I was surprised at the election of James Shaw as Green Party leader.
On the one hand I can understand the frustration that despite 16 years of election results where the party gained a good number of MPs they have never been in government despite the MMP environment being seemingly made for them.
On the other hand the election is a worrying sign of political immaturity.
There is no shortcut to solving issues like climate change, the despoiling of rivers by intensive dairying or ending fossil fuel extraction.
These are political questions where the Green Party comes face to face with capitalism. They are all caused by the endless drive for “growth” (on a finite planet with finite resources) on which capitalism depends. In other words capitalism is on a collision course with the environment and the choice is simple – end capitalism or face the end of humanity as we know it.
I don’t want this to sound simplistic but why would Green Party members think the election of an avowed capitalist will make it easier to get to the root cause of environmental degradation and social mayhem?
On the face of it Shaw says he is opposed to going into coalition with National and instead wants to build the Green Party brand and party membership – bringing in people who would consider voting green but are put off by such things as thinking the greens would be poor economic managers.
So who will these new Green Party members be? They will be mostly blue-greens – Remuera mums who are genuinely concerned for the future of their kids and the environment but who are also wedded to living off unearned income from capitalism. This promised influx would shift the centre of gravity of the greens so that while the party wouldn’t go into formal coalition with National it is more likely than at present to do a confidence and supply agreement with John Key – a couple of high-profile policy wins and some greater environmental regulation while backing National when push comes to shove in parliament.
And all the while green party social priorities would be quietly sidelined.
Such a deal with National would gut the greens as it has green parties overseas which have been harshly punished by voters for doing deals with the devil.
Most Green Party members will probably bristle at this post and declare the party is far more democratic than this scenario suggests.
I hope it is because party members will have to be eternally vigilant. Just look at the other New Zealand example of a party hijacked by free-market capitalism – Labour – and how thirty years on party members struggle valiantly and in vain against their party leadership.
I noted a distinct tone of “climate change” in Shaw’s speech. Maybe the Greens have decided that there are bigger fish to fry (no pun intended) and that they would like to go after this monster before it’s too late.
If the alternative is another 5 years of Labour faffing about with the Greens out of power for all of it, then why not make some inroads erstwhile?
If there’s an appetite for left wing activism then maybe that’s Mana’s for the taking.
I was at a branch meeting of the Greens where James Shaw came to talk, and the most compelling moment of the informal discussion was when he brought up the subject of climate change, describing it as “the elephant in the room” – everyone in the room understood exactly how serious this is. There’s not the slightest doubt that Shaw considers this the most pressing issue of all.
Well said John, an anti capitalist option is what is needed, the “good” people in Labour are slow learners indeed and have waged a fruitless struggle to turn the neo liberal ship around, the new Green co leader appears set to continue that party’s ideological slide into “blue green” territory
NZers had the best chance for years in 2014 to take a different parliamentary route with the strong Mana Internet line up of candidates and policies, but it did not fire in terms of votes for two reasons;
1) internal mistakes; changing the simple black “tick” signage, too tight a time frame to do everything, not keeping KDC under wraps more, Hone’s car crash etc etc
2) the gang tackle on Te Tai Tokerau and major hostility by the leaders of NZ First, Labour, National, The Prime Minister and the media, Labour being particularly bad by resourcing the West Auckland end of Kelvin Davis campaign while under resourcing some of their own Labour candidates
why raise that again now? to remind that a parliament with Hone, Laila and John Minto would have been a very different place and raised the bar for everyone, but hopefully Mana continues working among the people outside of parliament, because the kiwi tipping point will come–whether it is some of the “missing million” alienated voters getting organised, the middle classes taking a property hit or whatever, left leadership will be required
Economic ‘progress’ must be ecologically sound. Business acumen is okay if that is the case. What is needed to combat environmental and human rights deterioration is highly inspirational vocalizing.
Yes James Shaw has a wish to double the Green Party membership in a year and then, double it again, over-ambitious would be my view of Shaw’s stated intention,
More Doctors, more Farmers, more Business-people according to Mister Shaw, and, i have to ask why not more pakiaka-tarutaru,(grassroots),activists,and, where is the face of those who have laboured in our economy for low wages over many years in the Green Party,
Is Mister Shaw a Green of convenience???, asked befor His election to the position of co-Leader about His lack of driving skills Shaw simply put it down to the ‘inconvenience’ of owning a motor-vehicle in London whilst He lived in that city ‘doing’ the obligatory middle class OE,
Bizarrely He made no mention of carbon emissions….
Don Brash predicted he could get ACT to 15% support and raise party membership substantially, new leaders often get a rush of blood and then…
it is the tireless Green community activists and humble regular supporters that will be put off by further middle class attracting antics imo after watching the Green Party change over the years, including having friends and family who were at times members during the Sue Bradford years
He looks like a gnat! …carbon emissions ….what a farce, as we continue to expand dirty dairying…oh, but as I thump keyboard the powers that be are designing a vaccine for these god forsaken animals, so that they can justify more livestock onto our already desertificated treeless, land. makes me want to puke in my porridge!
imo this is a subtly sexist post…it totally overlooks/ ignores the role of the woman co-leader of the Greens Metiria Turei
….as some have predicted …the male commentators and msm will totally sideline her
…forget about her stirling efforts working with Mana/Int and Laila Harre and Hone Harawira on her Bill for meals in schools
…of course the male Left has still got a lot to learn as regards covert sexism
If you don’t like capitalism go and living in a socialist state…but take your own toilet paper: I believe there’s a shortage.
Go learn some basic grammar.
A shortage of toilet paper maybe, but a shortage of shit?
Apparently not…
The problems are here in Aotearoa not somewhere else. If you’d like to be the first against the wall when the revolution comes that can be arranged…
A cross roads for the Greens.
If Shaw becomes another Sharples then the movement will not recover with basic credentials intact.
A coupe for the neo- liberals and for further destruction of the NZ way of life and further deeper serfdom to the international bankers.
Electing Shaw is step one and the direction of that step is as yet unknown. His baggage contains his credentials.
Born again Greens are a confusion of principles.
Pragmatism for survival is not the only issue here but it is an important and defining one.
Shaw will have to be watched closely as he changes party direction. Trust in him at this point would be very much misplaced.
The success of a wait and see approach with close monitoring and active internal party strategy giving direction, will depend on how consensus is achieved. Quasi NACT influences have no part in the Green debate.
The economy as is cannot be more important that an economy of radical change to support survival with social equity. NACT will never support such goals.
Thanks John, you have articulated my concerns precisely. Shaw is another urbanite who couldn’t grow himself a feed in his apartment or backyard. I will not be voting Green.I look forward to Shaw’s attempt to engage the Key government in a debate on Climate Change. Will sink without trace you can be sure. As a leader Shaw will be as effective as Grant Robertson is as Labour’s finance spokesthing. Another epic fail.
He’s not quite cabbage enough is he.
http://davidtong.co.nz/2015/04/30/talking-climate-with-james-shaw/
As a fairly long standing party member, office holder and candidate with a total passion for social justice – who preferred Kevin, I have to say that we are in safe hands with James. It’s hard reading these kinds of blogs, because they all way underestimate him, our processes and our total commitment to democratic politics. Our social justice arm will not diminish or be sidelined, and James has no intention to try to do that. But if your worst case scenario comes to be, trust me when I say that our membership will not allow it, and does have the power to prevent it from happening.
Rachael, James Shaw does sound like a great new leader for the Green Party. Congratulations James !
I feel that this blog – The Daily Blog – will be one of the very few and rare journalistic outlets that will depict your new leader in an honest and favorable light. I hope that he will be vigilant against TPPA and I just saw this link below and felt it should be considered by all who are interested in a fair and just trade that will not hurt employees and the environment.
http://www.infowars.com/tpp-death-pool-more-pharmaceutical-destruction-is-coming/
And also –
http://www.itsourfuture.org.nz/what-is-the-tppa/
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/category/tpp/
“Our social justice arm will not diminish or be sidelined, and James has no intention to try to do that.”
I do hope so, although I am highly sceptical, as even before I noticed that apart from the so much quoted “child poverty” debate, other social issues, like the radical, draconian welfare reforms, were only really mentioned occasionally, seemingly having a lesser priority to topics that appeared to be more of interest to the bulk of the still voting (middle class) public.
This is what I noticed in question time sessions on Parliament TV, over the recent two years.
And what if more new members that feel appealed by the more “centrist” and pro market driven approach represented by James Shaw decide to join the Green Party, in significant enough numbers, to outnumber those sharing your views and priorities?
This would change the membership and through that the likely future political direction of the Green Party, would it not?
What is the criteria to becoming a member? Would it demand a member commits to certain social policies, and that they stay in place, before perhaps supporting other policy, or new approaches?
I’d be interested to hear more, to learn more, and to see where this journey will take the Green Party.
But I honestly have my doubts, as almost all parties in Parliament now seem primarily focused on getting “centrist” votes, from existing voters, not doing much to gain the disillusioned, undecided or indifferent non-voters growing into ever higher numbers.
This country’s politics are increasingly decided only by the middle class mums and dads, who have a very narrow focus on what benefits them, and are not at all interested in the fate of the poor and the unfortunate. They live in urban centres, and also do largely fail to understand the problems in the more rural regions.
I only see more and more voters and potential voters become yet more disillusioned, while the main three parties all fight for the middle ground, to each get as big a slice of that pie, not interested in what goes on outside of that area.
Rachel, I don’t know James Shaw from a slice of bread, but I will judge him and the Greens on what happens next. I tend to evaluate by people’s actions. I’ll be watching to see how true these words of yours are.
From the “avowed capitalist”:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/68996908/new-greens-coleader-james-shaw-challenges-pm-on-climate-change
At the branch meeting I attended to choose who would be the next male co-leader, everyone held all the candidates in high regard. In the end it was a toss up between Kevin Hague and James Shaw. I think Shaw won out because he was seen as being more dynamic and a potential circuit breaker. I think a lot of Green members also want to break out of the image cul de sac that the party has been boxed in by, and felt Shaw would be an agent for change and progression both within the party membership and in the way it interfaces with general public.
John – I have respect for your opinion, and others. The danger I see is doing what National hope you will do for them – “divide and conquer” . Maybe the best approach is to sit down together and maturely discuss, even if you both have to agree to differ – the new leader has now been elected, make sure we/you are all paddling the same way. I am not a member of any party so have no ‘agenda’ and meantime will put my energy into Transition Town’s goals of building resilient local communities.
Russel Norman was also seen as a circuit breaker. Russel worked tirelessly and was an effective opposition leader. His experience and credibility was mercilessly denigrated derided and demeaned by the MSM . He was pilloried relentlessly despite his sound economic reasoning. Quantitive Easing has been applied in the USA ever since 2008. Why not in NZ? There was no discussion , The NAtz drive the narrative. The MSM are bought and paid for. The game is rigged. The power elite do not give a fuck and nothing will change under Shaw’s leadership. He doesn’t get the fact that it is old fart boomers who do the hard yards for the Greens because we have lived the Green cause our whole lives. All my financial decisions have been made in terms of the disaster that is Climate Change. I am better off than most of my friends as a result. Alienating the old guard of the Green movement is a fatal mistake Mr Shaw. He clearly doesn’t know his constituency.
I think you need a chamomile tea, some arnica and a hug.
John Lennon said “give peace a chance” how about we give James a chance.
“On the other hand the election is a worrying sign of political immaturity.
There is no shortcut to solving issues like climate change, the despoiling of rivers by intensive dairying or ending fossil fuel extraction.
These are political questions where the Green Party comes face to face with capitalism. They are all caused by the endless drive for “growth” (on a finite planet with finite resources) on which capitalism depends. In other words capitalism is on a collision course with the environment and the choice is simple – end capitalism or face the end of humanity as we know it.”
Yep, I do share your concerns and sentiment.
The Greens have chosen a way tried in other countries in Europe, to make the environmentalism more “appealing” by turning it into a fashion label, a fad, a kind of trendy policy commodity, that will convince the middle class voters that have some angst about the future of the planet, to perhaps vote for them, and “feel good” about it.
Indeed, there is more at state, and facing up to the real challenges is necessary, not pandering to some modern day urban middle class wannabe “green” shopper, buying “environmentally friendly” goods, while the clothes they wear are made in China, Bangla Desh, Vietnam or elsewhere, in sweat shops, where the people cannot earn a decent living, live in slums and cannot drink the water.
It is not going to change anything much, if we just look at one very important topic, which global climate change really is, and ignore the rest, like that many consumer goods are now made in polluted, environmentally destructive places, where immense poverty rules, that in some places forces thousands to set sail on rotten boats, to find a better future elsewhere.
The climate change disaster has not even seriously started yet, it is yet to come, and the refugees from Burma, from the Middle East and so, they come for other reasons. It will get much, much worse when the sea-level rises by another 40 to 50 cm in coming decades, it is set to happen.
Surely the Greens are still in some ways heading in the right direction with their environmental concerns, but politically they are heading into a folly, I fear, if they will truly change direction to where James Shaw would like to lead the debate and policy formation.
The market will not save us from global climate change, and something more radical and imaginative is needed than simply having electric cars promoted, having extra taxes put onto dairy farms and car emissions. That may be part of a plan, but insufficient.
And if we all drive electric cars we will soon realise that the electricity we now use for other purposes, may suddenly not be enough to meet all needs.
This is an experiement they will try, and it will go down the same way as the Greens in places like Germany went. They gained some votes in the centre, but lost others, and that ended in internal debates and competitions for their leadership and political direction.
I would be pleasantly surprised if the Greens here manage to do things better and differently, but I doubt they will.
A new progressive left of centre party is needed, to replace Labour and Greens, and bring truly progressive forces under one new umbrella, with new ideas and solutions, that also starts talking with the next to one million non voters, a huge voter base that makes the real difference in future.
Such a party also needs to bring and present a new image, and should sweep out all these men in suits and ties, and women with more or less fashionable dresses out of Parliament! Throw out this conformist pack and bring in a wind of change.
Oh thank God and thank you John.
Finally, amongst all the awful middle class moaning and groaning about too much leftism (on a left-wing blog, would you believe) and a need to appease capitalism (camouflaged neo-liberalism) you have finally said it John, like it needs to be said.
The shonky deconstructing of social issues from political pragmatism will result in a Green party no longer Green.
Go ahead and try it if you must but you will most certainly get tarnished with the National Party odour and just as with the Maori Party you will be thrashed by your former supporters.
You’ve done nothing to disaffect me of my original opinion of the Greens: They are all middle class wankers.
Please prove me wrong. I dare you. I beg you.
Just listened to James Shaw’s address to the Greens AGM, in which he said:
“Politics is hard work, but it is worth it, because we can change the system, we can win.”
AND
“My career has always been about bringing the values of the Green Party into the business world.”
One would expect a Mana candidate to knock the new Greens leader as a “capitalist”. It’s not what I expect from John Minto though. He’s always struck me as someone for whom the truth is more important than point-scoring.
Sadly, John’s attack here is point-scoring. It’s exactly what I expect from our combative parliamentary system, and from the reduction of political parties to “brands” competing for political market share. This political culture which benefits National and the neo-liberal wing of Labour, who have the funds and establishment support for their brands.
Parties who oppose neo-liberalism and corporate globalization need to work in cooperation towards not just changing the party in government, but as James says, changing the system. So I’m disappointed by this column. Not because I have no criticisms of the Greens attempts to rebrand as moderates in the face of planetary crises which require radical solutions. Being true to our genuine differences will require criticizing each other at times, but those criticisms need to be respectful, and most importantly, based on facts, not empty name-calling.
Comments are closed.