Information
Opinion
As I have mentioned on numerous occasions to you, dear reader, I am a great student of Macchiavelli. His “rules” set out in The Prince are like Adam Smith’s rules in The Wealth Of Nations: absolutes which you ignore at your peril. Just as 2+2=4 is an absolute.
As we have probably entered ‘election year’ it is a delight to see incredibly stupid people like James Shaw and the Maori Party embark on a campaign to change the name of the country to Our Tea Rower (or some such nonsense).
The otherwise anfractuous route to a change of government just became that little bit easier.
Macchiavelli addresses why (in this example) proposing to change the name of the country is a huge mistake, in several ways:
1. It is dangerous to introduce a new order of things (just ask Roger Douglas!); those who’ve done well out of the old order are lined up against you; those supporting the new order aren’t really enthusiastic because it’s unproven.
2. You cannot satisfy ‘nobles’, or elitists (those whose latest decadent fashionable cause is to change the name of the country) without inflicting huge harm upon ‘the people’ (who are not ‘with’ the cause). Elites always want ‘more’ things that conflict with what the people want; something we’ve seen in recent years. ‘Nobles’ wish to oppress but the people wish not to be oppressed; you can’t insulate yourself against hostile people, but you can against nobles.
3. A nation accustomed to freedom either has to be destroyed, or it will destroy [the current government]. No matter what they do to us, we the people remember our ancient freedoms and rights they are trying to take away from us.
4. There is also the slight matter of an alternative government waiting in the wings with a long history of protecting those rights and freedoms.
5. Macchiavelli also warns against “flatterers” who never tell the truth to the chappie in power, but one suspects proposals to change the name to Our Tea Rower have been declared “unanimously supported” within the Beehive and Backbencher Pub by ‘bought and paid for’ staffers and media sycophants.
I could go on but you get the general idea; to try and up-end the status quo – change the name of the country to appease a small group of pretty rotten people – simply won’t succeed. One also wonders how anybody, already in deep political trouble, could be so stupid as to even try.
The usual trick of suggesting New Zealand from 1840 until now has been a force for bad with no redeeming qualities is also not exactly the correct road to travel down. There’s a lot of fertile ground to work with opposing such a contention; everything from our brave ancestors, to the western civilisation they created, to Gallipoli, to winning the World Cup.
It must also be acknowledged that there is precious little in Maori history or recent conduct that the average man in the street has much respect for.
Despite being rather cynical about both the National and ACT parties – their cowardice, their craven desire to be highly regarded by and get invited to the cocktail parties of dreadful people – it seems unlikely they would come out in support of such a ludicrous idea.
But if they did, imagine the fertile ground for Winston and NZ First. Imagine an election campaign fought entirely on the issue of keeping the name New Zealand with all other parties showing their true colours.
