Friday, February 27, 2009

Monday, February 23, 2009

Guilt upon exaggeration

Guilty upon accusation is a good brand to sell this issue around, however it is just ever so slightly hyperbolic. We have various characters going around saying how "guilty upon accusation" in Section 92A is unfair and not the kiwi way. Yet the Mactional Government recently passed legislation under urgency that allows employees in 'small businesses' to be fired within the first three months with virtually no recourse.
Being fired from a job for no reason, is that not "guilt upon accusation"?
Where is the anger in the NZ wankosphere about this law that comes into effect next week?
There is little outrage about "my rights" and "freedom" around this law since it will mainly affect people on lower wages - the working class (are we still allowed to say that?), not a significant demographic in the NZ blog clique. That's not to say opposing Section 92A is the wrong thing to do, the law is an ass. But it seems people are very choosy and myopic about "rights" and "freedoms" nowadays.

Our Precedent is Black

The 'controversy' around Section 92A exhibits all the traits of modern ridculousness, the act itself is absurd, as too are the opinions of the media industries that support it. But so too is are some of the protests against it. A strong and forceful message has been sent to the Government by thousands of people changing their profile picture on Facebook and bebo. And twitter as well!!! That will really stick it to them.

And while the Power/Joyce/Finlayson troika are reeling from that killer blow, the NZ wankosphere is going to 'black-out' their webpages for two whole hours!!! Of course you can still access rss feeds and read any new material after the 'protest' is finished. But hey, it's symbolic man, all the wankosphere joining together to deliver a meaningless act of self-expression that will invetiably recieve a meaningless and empty response.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Orewa Resurrection

Bring out your dead! Bring out your dead!

Monday, February 09, 2009

Clint Rickards and John Key BFF?

At last Wednesday's lunch where John Key announced Mactional's minor changes to business tax policies, among the 400 invited guests was none other than Clint Rickards, the rapist.
It's disgusting the way Rickards has slithered his way back into the system, using ethnicity as part of his defence for his despicable behaviour. But it's not surprising that the old cronies are protecting him, deeming him to be a fit and proper person to practice law and embedding him within the Waipareira Trust. There's probably an expectation that in a few years time we'll all have forgotten about what that "crazy bitch" said about innocent Clint and he can inch his way back up into a position of power. But some of us will never forget what this scumbag did, and his presence at any sort of governmental function other than inside a prison is totally unacceptable.

The idiocy of the "rolling maul"

Metaphors are funny things, in response to the economic crisis, we've had talk of Obama's Large Stimulatory Package and K-Rudd administering an "amphetamine shot" to the Australian economy.
Yet here in New Zealand we shy away from metaphors evoking the mainlining of hard drugs or large Presidential appendages. As a group of simple folk we prefer more earthy metaphors, be it weather, food, or of course Rugby. John Key's so-called "rolling maul" of "economic initiatives" appears to be the brainchild of a "marketing expert" who thinks that Rugby is synonymous to the national identity of NZ but does not actually follow the sport himself.

The rolling maul is a tactic that in modern times is used occasionally by skilled teams such as the All Blacks. However it is more commonly employed as a "go-to" tactic by distinctly average teams like England or East Coast. This tactic enables a team to achieve far more against superior opposition than they would have otherwise.

Even though NZ has a Rugby team that doesn't rely on the rolling maul to succeed, perhaps Key's metaphor makes sense in the spirit of the "little Kiwi battler", but in that case who are NZ's superior opponents? Our trading partners, Australia and China? Venezula? Iran? The invisible hands of the global economic crisis that are all around us? If so, shouldn't we be playing touch?

But whoever the opposition is, what happens when NZ finally collapses on the line to "score"? Do we get back up? And if so will we revert to the exciting back play NZ is renowned for or will we be forever condemned to playing the economic game in the style of Clive Woodward?

But the main reason John Key's metaphor is so bad is that there are currently experimental rules in international Rugby (ELVs) that include changes specfically designed to counteract the "rolling maul" tactic. The rules allow the defending team to collapse the maul without penalty, thus making the tactic far less useful, especially for a mediocre team like England.

So the "rolling maul" is not only ill suited to NZ's modern style of play, it is ineffective in the new global enviroment. Our "opposition" can collapse the "maul" stranding us far from where we want to be and we lose possession.

In the end, perhaps the "rolling maul" will turn out to be an apt description of his government's approach to the economic crisis though maybe not in the way Key intends.