
David Seymour And The Political Left
If there was a 'most prolific blogger while still being consistently thought-provoking' award it would be hard to beat Bomber (Martyn) Bradbury and his The Daily Blog (TDB).
His writing is turbo-charged and opinionated but underpinned by powerful compassion and a strong sense of both justice and outrage towards injustice.
For me he has been an acquired taste. It took a while and had its moments, but the acquiring proved to be a fascinating journey with the taste acquisition destination reached.
I have also appreciated that he republishes my health system (Otaihanga Second Opinion) and politics (Political Bytes) blogs in TDB.
He doesn't pull his punches. Occasionally he misses his target but more often he succeeds. He never leaves one wondering what he means. More importantly he invariably raises serious questions which deserve to be addressed.
A recent case in point was his 3 July post concerning the challenge of ACT leader and current Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour to the political left in Aotearoa New Zealand: Can the left beat David Seymour and ACT.
There are few questions more politically pertinent than this. As Bradbury observes, Seymour has, since 2014, taken ACT from less than 1% to, depending on which poll, a little under or over 10%.
However, I have two points of disagreement – TDB's comments on 'woke' and what it means by being leftwing.
'Woke', identity politics and the absence of nuance
TDB attributes in part David Seymour's and ACT's relative electoral success to the left allowing itself to be distracted by what it calls 'middle class woke Identity Politics'.
I discussed this disagreement over 'woke' in an earlier post (9 October 2023): Structure and superstructure.
I considered Bomber Bradbury's then published views on 'woke' too blunt and lacking nuance. Instead I advocated that identity and class politics are better understood in the context of the relationship between structure and superstructure.
My criticism was that his argument:
…counterposes economic discrimination and oppression to its other forms; it's either class or identity politics! This approach ignores nuance, complexity and layered relationships.
In fact, these politics have overlapping layers. The use of the terms 'structure' and 'superstructure' are helpful in this respect.
In this context the structure based on the mode and relations of production. Class is defined by its relationship to this production mode.
The superstructure, on the other hand, incorporates the various belief systems and ideologies that help rationalise what people do and think (and why), including the law, education systems and religion.
This superstructure also includes other forms of discrimination and oppression such as race, sex, sexual orientation and transgender. Sometimes it also includes religion.
They exist in a largely capitalist world. But they aren't products of capitalism. They existed in earlier forms of class societies for centuries.
It is legitimate to locate them in a superstructure but with an important qualification. To differing degrees, they interact with the underlying structure. Sometimes it is to the extent that it becomes difficult to differentiate.
It is these 'superstructural' forms of discrimination and oppression that get labelled as identity politics.
The point is not so much the label but whether they are counterposed to class discrimination and oppression or run alongside it, sometimes reinforcing and interactively.
A word that should never have been invented
A year later (13 April 2024) I discussed 'woke' in the context of a wider discourse on sectarianism: From French Revolution to 'woke'.
I concluded by observing that:
In my view the word 'woke' should never have been invented….Politics in New Zealand would benefit from a healthy debate on the relationship between class and identity politics. I regard them as interconnected and supplementary rather than opposites.
Bomber Bradbury's argument about 'woke' would be strengthened by dropping the term completely (leave it to the political right; it's their political plaything) and instead articulate a more nuanced narrative about identity and class politics.
He could take a leaf out of West Indian socialist intellectual and cricket commentator CLR James' 'book' who famously said 'what do they know of cricket if cricket is all that they know'.
This could then be turned into 'what do they know of identity politics if identity politics is all that they know'. This could be similarly adapted for class politics.
What is leftwing
My second disagreement is when TDB refers to the political left in New Zealand it means the Labour Party, Greens and Te Pāti Māori.
Unfortunately most of the commentary in the mainstream media around leftwing and rightwing is along the lines that one is what the other isn't; one ends where the other starts and vice versa. This becomes at best bland or meaningless and at worse absurd.
Even more unfortunately TDB is uncharacteristically consistent with this mainstream media paradigm.
I discussed this question well over two years ago in Political Bytes (30 April 2023): What being leftwing really means.
I said that:
One way of looking at differentiating between the political left and right is a continuum between collective responsibility and individual responsibility.
This leads into the role of the state and to questions over whether healthcare access and educational opportunities, for example, are a right or privilege to one degree or another.
…It isn't a bad way of looking at what is left-wing and what isn't. However, it is not enough. We can to better than this.
Being left-wing has to be seen in the context of the material system that governs our daily lives. Today in New Zealand, and for the overwhelming majority of the planet, it is capitalism.
Wealth accumulation the main driver of capitalism
After discussing capitalism's prime driver (limitless wealth accumulation) I observed that:
Being left-wing is about wanting to end, or even significantly curtail, the dynamic of wealth accumulation as a driver of societies. This might be through evolutionary or revolutionary means. But what it does require is transformational change.
There is a good argument that both the Greens and Te Pāti Māori are transformational (or at least significantly so) this can not be said of the Labour Party. Writing in the context of Labour then being in government, I commented that:
Transformational is what the current Labour Party in government is not. It is a political party not of the left but instead of social liberal technocrats with some collectivist impulses.
Social liberal values are good and the political left benefits from sharing them. In fact, many people on the political right also share these same values (or at least some of them).
In conclusion:
…social liberalism of itself does not transform a society which, more than anything else, has wealth accumulation as its dynamic.
…The political left needs to expressly differentiate itself from social liberalism in order to overtly focus on economic (as well as social) justice and protecting nature from the ravages of wealth accumulation.
If the term 'left-wing' is to mean anything other than not being right-wing or just having some collectivist impulses, then this needs to happen.
Bomber's aim nevertheless deadly accurate
In his own expressive literary way, however, TDB is right on the mark in describing the effectiveness and interconnections of the hard rightwing Taxpayers' Union, New Zealand Initiative and Atlas Network.
TDB is correct in identifying the high level of their lobbying power, particularly through social media describing them as a '…stable of astroturf organisations to generate lobbyist talking points camouflaged as the opinion of the people.'
Bomber Bradbury's most telling point, however, is his assessment of David Seymour describing the latter as '… a philosopher before he is a politician and he believes in a far right libertarian economic platform…'
Elsewhere he has approvingly quoted leading Labour MP Willie Watson who has described Seymour has the most dangerous MP in Parliament.
Again he is on the mark. The reason behind this assessment is that Seymour is a conviction politician; a hard right libertarian.
It does not mean that he isn't contradictory. For example, whereas a libertarian might be expected to support small business, Seymour and ACT have a strong orientation to big business, including as donors, with all its consequential anti-libertarian monopolistic traits.
But it contrasts with the prevailing opportunism traits of both Christopher Luxon and Winston Peters. Opportunism allows the ability to bend and change somewhat; conviction much less so.
In Bomber Bradbury's forthright manner he concludes:
The Left [sic] have underestimated Seymour for too long. They need to engage with him in a completely different way and understand they need to push back by offering better solutions and by defining him far more ruthlessly when they do attack him.
I agree although I would put it this way. The far right speak in slogans, the rightwing speak in sentences, the leftwing speak in paragraphs, and the far left speak in footnotes. This gives the political right a big advantage.
To counter this the political left (plus social liberal technocrats) need to express themselves in plain language sentences that are also translatable into good soundbites.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Otago Daily Times
an hour ago
- Otago Daily Times
Business case flawed: Brooking
The release of a "flawed" business case means more information is needed before Labour decides whether it would dump the planned Waikato Medical School, a Dunedin MP says. Last Monday, Health Minister Simeon Brown announced Cabinet had approved $82.85 million in government funding to build the country's third medical school at the University of Waikato — the institution was expected to contribute more than $150m to the project. Dunedin MP Rachel Brooking, of Labour, said she was "very sceptical" about figures used by the government to make its decision. The project's detailed business case was made public on Friday evening, part of a document dump which revealed the cost of producing GPs at the graduate-entry Waikato medical school would be $50 million a year cheaper than at the existing medical schools at Otago and Auckland universities. "The business case has really been written with an outcome in mind and not traversed all of the options, and that's just bad decision-making," Ms Brooking said. "It's bad way to make use of taxpayers' money, and it seems that in general, this all will cost more." She said the "flawed" business case would have consequences for the Otago Medical School: "those are difficult to predict exactly". However, Labour had "no plans at the moment" to dump the medical school, Ms Brooking said. "The issue is that we don't think the business case is credible. "So we'll keep asking questions about that and try and make any assessments on good information when we're in a position to do so." Taieri MP Ingrid Leary said "the so-called business case is really just a public relations document, given the outlandish assumptions and comparators". In a statement last Monday, Mr Brown said the project was an innovative model "that supports our focus on strengthening primary care, making it easier for people to see their doctor — helping Kiwis stay well and out of hospital". Waikato University would begin construction on new teaching facilities later this year. A full cost-benefit analysis was presented to Cabinet before any proposal was finalised, as part of the National-Act New Zealand coalition agreement, he said. Green MP Francisco Hernandez said the government's cost-benefit analysis used to "ram through" the Waikato Medical School made assumptions revealing the "lack of objectivity". Mr Hernandez said the document "falsely assumed" Otago and Auckland universities could not have negotiated a four-year rural graduate programme similar to Waikato University's proposal. "This assumption enables the government to claim that Waikato University will train medical students 'cheaper' because Waikato is assumed to have a four-year programme," he said. The government had also assumed Waikato University was more likely to produce GPs "even though Otago and Auckland could have also done a rural graduate programme". "Fundamentally, these flawed assumptions stem from the government's failure to run a transparent tender process from the start," Mr Hernandez said. "Rather than putting out an open tender to every university in New Zealand, they gave Waikato University a sweetheart deal." He called for the government to "be up front and honest about the actual costs" of the project and release the full agreement with Waikato University with all relevant advice. "The government's failure to rule out further handouts or to release the actual agreement raises questions on whether there were further sweetheart deals negotiated behind closed doors in the agreement that might end up with the taxpayer bailing out Waikato University."

NZ Herald
2 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: Warriors defensive woes, voting reforms, David Seymour and dropkicks, passport name-changing
It is just too easy for opponents to exploit the frailties we have here. Alan Walker, St Heliers. Voting reforms How are the changes to voting going to make it harder to cast a vote? The election date is announced months in advance, so people have no excuse to not enrol to vote. Also, by making it illegal to have entertainment or food offerings within 100m of a voting station is just common sense, votes must be cast freely and no inducement should be offered. It seems the only ones complaining are the ones who use this as an election-day strategy. Mark Young, Ōrewa. David Seymour and dropkicks David Seymour has again demonstrated his gift for insult, this time calling tardy voting registrants 'dropkicks'. Such boorish, sneering, self-righteous language, while not surprising coming from Seymour, really shows what a massive dropkick he is. Brian Dwyer, Welcome Bay. Passports It is so hard to understand what the Government is trying to do in changing the order of name on our New Zealand passports. The use of te reo is a source of pride in the unique embracing of our heritage through our original language. Other countries praise us for it. There are no obvious nay-sayers except certain voters who are dwindling in number as they 'get' the unique lustre of 'Aotearoa New Zealand'. In that order. Christine, Northcote Point. What's in a name? I am a New Zealand citizen living in South Dakota. I recently had my New Zealand passport renewed and noticed the Māori word for New Zealand was placed above the English word on the passport. I was somewhat mystified and offended by this change, as I view myself as a New Zealander, not an Aotearoan. I presume this renaming order is a manifestation of 'woke' ideology derived from the previous Government under Dame Jacinda Ardern. I find this form of 'virtue signalling' distasteful and not becoming of the Commonwealth country New Zealand is. To the three leaders of the current Government, congratulations are deserved on their sensible and appropriate name reversal on the front of the New Zealand passport. Quentin Durward, South Dakota, US. Cost of living We are currently in Perth and there are five different supermarket chains to shop at, plus a whole host of independent stores. One greengrocer in particular, Spud Shed, is 17 stores strong. Many of these are open 24 hours, offering an exciting shopping experience for the customer. It is a lot easier to shop around here to keep them honest. Some purchases included red capsicums for $1.75 each, two for $4 cabbages, $5 blueberries, and large 500gm strawberries for only $4.99. Two chips of cherry tomatoes for $3, and a block of Aussie butter for $6.79. Their in-season Sumo mandarins are magic, but it is not all beer and skittles in the produce world; we spotted our gold kiwifruit for $12.99/kg, and we miss our glorious New Zealand apples dearly. However, one thing is for certain, our New Zealand grocery retail needs some serious competition. Glenn Forsyth, Taupō.


NZ Herald
2 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Tauranga City Council cocktail party: Ombudsman recommends invite list be publicly released
Communications staff were told to tell NZME 'Marty said he won't be releasing the list of invitees, that they can go to the Ombudsman'. NZME referred the matter to the Ombudsman last July. Chief Ombudsman John Allen's June 17 decision recommended the council 'reconsider' NZME's request 'and make a new decision'. While it may have been a privately sponsored event, it was organised and hosted by the council, he said. The invite-only event was held on May 10, 2024, at the Cargo Shed in Tauranga. Photo / Alex Cairns Allen, who began his term as Chief Ombudsman in March, noted the council's assessment of the use of staff time 'as minimal and non-disruptive'. However, 'public money and resources, through the contribution of Council staff's work hours, were still used in organising the event'. Allen said the Privacy Commissioner considered the privacy interest of invitees and attendees to be 'low' and there did not appear to be 'any inherent or immediate risk' that public knowledge of this could create that would heighten the privacy interest. Allen considered the draft list of invitees, 'a fair number' of which held 'prominent public positions'. 'Given these factors, there appears to be a stronger public interest in releasing this information than the low privacy interest in withholding.' Allen noted the council was governed by four commissioners at the time. He acknowledged the council's comments that the celebration was 'partially to farewell the outgoing commissioners'. 'However, it remains that for the past three years, the people of Tauranga were effectively denied their elected representation in favour of appointed governance. 'The Ombudsman is likely to consider that this heightens the public interest in transparency, and also in accountability by way of council time spent on a non-essential celebration.' Section 7(2)(a) of the Act provides official information may be withheld if it was necessary to 'protect the privacy of natural persons'. He said the council 'improperly applied' this section to withhold the names of invitees, attendees, and sponsors from NZME. In an email on July 9, the council's democracy services team leader, Kath Norris, said the council had 'reconsidered' its decision and sent a list of 240 invitees and 10 sponsors. Norris said there was no attendance list or registration at the event, 'and therefore no definitive record of who attended, or whether other people came in place of someone on the list'. The guest list showed 40 council staff and their partners were invited. Other invitees included MPs, business leaders, construction and property development leaders, Western Bay of Plenty District Council and Bay of Plenty Regional Council staff, and iwi leaders. The event's 10 sponsors were economic development agency Priority One, Tauranga Business Chamber and property development companies or groups Twenty Two, Willis Bond, LT McGuinness, Quayside, Watts & Hughes, Urban Task Force, Carrus, and Panorama Ltd. Carrus founder Sir Paul Adams revealed last year that the company was a sponsor and said the party was a chance to celebrate the 'long-overdue' revitalisation of the CBD and to thank the commissioners for kick-starting it. New council offices and a $306m civic precinct redevelopment were among projects the commission approved during its four-and-a-half years governing the city council. A newly elected council began its term in August. Megan Wilson is a health and general news reporter for the Bay of Plenty Times and Rotorua Daily Post. She has been a journalist since 2021.