To paraphrase author of Catch 22 Joseph Heller: Just because you’re paranoid, it doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you. In other words – sometimes there is genuine substance to that which disquiets us.
The Post [on Saturday] editorialises Winston Raymond Peters, and the piece is reasonably well-written for that particular outfit. In describing his appeal:
Other party leaders lack his charisma and his uncanny knack for spotting an opportunity and for recognising the right moment. Both of our major party leaders look grey by comparison. […] He has mastered the art of oppositional politics, presenting himself as the permanent outsider, despite having held such positions as Deputy Prime Minister, Treasurer and Minister of Foreign Affairs. No one else has managed to be both inside the tent and outside it in this way.
Quite so. I don’t see any cause for argument there, but where the Stuff writer goes somewhat reassuringly off-track comes later, in what the Post describes as “a time of growing paranoia”:
This year’s Peters is more overtly right-wing, in keeping with a more negative time. He has discovered wokeness, strongly opposes co-governance and shares common ground with the anti-mandate movement. […] In this way, Peters is serving the same function he always did. He doesn’t just speak to a constituency that is conservative and feels left behind. He also absorbs the extremist vote.”
Extremist? The anti-woke, anti-co-governance, anti-mandate crews are somehow “extremist”, and paranoid to boot? Good grief. I offer nothing in response, it would take me too long to describe my contempt over that piece of keyboard scribble. It is in fact beneath contempt. Sub-contempt.
As for Peters? I take the liberty of paraphrasing Joseph Heller again: He was going to live (politically) for ever, or die in the attempt.
