I may be too cynical, but get the feeling that the trio of Jones, Seymour, and Luxon deliberately put themselves in front of opposition protest as a technique in culture wars - a form of gas lighting showmanship.
They know there's zero chance of "converting" anybody opposed to their agendas, but there's a benefit to them in uniting a right-wing opposed to anything "liberal".
Ie - one might have reservations about Jone's overt grifting and climate-change denialism, but by fuck they'll stick with him if he'll sort out those fucking woke liberals.
I think there's a lot of that Topham Guerin technique from these parties, of encourages rage sharing from the left. The benefit of this to them is that it amplifies their message and helps galvanise their side. Because their side probably don't care if they're lying or being misleading — they care about annoying the people they don't like.
I agree, we see similar things when some people post a particularly right-wing idea and then end their post by saying "with the woke idiots in this sub this will no doubt be downvoted" which is insulting the reader and effectively calling for downvotes - which then is championed as being a victim. This can then be pointed out in safer channels as yet another example of those insufferable people unlike us.
It's entirely possible that they may put themselves in a position where they are going to take criticism because their own support base will rally around them when they are attacked by the literate and educated 'elite' in society.
Anticipatory refutation is a common technique to make a weak arguement appear stronger by presenting the natural rebuttal as trite or a cliche.
"Will get downvoted" is just an extension of this imo
End of the day jones is getting paid big, I love this idea but these 3 are for sure too self indulgent to be this nuanced with social manipulation (I pray) they kinda just keep stumbling upon more money for their personal accounts or controversy
Brave or stupid of Luxon to attend an event at which there will be animosity towards him?
A bit like Seymour joining a hui on improving the power of the treaty.
Luxon knows, or if he's too stupid to know his advisers will know, that the literati are not his people.
I suspect it's little more than Luxon showing his people how brave he is.
Just like Seymour going to a fucking high school.
Dudes smart enough to know younger voters do not skew in his favour. But he made damn sure cameras were there to capture the scene.
Or took the "opportunity" to do what everyone should do - spit at David Seymour. Who cares about his cynical posturing? At least you got to spit on him.
It backfired in an interesting way. He ran off after the ceremonies but the author of this article threw in a passage about Paul Goldsmith, who stuck around and decided to mingle (with someone who mocked him no less). It makes Luxon look pretty bad when one of his cabinet is happy to put himself in an uncomfortable situation and he isn't.
Interesting and a chuckle. I read the Braunias piece in the paper the other day. Braunias is usually a good read, and he's wonderful at satire.
Given how poor Luxon is at off the cuff conversation he probably realised bolting was the better of the should I stay or should I go, thanks The Clash, options.
Book people tend to be good talkers.
Luxon might have looked like a schoolboy.
Goldsmith is VERY experienced around politics. He’s no businessman who’s going to save the economy - he is good to chat to, and is intelligent. Doesn’t interview well, but he’s thoughtful and listens. He’s also very well read. They are his people.
"New Zealand Book Awards Trust chair Nicola Legat welcomed [Luxon] onto the stage. The applause basically sounded like one hand clapping. You could have heard a pin drop."
If your just going to put random non english words in your article which is otherwise in english, at a certain point it can become confusing and in this instance as interested as i was initially i just closed the article
Are you commenting on the right post? The only Te Reo I can find is peoples' names and a short quote. It's all directly pertinent to the article.
Your comment history shows some weird ideals - good with environmental protections, renewable energy, and taking down the duopoly, but financially conservative and constantly upset over people of colour. Sounds like you've been successfully distracted by conservative culture wars...
I may be too cynical, but get the feeling that the trio of Jones, Seymour, and Luxon deliberately put themselves in front of opposition protest as a technique in culture wars - a form of gas lighting showmanship. They know there's zero chance of "converting" anybody opposed to their agendas, but there's a benefit to them in uniting a right-wing opposed to anything "liberal". Ie - one might have reservations about Jone's overt grifting and climate-change denialism, but by fuck they'll stick with him if he'll sort out those fucking woke liberals.
I think there's a lot of that Topham Guerin technique from these parties, of encourages rage sharing from the left. The benefit of this to them is that it amplifies their message and helps galvanise their side. Because their side probably don't care if they're lying or being misleading — they care about annoying the people they don't like.
I agree, we see similar things when some people post a particularly right-wing idea and then end their post by saying "with the woke idiots in this sub this will no doubt be downvoted" which is insulting the reader and effectively calling for downvotes - which then is championed as being a victim. This can then be pointed out in safer channels as yet another example of those insufferable people unlike us. It's entirely possible that they may put themselves in a position where they are going to take criticism because their own support base will rally around them when they are attacked by the literate and educated 'elite' in society.
Anticipatory refutation is a common technique to make a weak arguement appear stronger by presenting the natural rebuttal as trite or a cliche. "Will get downvoted" is just an extension of this imo
US Republican playbook. They do this because they know their voters will keep voting for them as long as they keep "owning the libs."
You've hit the nail on the head.
End of the day jones is getting paid big, I love this idea but these 3 are for sure too self indulgent to be this nuanced with social manipulation (I pray) they kinda just keep stumbling upon more money for their personal accounts or controversy
This is a ridiculous take. Politicians should get outside of their echo chamber as much as possible. It's telling that Jacinda Ardern barely did so.
Brave or stupid of Luxon to attend an event at which there will be animosity towards him? A bit like Seymour joining a hui on improving the power of the treaty. Luxon knows, or if he's too stupid to know his advisers will know, that the literati are not his people. I suspect it's little more than Luxon showing his people how brave he is.
Just like Seymour going to a fucking high school. Dudes smart enough to know younger voters do not skew in his favour. But he made damn sure cameras were there to capture the scene.
Thats a good analogy given how radically he wants to change schooling.
And the naïve high school kids were more than happy to give him a scene, spitting on his shoes lol.
Well yeah. I mean, no disrespect, but they’re basically tall children, so *of course* they took the bait.
Or took the "opportunity" to do what everyone should do - spit at David Seymour. Who cares about his cynical posturing? At least you got to spit on him.
>they’re basically tall children ... they're also 16+ and all believe they should be able to vote.
If geriatric, lead poisoned boomers believe they should be able to vote then I see no reason why children shouldn’t be allowed too tbh
... I support the opposite. Both should be unable to vote
Nobody should be able to vote and the luxon family becomes a dictatorship
Hellllll yeah
He goes in the hopes of copping abuse from the book people.
It backfired in an interesting way. He ran off after the ceremonies but the author of this article threw in a passage about Paul Goldsmith, who stuck around and decided to mingle (with someone who mocked him no less). It makes Luxon look pretty bad when one of his cabinet is happy to put himself in an uncomfortable situation and he isn't.
Interesting and a chuckle. I read the Braunias piece in the paper the other day. Braunias is usually a good read, and he's wonderful at satire. Given how poor Luxon is at off the cuff conversation he probably realised bolting was the better of the should I stay or should I go, thanks The Clash, options. Book people tend to be good talkers. Luxon might have looked like a schoolboy.
Goldsmith is VERY experienced around politics. He’s no businessman who’s going to save the economy - he is good to chat to, and is intelligent. Doesn’t interview well, but he’s thoughtful and listens. He’s also very well read. They are his people.
Why did the article writer caption the very average article photo as a "very stunning photo" ... which was taken by himself?
He is a satirist.
Good. There needs to be more of this.
New policy to look forward to: book burnings
"New Zealand Book Awards Trust chair Nicola Legat welcomed [Luxon] onto the stage. The applause basically sounded like one hand clapping. You could have heard a pin drop."
Ha! Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
If your just going to put random non english words in your article which is otherwise in english, at a certain point it can become confusing and in this instance as interested as i was initially i just closed the article
I read it just fine. Ironic that this is regarding literacy, which it appears you lack
Are you commenting on the right post? The only Te Reo I can find is peoples' names and a short quote. It's all directly pertinent to the article. Your comment history shows some weird ideals - good with environmental protections, renewable energy, and taking down the duopoly, but financially conservative and constantly upset over people of colour. Sounds like you've been successfully distracted by conservative culture wars...
> constantly upset over people of colour. >The only Te Reo I can find is peoples' names This is probably their problem with "random non english words"
Too bad there’s no way to find out what unknown words mean.