Peter's Blog

Well, here we are. Finally, after months of delay, many excuses, and much resistance, I have finally done the inevitable, and started my own blog....




It had to happen, eventually, as I am a born writer, loving to express myself through the written word, so here we are..... Where do I start? Maybe with a few words of introduction, for those who do not know me....



I live in New Zealand, on a rural property of 6 acres, in North Otago. I live with my partner, Glenys, who is my business partner as we as my life's partner, and also with two cats, eight sheep, six chickens and one rooster. We moved here in December 2006, in order to live a more sustainable lifestyle than was possible in the city, and to have a more healthy lifestyle. For pictures of our house and gardens, etc, see this webpage.



We work full-time in an office here at our little farm, running our business, where we make our own range of natural-health products, which are (mainly) centered around our own brand of flower essences, the “New Millennium Essences” which I have been working with for many years, and also with high-quality essential oils (I am a professional aromatherapist). If you wish to know more about our business or our products, please go to our Home Page on this website.



Anyway.... what will we talk about today? I guess that it is almost inevitable that I will speak about my own view of what is happening in the world today, and specifically, about politics! Maybe we can start with some comments about the current election campaign, and no, I do not refer to the over-publicized contest in the USA, though I might have something to say about that later, I am now referring to the election here in New Zealand.



Here in NZ, we elect our governments every three years, traditionally around this time of year, October-November, and over the years I have had a varying amount of involvement in this process. For example, for four elections right through the 1980's I was a passionate, dedicated political activist, very much involved in those four election campaigns, coming to know the political process very intimately. I have my opinions on politics in general, and on the so-called “democratic process” in particular, however I will not bore you with those opinions right now, maybe some other time.



Last night (Saturday 25 October), Glenys and I attended a political meeting! My first such event since 1990, I have steadfastly avoided them ever since then, until last night. However, last night we drove in to the town of Oamaru (20 minute's drive north of here), to attend a political meeting with Russell Norman, the co-leader of the New Zealand Green Party. I will say straight up that we generally regard ourselves as "supporters" of the Greens. How could we be anything but, being desirous of living a more sustainable lifestyle, and having rather “progressive” and liberal views, we really have to be supporters of the Green Party.



Anyway, despite it being a cold, somewhat rainy, night, and me feeling a bit unwell, with a sore back, we drove in, had a meal at the hotel where Russell was to speak, and were the first to arrive in the meeting room.




And..... Wow! If all politicians were like Russell, our country, and the world, would be a much better place! I am not a person to give praise lightly, I set very high standards, for myself, and for others. I have a rather low opinion of most politicians, and specifically of the leaders of most of our other parties here in NZ. But, Russell is an entirely different breed to all those others. He was thrust into the co-leadership of the Green Party unexpectedly, fairly recently, by the sudden and untimely death of his predecessor, Rod Donald, and many people must have been wondering “Who is this guy? Does he measure up to the standards that Rod set?”. Well, in my opinion, he certainly does.









Russell spoke, last night, in that meeting room in Oamaru, the “Albert Room”, at the Criterion Hotel, to around 25 to 30 people, and he spent a good amount of time answering questions that most of us put to him. In all my years of following politics (remember, my background as a former dedicated activist) I have never seen a better performance. And, by “performance” I do not use that word in the usual way we use it to refer to politicians! There was none of the “usual” skillful manipulation of the questions, the bluff and bluster, the bullshit, the avoidance, the empty promises, etc, I am sure you are all familiar with how most politicians carry on. Russell is not like that at all, he is straight-forward, plain-talking, and he has an incredibly good understanding of all of the issues. I can say that I have an excellent understanding myself of the current political issues of the day here in NZ, and that Russell is way ahead of me, there is absolutely nothing he said that in any way indicated any degree of ignorance or not understanding anything, he was 100 percent on-the mark, with an incredibly deep understanding of all the issues.



That is not to say that I agree 100 percent with absolutely everything that Russell, and the Green Party, are saying. There are a few things that I disagree with them on, although these are mainly minor points, with one exception, that I will mention shortly. What I am saying, is that Russell has a totally comprehensive understanding of all the issues, and an excellent ability to explain them, concisely and clearly, including when questioned by people he has never met before.



I will not go into detail about most of what Russell said, it would take far too long, and would certainly bore most of you. I will briefly mention that he said that the issue of water will very likely be the big “green issue” that gets the mainstream average-Joe New Zealander really commited to supporting a “green” issue. Not climate change, not peak oil, not environmental degradation in general, not pollution, but plain old simple water. Water.... something that most of us just take for granted, we turn on the tap and out it comes, so what's the big deal about water?



It's already starting to happen in a few areas of New Zealand, the Waikato and Canterbury especially. And, especially in relation to one industry that is becoming an extremely voracious user of water.... dairy farming.



Now, years ago, when I was a child, dairy-farming was nothing like it is today. I have very fond memories of occasional visits to two dairy farms back then, one being my Uncle Bob, near Blenheim, and the other being a man named Ray, and his wife, who were second cousins of my mother, and they had a small dairy farm near the city of Christchurch. Neither farm had irrigation, at least not in the modern sense, they just relied on the vagaries of the weather, and their farms were stocked with only the numbers of cows that the land, and the local climate, could prudently support. By modern standards, their farms were very small indeed, far too small to be “economic” by today's standards.



However, both Uncle Bob, and cousin Ray, they both made a good living from their farms. Bob was a very hard worker, he grew potatoes. for extra income, as well as having the cows, and he ended up doing very well financially. Ray was less of a hard worker, but he got by ok. Yet, today, neither of them could survive, unless they increased their farm size by a vast amount and their herd size even more so. Why? What's changed?



There are a complex web of factors that make the Bobs and Rays of yesteryear hopelessly obsolete, in my opinion. If I had to sum it up in a few words, I would say “the rise of industrial farming”, both here in NZ, and all over the world. Among the factors that are connected with the rise of industrial farming, there is the price of farm land, the price of cows, and the cost of setting up the equipment needed to be a dairy farmer. These costs automatically peg themselves to the level of the “most efficient producer”. This means that, if some the most “efficient” farmers are in actual fact large corporations with huge farms and massive economies of scale, then anybody who does not share that model is automatically uneconomic, no matter how knowledgeable and talented they are about farming; for them the numbers just do not stack up. The consequence of this is that everybody is forced to follow that same model of “efficiency”, or go out of business. That's the brutal reality of doing business (in just about any industry, really) in this modern “market economy” world.



Remember the old song “Old McDonald's Farm”? We actually saw it performed last night: after the political meeting, some of us went to the Penguin Club, which is a music venue in Oamaru, an “entertainers club”.



Anyway, remember that, on McDonald's farm, they had many animals, not just one, monocultural, type of animal, like just cows and nothing else, or pigs, or sheep and nothing else. Those old-time farms had many animals, many many different animals: sheep, cows, pigs, donkeys, horses, chickens, ducks, geese, turkeys, dogs, cats, maybe even a fish or two! And, quite likely, a few hives of bees, a good-size orchard, and a large vegetable garden. Farms are no longer like that. In fact, today's so-called “farms” are no longer farms at all, not in the sense that I use the word “farm”. Our little six-acre property, with our eight sheep, six chickens, one rooster, two cats, 60-odd fruit trees, and large vegetable and herb garden, to me at least, is more of a real “farm” than the modern 1000-plus acre monocultural factory-farming, super-efficient monstrosities that are considered to be the norm today.






Anyway.... I do not wish to labor the point, many of today's “farms” are actually industrial production units, bearing only passing resemblance to the real farms of yesteryear. For a really good insight into this, and the implications of it, I highly recommend the excellent book by Michael Pollen, “The Omnivore's Dilemma”, you can check it out at Michael's website. This book is so well written, that, while reading it, I was constantly pausing to admire the superb word-smith skills of the author: he gets his points across in such an interesting way, and I am really looking forward to reading his latest book, “In Defense of Food”.








Anyway.... back to the point that I was making about water, and that Russell was making last night.... Water is just so vital to everybody. We all need water, in generous quantities, every day of our lives, to wash in, to cook with, to clean our houses and, sometimes, our cars, for a myriad of purposes, not the least of which is for drinking, we all need good quantities of fresh, clean water. Totally deprived of it, we are literally dead within a few days.



So, it follows that, if someone, or some group of people, were to dare to threaten our access to adequate quantities of clean, fresh, water, we would be very concerned. In fact, we would probably be very angry with any such people. That is the situation that is now shaping up here in some parts of New Zealand. I do not wish to exaggerate this.... right now, we all have enough water for our personal needs, and we will continue to have for the next few years.



However, beyond the next few years, especially when one includes the likely affects of climate change.... and the rate that industrial-scale farming, especially dairy farming, is very quickly gobbling up vast quantities of our remaining stocks of fresh, clean water, for the purpose of private profit, without having to pay anything for the water, and being given the right to take more and more large quantities from the remaining “shared reserves”, it is shaping up towards the day when the water will run out. A combination of a very dry summer, a depleted water table, and maybe some contamination of the water source by those same industrial “farms” that have also depleted the resource, and, almost inevitably, if we continue on our present track, it will happen. Communities will run short of water for personal household use. When that day arrives, if we allow it to happen, we will have a huge issue on our hands, to say the least.



And, if one takes a critical, unbiased look at the policies of the various political parties, here in New Zealand, to this issue, what does one see? Without going into huge detail, my impression is that most of them pay massive lip-service to it, with impressive sounding platitudes and hubris, but at the same time, they basically support the present disasterous status-quo of allowing more are more allocations of water rights to be made to industrial farming, for the purpose of massive private profits, and, in my opinion, often against the best long-term interests of the community as a whole. As far as I can tell, it is mainly the Green Party, and maybe the Maori Party, that has a sensible policy of putting the brakes on unrestrained “development”, in the interests of the long-term sustainability of this scarce resource that rightly belongs to all of us. If I am wrong in my opinion, and some other political party also has a sensible policy, please tell me.






I mentioned above that there was one policy of the Green Party with which I strongly do not agree, and this is what it is.... The compulsory phasing out of the “old technology” light bulbs, and the replacement of them with the so-called “CFL” (compact fluorescent) bulbs. Simply put, it is my opinion that fluorescent lights are a major health hazard. Quite apart from the fact that each one contains a small quantity of mercury, which involves a massive disposal problem when all those bulbs wear out and are discarded, there is the issue that the light produced by fluorescent lights is a very unhealthy light, being very deficient in some frequencies of the visible light spectrum, and contributing in a major way to ailments like “SAD” (Seasonal Affective Disorder”), and there is also the issue that the radiation produced by fluorescent lights is very unhealthy to the human body.



My personal experience is that, when I spend more than an hour or so under fluorescent lighting, I feel totally drained of energy, very tired, and I become very grumpy. I cannot bear to be under fluorescent lights for any more than an hour, absolute maximum. I strongly suspect that many others are also affected by them, without realizing what it is that is the actual cause. In order to fulfil a personal need for help with this issue, I have created some flower essences that help the body to cope with the affects of being under artificial lighting, and, especially, under fluorescent lighting. Click this link to see details of this. and, click this link to see details of a spray-bottle blend of essences and essential oils for help with many “sick environment” issues, including the affects of being under artificial lighting, breathing dead air-conditioned air, and being exposed to emf radiation, etc.



This is a “sleeping issue“, and it is my opinion that it will come back to haunt the Green Party some time in the future. On a personal level, I strongly recommend to everyone to avoid fluorescent lights as much as possible, there will very soon be energy-efficient alternatives, like halogen light bulbs, that are much healthier. Also, there are other, much more productive, ways to save energy, including fitting a solar water heater to your house (that's a big one!), not leaving the TV and stereo running all day and all evening (read a book instead, it's also much healthier for your mind!), showering for a minute or so less, using your car less, using public transport more, and so on and so on.







Anyway, regarding politics in general, and this NZ election in particular, there is a very important point that I wish to make. For many years now, a large percentage of the population have been largely disillusioned with politics and (especially) with politicians. People are sick of all the exaggerated claims made by politicians, the posturing, the hubris and bullshit, and the partisan warfare between the parties. Most politicians are locked into the “same old con job” of pretending that they (and only they, not the other party!) can somehow make life more pleasant/prosperous/successful/enjoyable/safe/etc for the voters, if only the voters will vote for them! Now, in many cases. the politicians do genuinely believe that they can do a better job than the “other lot”, if given the chance. Many of them were drawn into politics in the first place by some kind of idealism, genuinely wishing to do their bit to “make the world a better place”.



So, what went wrong? Why is it that, after their term(s) in office, the world does not seem to be “a better place”? If you ask those same politicians that, the ones that have been in charge of government, they will, always, come up with a long list of excuses. You know the excuses, the ones like “We just need a bit more time, to complete our reform program, don't throw it all away now by kicking us out and letting that other crowd mess things up!”. Or, another well-worn excuse is “We have done quite well, considering the conditions, we have steered our country through difficult times, due to circumstances outside our control, don't mess it up now by kicking us out and allowing that other lot to mess it up, these difficult times need our country to have safe, experienced, hands running the ship of state”. That last one is currently being used by governing parties a lot right now, with the current global financial meltdown going on, and especially by our incumbent governing party (the Labour Party) here in New Zealand.



Another common theme is, “You lost faith in us prematurely last time we were in power, and you threw it all away, by kicking us out back then, before our reform program had a chance to deliver the benefits! It's the fault of the other lot that it never worked out, because they messed it up by stopping the much-needed reforms, so it's actually your fault for voting them in. Just hand it back to us and allow us to complete our program, and you will see, paradise will arrive! (This is the current bleated theme, much repeated, like a chanted mantra, of our local extremist right-wing “economic reform and deregulation” party here in NZ, the “Act Party”.)



There is often a promise made, every election time, of “better times to come”, if only you will trust us, and give us a chance, (or another chance). It reminds me of the fairy stories, which often end with the line “.....and the prince and princess lived happily every after.” However, back here in “real life”, the happily ever after bit just never seems to arrive! Maybe it does for a few people, for whatever reasons, but for most everybody that I know, and for everybody who calls talkback radio, or writes letters to the newspapers, or, these days, writes a blog, they never seem to experience the “happily ever after”. Why not? Could it be that the politicians are deliberately lying to them, just to obtain their vote? And that the politicians actually know this, and are deliberately making promises under false pretences, promising things that they know they cannot deliver?






I personally think that part of the answer is that most of the politicians are locked into the “Game of Politics”. An excellent example is our present NZ Prime Minister, Helen Clark. Helen is a person of extremely high ability, it is my opinion that she originally went into politics for all the “right” reasons, with a genuine desire to change things for the better. However, over the years, she has become more and more locked into “The Game”, and she is a superb practitioner of this game, there are none better at it here in NZ than Helen (and, probably, hardly anyone elsewhere in the world).



I have watched Helen closely, over the years, as she expertly plays this Game of Politics, and I really have to admire her expertise. She knows The Game just so well, she knows exactly when to bluff it out, when to ruthlessly cut loose a colleague who has become a liability (ask Dover Samuels about that one!), and when to cut and run. Just like the Kenny Rogers song about “The Gambler”, she knows the golden rules of her particular craft, politics, including to always appear confident and poised no matter what, how to denigrate an opponent, how to manipulate and to bend the truth to just short of breaking point, and so on and on, she knows it all so well. However, does this mean that she is the best person for her job, to be the Prime Minister of NZ?





Herein lies the dilemma. The essential question is..... does the person who is best at playing “The Game” make the best leader? Is this best “player” the best person to make the tough decisions, to front up when the going gets tough, to always act in the overall best interests of society as a whole, to be able to build consensus within the diverse sectors of a society? Is a high level of skill at The Game the attribute that we really need in our leaders?



Because, what has been happening, for hundred of years now, is that, by the very nature of politics, this is what we have had, like it or not, at least within so-called “democracies” like ours. Generally, the most skillful players have won the contest to become our leaders. Here in NZ the names Rob Muldoon (in his own brutal style), and David Lange come to mind. Also Norman Kirk, and Keith Holyoake, in his rustic way. Some have it to a lesser degree, or in a less obvious way, like Jim Bolger, who was for many year underestimated by most people. And some just do not really have it, people like Bill Rowling (despite being a very likeable guy, and actually a very capable leader in his own way), and more recently, Don Brash did not really have it, he was in some ways too honest, like when he said that he could not shout down Helen Clark in a TV debate, because it was against his beliefs to shout at a woman. (I really admired him for that, although I strongly disagreed with most of his policy beliefs, I admired him as a man.)



In this current campaigning, here in NZ, the voting public is closely watching the performance of John Key, the new leader of the National Party (which is our main so-called center-right party, and is virtually poised to win the election, after nine years of government under the so-called center-left Labour Party). The voters are watching John closely, to see if he has the “X Factor”, to see if he can weave a spell that they can buy into. To see how well he “plays the game”. Is he a new Master Player, or is he just another pretender, like Jenny Shipley was? If they decide that, after all, he is just a pretender, they will punish him severely, by witholding their support, even if many of them have come to despise Helen, just like they punished Bill Rowling despite their hatred for Muldoon. (I am speaking here of that mythical creature, the “middle-ground floating voter”, not the core bedrock supporters.)



So, the question is, are we being well served by our present well-worn habit of always judging our leaders, and wanna-be leaders, mainly on the criteria of “How well does he play The Game?” Certainly, I used to think that we are. That the most important thing for any politician with high asperations was their ability at The Game of Politics. For all that decade of the 1980's when I lived and breathed politics, as a very active activist, I believed this. For all that time, David Lange was my super-hero. (OK, I have let it slip, it was the Labour Party that I was a fanatical activist with!) However, in the years since I walked away from that former life, from 1990, my views have changed. I can still admire the political skills of someone like Helen, watching her perform at her craft, she really is a Master Practitioner, and her offsider, her “Deputy Sherrif”, Michael Cullen, is also a master performer, in his position, as deputy (but, probably not as the actual leader, and he knows this).



I could go on at some length, analyzing this to death, however I will not do that. I will move on to say this.... in any society, there comes a time when the time has come for a really big change. For a long time, the people of the society go about their day-to-day business, almost in a way like they are sleep-walking, with a particular set of what could be called “tribal belief systems”, and this serves that society well. I could quote many examples of this kind of thing, where society did not change much for a very long time, often for thousands of years, and then, quite quickly, it all changed. A good example is how, in many Western countries, and certainly here in NZ, around the late 1970's, into the early 80's, it suddenly changed that it was no longed totally unacceptable for a man and a woman to live together, openly, as sexual partners, a “couple”, without being married to each other. It all happened within a few years, and now a man can have a “partner”, rather than a “wife”, and most people do not care about that. But, believe me, that was not always the case!



Of course, for a long time before that paradigm shift, there have always been a few “pioneers”, the people who have defied the accepted conventions, disobeyed the rules, sometimes at great personal cost. That has always been the case, and in the above-quoted case a famous example was Lord Nelson, who left his wife and took up with Lady Hamilton, though in a manner that was somewhat restrained by the rules of the time, way back in 1800 or so. Sometimes, it is the very rich (or the very poor, who nobody cares about), or the very famous (like Lord Nelson) who can get away with breaking the rules, and good on them, all of them!





The point that I am leading up to here is, somewhat obviously, that I believe that it is just about time for another one of those huge changes (societal paradigm shifts) to come into being, just as quickly as previous shifts. And, I would love to do my little bit to help this change along! It is now time for our society (or, at least, a good part of it) to grow up politically. To see through the charade of “The Game”. To come to the realization that the “happily ever after” of the politicians really is an illusion. To take responsibility for themselves, for their own wellbeing and happiness, and to cease to buy into the false god of political promises.



To begin to assess their political leaders, and potential leaders, on a different basis. Not on their ability to play The Game, but on a much more difficult to judge set of criteria, which will include in-depth consideration of the policies of the politicians, and their parties, and in-depth consideration of what kind of people they are, do they have the real skills needed, and are they really trustworthy and motivated by a determination to always act for the highest good for society as a whole. Also, are they emotionally mature, emotionally secure, and stable people?



There is this thing in politics in the USA, where to be a so-called “Washington Insider”, is now considered, by many average-Joe voters, to be a big negative for a politician. Many years of service as a senator, for example, is now seen by many as a handicap rather than an asset, in an aspiring presidential candidate. That was a big factor for John McCain in his choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate (there were other factors as well, which I really must not go into now!). The Washington Insider is their way of saying “Master of the Game of Politics”, it is virtually the same thing. It is now a big turn-off for many people.



It is also, I believe, becoming a big turn-off for many voters here in NZ. They do not realize it yet, it is mainly subconscious for most of them. I believe it is a factor in many people's antipathy towards Helen Clark. It is not so much her policies, it is not so much the personalities, it is that they are sick of her antics in playing The Game. They are growing tired of being spectators, and (once every three years), of being the referee, of that particular game. They would like to change the rules.



However, they do not really know what they want in place of the current Game. They know, instinctively, most of them, that it is no use just turning to another player of The Game, like John Key, or even Winston Peters, for the change that they desire. The Game will just continue on, and it is The Game itself that they are growing tired of, not just the face of the captain of the winning team. They are also all mixed up about the real nature of how a democracy works. Many of them equate The Game with democracy, they think that the two are inherently linked together, inseperable twins, and that any possible alternative must be some alternative to democracy itself, and they know from their experience that all known alternatives, like military dictatorship, or so-called communism, are not what they are looking for! This is an excuse for the low expectations that many people have regarding their politicians that is often voiced, that old one that “democracy is a very limited system, but any alternative is much worse!”



Well, I have news for them! There is an answer to this dilemma. Just change the criteria that we use to evaluate our politicians. Stop rewarding the people who are the most skillful practitioners of The Game, with the minor variation of eventually becoming bored with the old Master Player (which is currently happening to Helen), and looking for the excitement of a new face, like John Key. Use some other criteria altogether. Do not assess John Key's leadership potential by the old rules of The Game. Change the rules!



Which brings me pretty much back to where I started this blog, which of our current politicians are the ones who are most worthy of our support? (And it's all a matter of degree, as always, none is likely to be totally perfect). Which ones are most likely to be ready to opt out of The Game, and to lead us forward under new rules?



Well, you decide for yourself. That's what democracy is all about, after all. I have pretty well decided, after my experience of seeing and hearing Russell Norman last night. As well as being extremely knowledgeable, well briefed, articulate, and patient with people asking questions, Russell is also somehow “different” to most of that other breed of politicians. Is this just because he is so new to parliament? Maybe that's a factor. However, I have observed his co-leader, Jeanette Fitzsimons, for a long time, and I believe that she also has, to a good degree, opted out of playing “The Game”, and for that reason, above all others, they will have my support come November the 8th.





What about you? Are you ready for a genuine change, rather than just a rearrangement of the deck chairs? Are you ready to see through the hype and all the claims and counter-claims? Are you ready to be part of a grass-roots groundswell towards a more mature society? I know that I am ready, however, you make your own choice.





If you would like to contact me for any reason, including a desire to post comments on this blog, you are welcome to me.

Click to follow me on Twitter