Is NZ politics having a MAGA moment?
Welcome to the era of 'wrecking ball' politics
Andrea Vance is never one to mince words, and she was on form again this weekend in the Sunday Star Times (paywalled). NZ's political pendulum is now a 'wrecking ball', she wrote, smashing through 'the written and unwritten codes that once held together democracy'. Where once governments at least paid lip-service to the MMP ideals of consensus building and thoughtful, long-term change, 'now governing is a zero-sum game. Legislation is drafted to provoke, not to last.'
It's an argument that Massey political scientist Richard Shaw echoed – albeit with a little less fire than Vance – in the Conversation last month (republished in The Spinoff). He warned the coalition's approach was veering towards 'government by decree', its unprecedented use of parliamentary urgency allowing it to '[wield] its majority to avoid parliamentary and public scrutiny of contentious policies'. With so many controversial new laws on the books, the next Labour government is certain to undo many of them. And so on, and so on. The sheer pace of repeals, reversals and rushed lawmaking has created what Vance calls a 'cycle of legislative whiplash' – a wasteful churn that chips away at the public's trust in stable governance.
Small parties, big influence
MMP was supposed to encourage moderation; now it risks amplifying the extremes, writes Shaw, who notes that the most unpopular recent legislation – like the Treaty principles bill and tax breaks for tobacco – was pushed into parliament by the coalition's junior partners. 'Rightly or wrongly, this has created a perception of weakness on the part of the National Party and the prime minister,' Shaw adds.
In the NZ Herald (Premium paywalled), right-leaning columnist Bruce Cotterill argues that the minor parties on the opposite side are the real threat. Instead of focusing on 'mainstream' issues of the day, 'we are constantly distracted by the needs of, or the deeds of, those who are representing the minorities', he writes, pointing to Te Pāti Māori's 'increasingly extremist and separatist' agenda and the Greens' spate of MP-related scandals. 'These two parties alone hold 20 seats in the nation's Parliament. Can we really believe that over 16% of voters support their current antics?'
Parties lean into online conflict
Outrage and social media clicks are starting to shape the tone of politics as much online as in the parliamentary debating chamber. As Glenn McConnell reports in Stuff, NZ First and Act have turbocharged their presence on YouTube, leaning into American-style populism. Titles scream about David Seymour and Winston Peters 'DESTROYING', 'DEMOLISHING' and 'ROASTING' their opponents – including their enemies in the media.
This type of 'us versus the elite' politics has been around for a while, says political scientist Luke Oldfield, but now it's been repackaged for the 'New Zealand Joe Rogan vote'. The right-leaning parties' social media teams are drawing inspiration from mega popular US Youtuber Ben Shapiro and his ilk, Oldfield says, creating videos designed to bait the algorithm and draw in disenchanted young men who'd otherwise tune out.
'A revolving-door approach to representation'
Another warning about declining parliamentary standards comes from former United Future leader Peter Dunne in Newsroom. The sudden resignation of NZ First's Tanya Unkovich is the latest reminder that list MPs can vanish mid-term with zero electoral consequence, replaced overnight by the next name on the party list, he says. 'Already, in the current 54th Parliament, 7 list MPs – 5 of them from the Labour Party – have resigned … two MPs have died, and one has been expelled.'
This 'almost revolving-door approach to representation', Dunne warns, only deepens cynicism about parliament's dignity and purpose. After all, 'It is hard to respect an institution when some of its members by their own disregard for it show so little respect of their own.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Propaganda Siren: Silencing The Voice Of America
In March this year, the Trump administration effectively shuttered the Voice of America, a broadcasting vehicle for the selective promotion of US policy and culture for over eight decades. Nearly all of its 1,300 staff of producers, journalists and assistants, including those working at the US Agency for Global Media, were placed on administrative leave. Kari Lake, President Donald Trump's appointment to lead the Voice, was unflattering about that 'giant rot and burden to the American taxpayer.' Last month, Lake confirmed that layoff notices had been sent to 639 employees. The motivations for attacking VOA were hardly budgetary. The White House cited a number of sources to back the claim that the organisation had become an outlet of 'radical propaganda.' VOA veteran Dan Robinson features, calling it 'a hubris-filled rogue operation often reflecting leftist bias aligned with partisan national media.' The Daily Caller moaningly remarks that VOA reporters had 'repeatedly posted anti-Trump comments on their professional Twitter accounts, despite a social media policy requiring employee impartiality on social media platforms.' The Voice, not aligned with MAGA, had to be silenced. The measure by Trump drew its inevitable disapproval. VOA director, Michael Abramowitz, stuck to the customary line that his organisation 'promotes freedom and democracy around the world by telling America's story and by providing objective and balanced news and information, especially for those living under tyranny.' Reporters Without Borders condemned the order 'as a departure from the US's historic role as a defender of free information and calls on the US government to restore VOA and urges Congress and the international community to take action against his unprecedented move.' As with much criticism of Trump's seemingly impulsive actions, these sentimental views proved misguided and disingenuous. Trump is on uncontentious ground to see the Voice as one dedicated to propaganda. However, he misunderstands most nuttily that the propaganda in question overwhelmingly favours US policies and programs. His quibble is that they are not favourable enough. Prohibited from broadcasting in the United States, VOA's propaganda role was always a full-fledged one, promoting the US as a spanking, virtuous brand of democratic good living in the face of garden variety tyrants, usually of the political left. Blemishes were left unmentioned, the role of the US imperium in intervening in the affairs of other countries considered cautiously. Loath to adequately fund domestic public service providers like National Public Radio (NPR), the US Congress was content to fork out for what was effectively an information arm of government sloganeering for Freedom's Land. The VOA Charter, drafted in 1960 and signed into law as Public Law 94-350 by President Gerald Ford on July 12, 1976, expressed the view that 'The long-range interests of the United States are served by communicating directly with the peoples of the world by radio. To be effective, the Voice of America must win the attention and respect of listeners.' It stipulated various aspirational and at times unattainable aims: be reliable on the news, have authoritative standing, pursue accuracy, objectivity and be comprehensive. America was to be represented in whole and not as any single segment of society, with the VOA representing 'a balanced and comprehensive projection of significant American thought and institutions.' US policies would be presented 'clearly and effectively' as would 'responsible discussions and opinion on these policies.' The aims of the charter were always subordinate to the original purpose of the radio outlet. The Voice was born in the propaganda maelstrom of World War II, keen to win over audiences in Nazi Germany and its occupied territories. Authorised to continue operating by the Smith-Mundt Act of 1946, it continued its work during the Cold War, its primary task that of fending off any appeal communism might have. Till October 1948, program content was governed under contract with the NBC and CBS radio networks. This troubled some members of Congress, notably regarding broadcasts to Latin America. The US State Department then assumed control, authority of which passed on to the newly created United States Information Agency (USIA). In such arrangements, the objective of fair dissemination of information was always subject to the dictates of US foreign policy. What mattered most, according to R. Peter Straus, who assumed the directorship of VOA in 1977, was to gather 'a highly professional group of people and trying to excite them about making the freest democracy in the world understandable to the rest of the world – not necessarily loved by, nor even necessarily liked by but understood by the rest of the world.' The State Department left an enduring legacy in that regard, with the amalgamation of its Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs with the USIA in 1978 during the Carter administration. Furthermore, prominent positions at the Voice tended to be filled by career members of the diplomatic corps. Given that role, it was rather rich to have the likes of Republican Congresswoman Young Kim of California question Trump's executive order, worried that closing the Voice would effectively silence a body dedicated to the selfless distribution of accurate information. Accuracy in that sense, alloyed by US interests, would always walk to the dictates of power. Kim errs in assuming that reporting via such outlets, emanating from a 'free' society, must therefore be more truthful than authoritarian rivals. 'For a long time now, our reporting has not been blocked by adversaries like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea,' she claimed in March. 'Now, we are ourselves shutting off the ability to get the information into those oppressed regimes to the people that are dying for the real truth and information.' As such truth and information is curated by an adjunct of the State Department, such people would be advised to be a tad sceptical. The falling out of favour with Trump, not just of the Voice, but such anti-communist creations of the Cold War like Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty and Radio Free Asia, is a loss for the propagandists. Arguments that stress the value of their continued existence as organs of veracity in news and accuracy, correctives to the disinformation and misinformation of adversaries, are deludedly slanted. All forms of disinformation and misinformation should be battled and neither the Voice's critics, nor its fans, seem to understand what they are. VOA and its sister stations could never be relied upon to subject US foreign and domestic policy to rigorous critique. Empires are not in the business of truth but power and effect. Radio stations created in their name must always be viewed with that in mind.
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Sanctioning Key Members Of Foreign Terrorist Organization Tren De Aragua
Tammy Bruce, Department Spokesperson July 17, 2025 The United States is sanctioning the head and key members of Tren de Aragua (TdA), a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) that originated in Venezuela and has launched a campaign of terror throughout our hemisphere. Hector Rusthenford Guerrero Flores (a.k.a 'Niño Guerrero') has a history of being involved in criminal activities for over two decades and currently is the detestable leader of TdA. Guerrero expanded TdA from a prison gang involved in extortion and bribery to an organization engaged in terrorism with growing influence throughout the Western Hemisphere. The Department of State, through the Transnational Organized Crime Rewards Program managed by the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), is offering a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of Guerrero. Today's sanction actions also target five additional key TdA leaders and affiliates, including one of TdA's co-founders and a close Guerrero lieutenant, Yohan Jose Romero (a.k.a. 'Johan Petrica'). INL is also offering a reward of up to $4 million for information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of Romero. These other TdA leaders are involved in atrocious crimes such as illicit drug trade, migrant smuggling, human trafficking, extortion, sexual exploitation of women and children, and money laundering, among other activities. This action follows the recent designation of TdA as an FTO and Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT). The United States is committed to keeping the American people safe by using all available means to eliminate TdA's threats of violent crime throughout our hemisphere.
Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
Trump suing Murdoch's WSJ over Epstein claim
US President Donald Trump is suing the Wall Street Journal and its owners including Rupert Murdoch over the newspaper's report that Trump in 2003 sent Jeffrey Epstein a birthday greeting that included a sexually suggestive drawing and a reference to secrets they shared. Trump filed the lawsuit in federal court in the Southern District of Florida on Friday against Dow Jones, News Corp, Rupert Murdoch and two Wall Street Journal reporters, accusing the defendants of defamation and saying they acted with malicious intent that caused him overwhelming financial and reputational harm. He is seeking at least $US10 billion ($NZ16.7 billion) in damages. Trump, 79, has vehemently denied the Journal report, which Reuters has not verified, and warned Murdoch, the founder of News Corp, that he planned to sue. Dow Jones, the parent of the newspaper, is a division of News Corp. "I look forward to getting Rupert Murdoch to testify in my lawsuit against him and his 'pile of garbage' newspaper, the WSJ. That will be an interesting experience!!!" Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Friday morning. Representatives of Dow Jones, News Corp and Murdoch could not be reached for comment. Disgraced financier and sex offender Epstein died by suicide in a New York jail cell in 2019. He was 66. The case has generated conspiracy theories that became popular among Trump's base of supporters who believed the government was covering up Epstein's ties to the rich and powerful. Some of Trump's most loyal followers became furious after his administration reversed course on its promise to release files related to the Epstein investigation. A Justice Department memo released on July 7 concluded that Epstein killed himself and said there was "no incriminating client list" or evidence that Epstein blackmailed prominent people. Attorney General Pam Bondi had pledged months earlier to reveal major revelations about Epstein, including "a lot of names" and "a lot of flight logs." With pressure to release the Epstein files building, Trump on Thursday said he directed Bondi to ask a court to release grand jury testimony about Epstein. The United States government on Friday filed a motion in Manhattan federal court to unseal grand jury transcripts in the cases of Epstein and his former associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who in 2021 was convicted of five federal charges related to her role in Epstein's sexual abuse of underage girls. The 63-year-old former socialite is serving a 20-year sentence. "Public officials, lawmakers, pundits, and ordinary citizens remain deeply interested and concerned about the Epstein matter," Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in the filing. "After all, Jeffrey Epstein is the most infamous paedophile in American history." Blanche called the transcripts "critical pieces of an important moment in our nation's history," and said "the time for the public to guess what they contain should end." He said prosecutors would work to redact all victim-identifying information before making anything public. BAWDY LETTER The Journal said the letter bearing Trump's name was part of a leather-bound birthday book for Epstein that included messages from other high-profile people. The newspaper said the letter contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appeared to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker. It said the letter concludes "Happy Birthday - and may every day be another wonderful secret," and featured the signature "Donald." Allegations that Epstein had been sexually abusing girls became public in 2006 - after the birthday book was allegedly produced - and he was arrested that year before accepting a plea deal. Epstein died just over a month after he was arrested for a second time and charged with sex-trafficking conspiracy. Trump, who was photographed with Epstein multiple times in social situations in the 1990s and early 2000s, told reporters in 2019 that he ended his relationship with Epstein before his legal troubles became apparent. In 2002 Trump, a Florida neighbour of Epstein's, was quoted in New York magazine as saying, "I've known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office in 2019, Trump said he and Epstein had a "falling out" before the financier was first arrested. Trump said he "knew him like everybody in Palm Beach knew him" but that, "I had a falling out with him. I haven't spoken to him in 15 years. I was not a fan of his, that I can tell you." WHAT TRANSCRIPTS COULD SHOW The release of the grand jury documents may fall short of what many of Trump's supporters have sought, including case files held by the administration. Grand juries review evidence from prosecutors to determine whether people should be indicted for crimes. This includes hearsay, improperly obtained information and other evidence that prosecutors would not be allowed to present at trial. Transcripts of grand jury proceedings are generally kept secret under federal criminal procedure rules, with limited exceptions. A judge may allow disclosure of grand jury matters in connection with judicial proceedings, or at the request of defendants who believe it could lead to the dismissal of their indictments. It is likely that some material released from grand jury proceedings would be redacted, or blacked out, because of privacy or security concerns.
