, I’ve commented on this blog that Nick Smith often makes claims that are trivially shown to be wrong, like that the govt is forcing people to buy low flow showerheads, or that the ETS legislation passed contains a carbon tonnage threshold that would exclude small businesses when there is NO version that ever had that in it. I have simply said it would seem he either does not know what he’s saying or may even be lying, without feeling the need to go farther. Now I could weave a story about how National is so concerned about its lack of credibility on environmental issues that it self-consciously has fallen into attacking every govt policy as a means of hiding its own inadequacy. I could quote an expert who agrees that a party’s psychology often deteriorates in such circumstances to the point that in desperation it is compelled to ever more extreme statements. And who’s to say that this is not a possibility? But there’s is a point beyond which it becomes absurd, some would dare say “wanking”.
Bryce, you admit mortal fallibility and no intention to speak with absolute authority, and I accept your word. But you did not achieve this in your post.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
While we may not know what goes on inside the party we can still wonder:
These peace-loving Greens just can’t seem to keep away from those (allegedly) gun-toting, molotov cocktail possessing “Urewera 17″ people.
Rev Mua Strickson-Pua has been out supporting the arrestees as they appear for depositions hearings on firearms charges in the Auckland court this week.
http://tinyurl.com/4fgwlt
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Is that not the truth Frog and isn’t it relevant to the thread about what goes on inside the party and why people might infer what they do?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What sort of relationship does he have with the alleged? Forgiveness? Support?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)