IN RECENT DAYS Phil Goff has been both passionate and forthright in his condemnation of Israel and its genocidal war in Gaza. No longer bound by his diplomatic responsibilities, the former High Commissioner to London has been able to speak his mind.
In an opinion piece published over the weekend, the former Labour Party leader wrote that 'Israel doesn't care how many innocent people it's killing'. A week or so earlier, in an opinion column for the NZ Herald, he charged the Israeli Government of deliberately denying the people of Gaza ready access to food and that the 'weaponisation of starvation was a war crime'. Just yesterday Goff was on The Bradbury Group again denouncing Israel.
Another former leader of the Labour Party, indeed a former Prime Minister, has also been all over the media in recent days, but for more self-interested reasons. Jacinda Ardern has a book to promote, and she has emerged from the Ivory Towers, namely Harvard University, where she is teaching a course on something called 'empathetic leadership'. 'The world's media is lining up to interview Jacinda Ardern about her memoir, 'A Different Kind of Power - CBS, BBC, even Oprah,' wrote an excited Emily Simpson for the TVNZ website.
Jacinda Ardern continues to capitalise on her 'brand', namely that of the compassionate political leader who did things differently. And the media, at least the liberal media, have been more than happy to portray her that way. So in a near laudatory feature for The Guardian, Editor-in-Chief Katherine Viner writes:
'For all these reasons, Ardern is now missed by progressives, at home and abroad. At her height she had blazed a global trail, modelling a different way of doing politics ... It was Jacinda-mania, and everybody wanted a prime minister like her: young (elected at just 37) and a woman, she offered a different vision of national identity for New Zealand – straightforward, compassionate, diverse, globally desirable – and a different way to lead a country – youthful, human, decent.'
In 2020 The Guardian, in the throes of 'Jacindamania' itself, declared that Ardern 'represented a new kind of soft power'.
The obvious problem is that this portrayal of Jacinda Ardern is completely bogus. Despite claiming that she represents a 'different kind of power', that portrayal can only be propped up if her supporters either ignore or downplay the many transgressions she committed during her time as Prime Minister.
Despite promising 'transformational change' during Labour's 2017 election campaign, Ardern proved to be as much a determined defender of neoliberalism, or the political status quo, as her National Party predecessors John Key and Bill English. The Prime Minister, who supposedly did things differently, did little to improve the lot of ordinary people.
At the time of her election, over one in five children lived in poverty and inequality was high, with the wealthiest 10% owning some 60% of all the country’s assets, while the poorest half owned 2%. Housing affordability grew into an all encompassing crisis, while the country had the worst homelessness rate in the OCED, with almost 1% of the population living on the streets or in emergency housing.
Yet, by the time she left office, child poverty rates remain unchanged, while inequality had dramatically increased. But Ardern, displaying a noticeable lack of empathy for the plight of the poor, rejected calls to increase welfare benefits. And house prices increased by 58% during her time as Prime Minister.
Little wonder that Katherine Viner has to at least acknowledge that '.. many New Zealand progressives were frustrated with the amount of change she managed to implement, especially considering the landslide she won in 2020.'
Ardern's celebrated 'empathy' proved to be little more than a few fitful and ultimately meaningless gestures toward seeking a better world. In the end, she defended the 'free market' and its corporate beneficiaries, even though she once argued that ' the days of thinking that the state can be a passive bystander and the market will provide…are over'.
And while Ardern enjoys her days at Harvard University and is feted by the international media, ordinary people in New Zealand are having to struggle with the consequences of her failure to implement the fundamental changes she once promised. Instead of freeing the country from the shackles of forty years of neoliberalism, her inaction invited to power a National-led coalition government now engaged in a renewed neoliberal offensive against working class interests.
In a review of A Different Kind of Power Grant Duncan writes:
'Her book is more about subjective self-doubt and empathy. She doesn’t critically examine her own policies. Nor does she express empathy for those who felt disadvantaged or excluded by them – granting as always that emergency measures had been necessary. And, as she heads further into an international career, there’s no expression of empathy for those who now need it most, be they children in Gaza or refugees in South Sudan.'
Since Israel began its barbaric assault on Gaza, some nineteenth months ago, Ardern has made no comment, unlike Phil Goff. She has not used her authority as a former Prime Minister of New Zealand nor her continued presence in the international media, to speak out on behalf of the Palestinian people. It seems that Ardern's 'empathy' has severe limitations and stops at the point when it might just begin to rock the boat.
Perhaps Jacinda Ardern needs to be reminded of the late Desmond Tutu's observation that ' If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.'
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated.