Yesterday, political commentator “extraordinaire” Chris Trotter, posted a provocative piece on OpenLabourNZ via his blog Bowally Road (would we expect anything else?)
In his usual inimitable style, Chris waxed lyrical about “magical remedies for monstrous and besetting evils – and all derived from folklore.” He was referring to such means as silver bullets, stakes through the heart, philosopher’s stones and the like.
The latest magical remedy, being attempted by the Labour Party, being the internet and OpenLabourNZ, Labour’s first attempt at developing policy online and involving the people of NZ.
Called OpenLabourNZ, the first cab off the rank is on Labour’s policy on open and transparent government.
Trotter describes this as the virtual political party and then goes on to say that nothing beats face to face contact and politics being conducted in the real room.
Well I’m keen for people to discuss this.
I’m an optimist and a bit of an opportunist. A back-handed compliment from Chris Trotter is better than no compliment.
Nothing beats the engagement on the doorsteps and the argy bargy of a political stoush between people in a real room. But the online world is real and exciting ,and new and conventional boundaries are kind of irrelevant.
And hey Chris, you did blog about it (via the internet). You old wolf you.
“I miss the 1970’s”.
There, see, you never have to read another Chris Trotter piece again.
Uhmmm…Clare?
Sorry to be pedantic but with you being an expert in “owning the language” and all that I would have thought that the phrase “cab off the rank” might have been a banned phrase in Labour.
If it isn’t, great, the party is moving on from it’s dis-tasteful, divisive past.
Online stuff has its place. If done right and with no regrettable actions.
Spud you just excluded 95% of the internet :p
To me it seems OpenLabourNZ can only aid in person meeting on policy discussion. Once word of it spreads it will hopefully provide a voice to those without a strong political presence in their towns.
@Loota LOL
Internet is a good way to reach a lot more people. Face to face is the best way but a lot of busy people this is great as it allows them to have there say without the disruption to their day.
Some people this way of communicating gives them a voice as they maybe shy or introverted
There are many reasons why this gives people a voice. Labour I feel will not lose face to face communication at all.
This is just another way of reaching the masses not the only way.
“I miss the 1970’s”.
There, see, you never have to read another Chris Trotter piece again.
Ouch. But very, very accurate.
OpenLeft is expanding the size of the room and allowing more people to participate. And I’m not sure why anyone would be upset by that. Its only a distraction from real politicsif you think that real politics can only be conducted in meatspace.
“if you think that real politics can only be conducted in meatspace” Huh?
??????
I was going to say that the best place to discuss this would be on his web site. But the discussion is stilted because comments are moderated. What I posted there was:
“you have to be there”
Presumably TV, radio and newspapers are by the same logic also irrelevant.
Leaving aside the fact that for an increasing number of people being on the internet is being there.
Personally as someone who has never taken part in political debate before this site, I think it is Great. Most of us simply dont have time to be involved any other way. Many kiwis work 6 days a week and our spare time away from work is very precious to us.
Spud: From the Jargon file:
meatspace: /meet´spays/, n: The physical world, where the meat lives — as opposed to cyberspace.
Chris Trotter used to be worth reading – whatever happened??
“It’s all about getting the message out and ensuring the public participate in the political process – but the working class never did that by net in the old days, so it it not part of our traditional way of doing things … .
Most of the working class lacked the ability to type a letter to the editor, not that stopped me writing columns in support of the cause.
Of course I’m on the net now myself … ”
The old rogue is both posing himself as in the vanguard of what the working class advocates are now doing and yet a (commentating) critic at the same time.
A professional media commentator whore and part of the working class cause at the same time …
Of course it’s not a silver bullet, nothing is. That doesn’t stop it from being an absoultely fantastic concept though!
Trotter is just stuck in the past and can’t handle anything new or progressive whether it be innovative policy process or “radical” concepts such as the notion that everyone is equal regardless of sexuality or race.
@Idiot / Savant LOL
If you operate OpenLabour like you do this site you will go nowhere.
As soon as anyone tries to debate anything on this website `Intolerent Trevor’ steps in to delete the comment and ban people. Open debate means everyone should be able to debate an issue without sanction as long as there is no abuse or foul language.
You have a long way to go and perhaps some old diehards need to move on.
PDM. Firstly you are wrong and everyone knows it. Trevor’s posts are the most lively in terms of comments. His moderating style is much the same as all the moderators, he just has a higher profile and is more likely to be attacked by the likes of you. This is trolling behaviour but I’m letting this comment through. If you make allegations again you will be banned by me. Clare
Chris Trotter used to be worth reading – whatever happened??
He got old, and the world passed him by.
I have told people to shoot me if I look to be ending up like him.
I think I just saved you from being banned. Trevor
I have commented on the blog itself, but it was almost a waste of time. I found the whole article to be of little real value. The whole front of the article bears no relation to the subject at hand; in fact if anything OpenLabour is the application of scientific principles of open publishing and peer review to the political process.
Forget his site/blog/whatever. Let’s look at what Labours engaging of people on the Interet really means.
Technology has always been about improving communication (thus, I’m an Information Technology specailist – it’s not just technology, it’s about communication) but in this wierd new world, things have gone very wrong somehow. I’m expected to publish information I want my friends to see and hope they happen upon it rather than sending an email (read: facebook) or fit what I want to say into a 140-character message (twitter).
But the point is, the technology has been getting better. Clare is able to communicate her ideas en masse and all of us here are able to have a conversation around that. Brilliant.
Sure, it doesn’t beat face to face contact. It’d be great to be able to sit down over a coffee and talk about a proposal for a more open government with like minded people – but then, I’m in Auckland. I’m sure a lot of you aren’t in the same city – so we’re stuck using technology.
But if that’s the case, and the technology can reach a whole lot of people, and those people can feel they’re contributing something back rather than their usual once every four years type of participation, then Labours working off positives. We can engage. We can talk. We can build policies on the voices of a lot of people rather than those privileged few who are politicians.
Surely engaging people can’t be a bad thing? In otherwords, Trotter can go live in his ivory tower. The rest of us will just get on with things.
Don’t forget, that not everyone has the internet and uses these modern forms of communication.
It costs about $80 a month for cable broadband – some are excluded from this and Sky by reason of unaffordability.
@SPC Good point and there’s no doubt that OpenLabourNZ targets internet users. It’s critical that we enable people who aren’t connected to participate and I’m encouraging people to write to me. One of the challenges though, is for a wider group of people to know that we’re taking this initiative and how they can take part. We are relying on people reading Red Alert or one of the other blogs where people are writing about it, word of mouth, or reading the odd snippert in mainstream media. Ideas on how to get the message out wider?
Two ideas.
1. Labour MP’s make reference to it part of the local newspaper ads/columns – initiated with a news story for the newspaper via a journalist.
2. Unions to members.
Hi Clare
How about writing something reasonably succinct and interesting, and emailing to your various networks and ask for that to be forwarded on. That might just snowball to reach a wider audience.
Best wishes
Poor old Chris Trotter, I have enjoyed his writing in the past but sammy nails it and nails it well
I have to say think this initative of Clare’s is a real step forward, almost a leap!
There is a chance for ordinary people to get some real input into policy, not self-selected people sitting in back rooms coming up with what the polls shows might work
I don’t always agree with you Clare but I think this great
The great thing about immediate interactive internet forums with elected representatives is that it removes the 20 day wait of the official information act. When you ask the hard questions of govt under this means they can make life a drawn out misery.
Immediate interactive forum gives a better indication of person being questioned personal knowledge of the subject as opposed to not knowing who may have typed the reply on their behalf.
Another area in our democratic system that has allowed people without sufficient general or stately knowledge to get into positions of great influence by having confidence in public speaking and the gift of the gab is the practice that has become accepted of elected representatives demanding to know, or stipulating, beforehand questions that are going to be asked in interveiw situations. Immediate interactive forum alleviates this, allowing a better judgement of knowledge of participants.
Chris Trotter is another in this nation that has a good knowledge of the domineering impact of private foreign controllers of the international banking network upon the economic and social policy of this nation, yet with all his opportunities in the mainstream media he doesn’t tell the average battler the truth of what is really happening to them. When the common peoples of this nation are back in conditions of virtual slavery himself and Bernard Hickey are going to have a lot to answer for due to their selective telling of knowledge they possess in the opportunities they had.
I cannot see how this online initiative can hurt? It’s not like the Labour party is dissolving into cyberspace.I believe it’s a great initiative, and I have never had so much dialogue with MPs in my life.
Part of the electorates disillusion with the last
government could be put down to excessive reliance on
perceived concerns “revealed ” by “focus groups”.
Consider ear chips for dogs. There are dog attacks on humans and other animals from time to time. A microchip is going to stop them? I do not think so! Govt pisses off every dog owner in the country without solving problem of untrained and unregistered dogs.
Increase excise on “fortified” wines as a response to irresponsible teenage drinking? Most teens, if they knew what Port or Sherry were would associate them with grand parents and would not be seen holding a bottle of the stuff.
So every port/sherry drinker who owns a dog (some own several) is doubly pissed off.
While I think Michael Cullen is a very capable person the “chewing gum tax cut” was a disaster.
NEVER patronise the electorate. Everybody is pissed off. Cullen comes across as a smart arse academic terrorising some poor undergraduate in a tutorial.
Somebody tried to get into bed with John Howard over “health products”. No rational arguments were ever presented. This is s bureaucratic bullying. (I think it might have been Annette King). The media backlash was interesting, concentrating on “celebs” rather then facts. Trouble was govt offered no facts. Arrogance personified.
Actually I do think there are serious issues involved in the health supplements area, mainly around quality control.
Jumping into bed with Oz is not necessarily the right answer.
How many people did you need to piss off without losing the election?
I did not mention light bulbs. (Felt kind).
need to be addressed in this arer
Actually a lot of people realise that the “chewing gum tax cuts/indexing the tax thresholds” is quite appropriate especially for the top tax rate. Which explains the over $100,000 idea and the next big idea – cutting taxes at the lower levels to complement a rising minimum wage campaign.