August 4th, 2022.
I was recently researching elements of fascism for a paper and for some reason began to think of New Zealand. What is fascism? It is difficult to get a definition of fascism. George Orwell once complained that “fascist” had become nothing more than a synonym for “bully”. This is the way we see it being used today. The left uses it to denigrate the right when a solid argument fails.
Jason Stanley, professor of philosophy at Yale University and author of How Fascism Works (Random House, 2020) is quoted as saying, “Fascism is based on an ethnic division between ‘us’ and ‘them’, an extreme ethno-nationalism. It’s based on nostalgia for a mythic past, typically in which members of the chosen ethnic group had an empire – and it represents the present as the loss of that great empire, that natural standpoint in which members of this ethnic group dominated their environment militarily, politically, and culturally.” This is interesting, especially when applied to the situation in New Zealand. One can see elements of this definition creeping into the NZ government today.
Madeleine Albright, former United States Secretary of State, in her book Fascism: A Warning (Harper, 2019) defined a fascist as “someone who claims to speak for a whole nation or group, is utterly unconcerned with the rights of others, and is willing to use violence and whatever other means are necessary to achieve the goals he or she might have”. As she was a member of the Democratic party and served in the Clinton administration, she can hardly be called a right-wing sympathiser.
The American conservative Jonah Goldberg caused a stir when in 2008 he published his book Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning. In it, he argues that fascist movements were and are left-wing. Unsurprisingly he suffered considerable abuse from left-wing reviewers of his book. However, amongst the expected opprobrium were comments such as “Goldberg shows how liberals came to believe that authoritarian government is fine as long as representatives of ‘the people’ – themselves – are in charge”.
Mr Goldberg makes a stronger case when he accuses the New Left of classic fascist behaviour when its cadre took to the streets and through action discarded its early idealism for what Mr Goldberg correctly calls “fascist thuggery”. Or wokery?
Does anyone begin to see parallels between all this and the Ardern administration?
When will New Zealand see the beginnings of an organisation to nurture and develop the Maori youth and teach them the ways of co-governance and useful ways to contribute to society? We could call them the Ardern Youth. Possibly they could be encouraged by the recruitment of the gangs to keep them off the streets, now usefully employed as the keepers of peace under the auspices of the co-governance peacekeeping plan. Perhaps they could even have state-issued brown shirts?
I then began to think of a country with political and social issues.
In this country, 17% of the population has political and economic control over the majority of the population because of their ethnic background. It has sporting teams whose selection is based on ethnic background. The wealth and economic resources are concentrated in the hands of the minority. The majority are electorally disenfranchised. What is the world to do with such a rogue state?
The answer is to place economic sanctions on the country and shun it politically. We will “encourage” banks and financial institutions to cease operations in the country. We will work strenuously to prevent sporting and cultural contact with the country. It meets our previously mentioned definitions of fascism and deserves to be shunned, ignored, and sanctioned, right? It should become apparent that we are referring to South Africa.
New Zealand has an ethnic minority that comprises 17% of the population. Via Ardern’s Government, they are usurping power from the democratic process and diverting ultimate control to themselves. They have a separate rugby team; they are assuming control of assets and power, including the final say on the disbursement of funds from the central government.
Control of information is being tightly influenced by the Government, and there is only one message.
Dissent is being crushed, sometimes physically, and political enemies have been banned from Parliament’s grounds. Does this sound like a fully functioning democracy?
To quote Alan Paton: “Cry, the beloved country”.