David Cormack
patreon
Cynicism in spades
🕑 Added 2022-06-12 22:18:15 +0000 UTCGangs. Gangs. Gangs. Gangs. Poors. Gangs. Crims. Extremists. It's all gangs.
National announced it would be getting tough on gangs. Because National is tough on crime you see. TOUGH. ON. CRIME. And when you're tough on crime, well then you're a good government. Because crime is bad, so we should be tough on it right?
It's this sort of basic thought that is endemic among, not just National, but most of our politicians.
But at the moment, National is winning hands-down on cynicism. It first became super apparent in a speech given at a regional National Party conference by Luxon. He said that the cost of living crisis would sweep National to power. He didn't actually have a plan to address it, and he was almost gleeful that it was here because, hey, whatever it takes to get power eh?
But this cynicism pales in comparison to National's gangs announcement from the weekend. Their plan to get tough on gangs? Ban patches, ban gangs from being able to gather in public, and ban gang members from fraternising with anyone. Also make it harder for gang members to get guns.
Scorn for the policies have poured in from everywhere. A gang leader was quick out of the blocks to say this was dumbassery. But you'd think that was an advertisement for the policies. Harry Tam is a life member of the mongrel mob, but he's also in charge of an agency that sets out to engage with hard to reach communities to make it better for them. Gangs are one such group.
But then a former National MP, Chester Borrows, spoke out against the policies. He said they were nothing but headline grabbers that achieved precisely jack shit. Chester was an associate Minister of Justice and Social Development. He's also a former cop. And currently sits on the parole board. Dude might know one or two things. Certainly more than say a guy who used to be CE of an airline.
Then the CEO of InternetNZ said National's plan to monitor gang social media was also unworkable.
There has not been a single person with credibility on the issue come out in favour of the policies. It's nothing but red meat. It sounds good in theory but actually achieves nothing.
And this is where National has got itself. It isn't coming up with new ideas, or imaginative solutions for contemporary problems, it's just falling back on the same old bullshit. Tax cuts and harsh on gangs. And this might be popular, but that doesn't mean it's right.
All over the world, tough on crime policies have been found to fail. So they're not actually tough on crime at all. They're tough on individuals and that then actually makes it worse for crime. National knows this too, by the way. Sir Peter Gluckman, the Key-led-National-Government appointed former science adviser wrote that "successive governments of different political orientations have supported a progressively retributive rather than a restorative approach to crime".
If you really want to address crime, you don't create Strike Force Fashion Police to arrest people for wearing gang insignia, no you address the drivers of crime. Poeple usually commit crime to satisfy a want or a need. That is sometimes money, food, drink, drug, whatever. In order to lower crime you stop people going without. You give them money, food, shelter, mental health treatment, whatever. Do that and you'll find that crime rates plummet.
But not if you're National. No if you're National you'll pretend to be tough on crime. But you're not. We don't need anyone to be tough on crime. We need people to be smart on crime. And National ain't it. And instead of being tough on crime, what National really is, is soft on poverty.
