Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, July 22nd, 2026 - 48 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
One of the toughest and most heartbreaking reports we get before an election is the Salvation Army State of the Nation report. It's due out in the next few days.
So to whet the appetite for that one, check out a retired judge with a very long history of having to deal with criminal proceedings directly caused by extreme poverty point out how cruel the new "move on" legislation really is:
Former judge says proposed move on orders are careless and callous | RNZ
The Summary Offences Amendment Bill should be abandoned by the government.
Judges hate it and the police hate it.
Anybody with a brain accepts that moving people on just moves the problem to another place and makes it harder for the homeless to claw their way out of their awful situation of having to sleep on the streets.
Surely there are enough rational National MP’s with a moral compass that will vote this bill down?
Surely there are enough rational National MP’s with a moral compass that will vote this bill down?
Having a moral compass would disqualify them from being a National MP in the first place.
Apparently leftist nirvana can be achieved by cancelling elections:
As someone who always viewed Reagan as a dinosaur, I naturally supported the Sandinistas. Sad to see them end up so pathetic. Is socialism inherently corrupt? I doubt it. More likely the flaw is in human nature.
I believe that many people see ethics as something of academic interest-only, as something unnecessarily complicated or simply unnecessary full-stop, as something superfluous that can be ignored at little risk, particularly economic-financial and thus political risk. I think this is a wilful misunderstanding.
Or asked in a slightly different way, who am I and what kind of person do I want to be?
The same questions around genetic engineering could and should be asked around AI, for example. The latter seems more relevant and pertinent because it impacts more directly on our jobs and the ways we interact with each other and the world. However, the underlying principles are the same, as are our values, even when we don’t [fully] realise it or simply don’t want to acknowledge it.
https://newsroom.co.nz/2026/07/22/nz-gene-tech-law-rewrite-has-a-gaping-ethics-gap/
Public support for the various political parties and their ethical positions should serve as an indication of where our ethics lie and what we want for our future.
You would think so, wouldn’t you, but I don’t think this is necessarily the case. There are many competing narratives/stories that are often accepted without thinking and asking questions. Often, these pertain single-issue problems that ‘resonate’ and create the right (and desired) ‘feel’ or ‘vibe’. Our real values are not feels/emotions, they can make us feel uncomfortable at times, they can cause friction and conflict even, with ourselves and/or with others, and they can take strength [of conviction], courage, and integrity when tested/challenged. Yet, people tend to hide behind excuses of not having the ‘luxury’ of time, energy, the means (e.g., money, IQ/education, networks, age and/or health), etcetera. So, public support for various political parties, often measured as opinion polls that greatly reduce it down to aggregate numbers, may not even be a poor proxy for where our ethics lie and what we want for our future and potentially be quite misleading, which might explain some of the ‘disgruntlement’ in/of the electorate. This can’t be fobbed off [easily] as post-modernism and subjectivity, in my opinion.
"You would think so, wouldn’t you…"
Well, no, I wouldn't.
How then, do we test a population to find its ethical base?
What happens when, upon testing, we are appalled by what we find?
I had to think hard about this question and I’m not sure I got a satisfactory or sufficient answer.
I think what you’re asking is whether the relatively fixed ethics base is congruent with the population’s present ethics, which is quite dynamic, particularly in a pluralistic society. I thought of this analogy: a house is a fixed framework built on a solid base, and there are the occupants who live in it. Over time, occupancy and occupants change, there’s wear & tear, and repair & maintenance is required (aka upkeep), including preventative maintenance. It takes effort to ensure the house & contents are fit for purpose – at times a major renovation is warranted. To extend this analogy, we can apply the same approach to the neighbourhood, local community, and then even nation-wide.
Constant checking, through feedback, formal & informal research, reporting (through local media and institutions such as primary healthcare, schools, and the likes, for example), and careful observation are necessary to determine the congruence at any given time.
I think the above process never stops and never finishes. If/when there’s a widening gap that appals us or some of us, then action should be taken through formal and informal channels (and general elections are just one tool). In short, this is politics, with sound political and democratic processes in place that are effective and ideally, efficient. This can escalate, if you like, to political activism and movements although the latter tends to focus on single issues and peter out without systemic & structural support.
HTH
PS the above raises many questions. For example, is our society sufficiently equipped to run those ‘self-tests’ with deep cuts into humanities research, cuts in financial support & funding of many institutions, the corporatisation & centralisation of many institutions, the narrow focus on the central economy with its aggregate stats, and the perennial question where/who the duty & responsibility should lie/carry (i.e., Left vs Right, state vs private sector & markets).
Minnow party feature here: https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/22-07-2026/the-little-parties-coiling-their-springs-for-election-2026
Women ought to support their rights, and a political party is the way to do so, but legendary kiwi compacency infects them as much as it infects kiwi men. Way to change this game: any current female MP can switch to using that brand.
Too late? Probably not. First woman to do so with a viable established reputation has a good chance of using female common interests intelligently in our current context, and thereby pulling the votes of enough women to make history…
"“We are women and men who believe in democracy, equality and biological reality…"
Can't imagine why they attracted so little support…
Biological reality … big call! Biology provides such a diverse range of examples…
Mystifying really. Faith-based views of biology are often infotaining, so you'd expect their combination to work okay. Faith-based views of anything in reality tend to typify people. For instance, faith that the sun will rise in the east next morn.
Likewise faith in democracy, as exemplified by Trump. Persil washes whiter, as the old saying goes, so we get consumer consciousness.
As for equality, could be that's the tricky part. You & I can have faith in the establishment's ability to reside via inertia, but barbarians seem to be milling about the gates in a vaguely ominous way. Someone may notice a lack of equality in wealth and income, but better not spook the sheeple by saying so.
Biology provides a lot of things. However human biology shows that we have two sexes male and female and that we reproduce in an anisogamous fashion. And mentions of "intersex" gets you laughed at.
Mammalian biology says something different.
The significant difference between us and other mammals seems to be … soul.
Does that count for nothing with you?
Our souls arise in part from our embodiment, and the fundamentals of that are binary sex. It's more obvious for women perhaps.
I would have thought lesbian women would have a broader perspective.
Given their sexuality is not a product of their biological sex.
how is sexuality not a product of biological sex?
Having sexuality is a human condition sure, but you do seem to be misdirecting away from the point I made.
If you need clarification, there was a time when homosexuals argued they should not be discriminated against for being born that way.
There is no still biological sex evidence they were born that way.
it's likely I am missing your point.
That doesn't mean sexuality isn't based in biology. If it's not biological, what is it?
By which I mean, homosexual people are same sex attracted. That is the literal definition. They are not attracted to gender roles (or they might be in addition to the sex attraction). There are other people for whom sexuality seems to be something else, but I would argue for those people it is also additional not foundational.
Is there any evidence that their same sex attraction is related to their biology?
There is limited evidence in genetics for this. People have thus looked at hormones in the womb and other factors as determinants, but largely it is also inconclusive. They have looked at upbringing influences and not found anything.
Thus there seems to be no ability to cite a nature or nurture aspect in the formative years.
It is of a complexity, as to how people identify and relate to others (as to their nature and to whom they are and cohort to and in what way).
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/there-is-no-gay-gene-there-is-no-straight-gene-sexuality-is-just-complex-study-confirms
I guess it depends on what you mean by ‘related to’.
Same sex attraction is, and can only be, attraction to biological sex. Biological sex is biological. Therefore same sex attraction is biological.
Whether that means it’s hardwired in from conception, or happens somewhere along the line, I don’t know. But by the time humans reach an age of active sexuality, homosexuality is 1) unchanging and 2) based in biology.
It's interesting how advances in neuroscience have shifted the pendulum more towards explanations rooted in biology and less in beliefs around phenomena that are culturally learned.
The genetic view takes in animal intersex as basis. This psych portal has a fairly recent stat on humanity: https://www.psychologytoday.com/nz/blog/governing-behavior/202204/animal-biology-is-not-binary
Intersex is an outdated term, the accurate term now is differences of sexual development (or disorders of sexual development). There is no such thing as between the sexes. Sex is the reproductive strategy of a species. In humans that is binary: people with large gametes mate with people with small gametes in order to reproduce and perpetuate the species. Such binary sex is very common in nature.
DSDs are what they now say on the tin: differences in how those two sexes develop. Almost all people with DSDs are a difference in development of male or female. There is no third sex. If there was a third sex, women would be able to get pregnant without men.
Most people with DSDs are unaware of the fact. Some are aware and it’s a significant medical issue. Understanding biological sex and the binary nature of it is essential to those people getting the medical treatment and social support they need.
Culture is also informative.
How post suffrage emancipation impacted on fashion
https://www.lofficielbaltic.com/en/mode/androgyny-in-fashion-how-gender-fluidity-redefines-contemporary-style
One might note the earlier 19th C knickerbocker approach for women who were engaged in physical activity (it influenced for a time the outfits of males in sports).
Trying for some basic sense, stability and humanity in politics – good on you for trying to spell it out to all the peeps. I have decided that the new name for the Going party is The Guardian Party. attempting to hold good NZAO together, stop the financial neolib, freemarketer locusts from stripping us of all value accrued from past Kiwi battlers iwi and tauiwi, workers. traders, mothers and carers, and hold it safe. Along with our basic rights to-be while we are being, and to go when we want. So what about it eh?
Just to keep my spirits up – TQ grey and
(A variety of responses from typical? undemonstrative? kiwis! And on seing the amount of code that goes into producing those faces – is that making too much work for the site? Let me know and I’ll not repeat.)
Have you read, or heard about the publication of a contribution by Jo Freeman in Ms Magazine?
No, but Google reported her influence half a century back, and then I found this: https://msmagazine.com/author/jofreeman/
Also, an origin here: https://bibbase.org/network/publication/freeman-thetyrannyofstucturelessness-1970
Then from wiki…
So do you have a take to share on how this is relevant nowadays? I did glimpse a salient dimension; from reference to implicit power relations between women.
Really, just google my sentence and get.
AI
AI
"Trashing: The Dark Side of Sisterhood"
The link to the article
https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/trashing.htm
The issue
She wanted democratic structures, she was trashed by those with their own agenda.
It is hard to stay united with common cause.
The reasons why those other women reacted negatively ought to be considered, to get a balanced view. Naturally, born with the midpoint of Libra rising, I would say that. Yet that doesn't mean it isn't true.
Sure ignore this
if it is inconvenient to your narrative.
Consider Henry Makow vs feminism as a source of the current era of toxic masculinity & related Christian nationalism in MAGA land USA.
What does that say about the tendency of patriarchy to authoritarianism.
I was impressed by that quote and agree it seems the key feature. I'm not promoting a narrative, just an holistic view. To be fully informed, one must encompass all salient features…
A useful lesson on the conundrum of political centrism.
https://theconversation.com/nzs-political-centre-is-an-electoral-strategy-not-a-set-of-beliefs-287771
FWIW, I’m getting confused by the mixed messages from and about TOP. For example, the major donor to the party who claims he’s not ‘politically interested’ yet donated large and became a member of the board. I mean, I like some of the things he’s saying but it doesn’t quite stack up for me, which is the same feeling I have of the party.
https://newsroom.co.nz/2026/07/20/serato-co-founder-was-not-politically-interested-but-is-now-opportunitys-biggest-donor/
I’m not the only making up my mind on this. Emily Writes “loathe[s] centrists” and “TOP piss[es her] off”.
https://www.emilywrites.co.nz/should-you-vote-for-the-opportunity-party/
There are a few other issues with TOP that bother me and I’ve been thinking about writing a Post on it, but I’m still on the fence on that too.
Please do write your post. I'm anxious about support for TOP in the same way that I was anxious about individuals from my various communities falling for the anti-vax clap-trap back then; lovely, sincere folk, not quite able to push through to full understanding of the bigger picture 🙂
I think I understand your anxiety to a point but during the pandemic there was an awful lot of uncertainty (and fear), mis-, and dis-information. I don’t quite see the equivalence or similarity with TOP!?
When do we ever achieve “full understanding of the bigger picture”? We often rely on hearsay, our peers (pressure), (social) conditioning, and heuristics (e.g., common sense) to make our choices & decisions believing we have agency and are autonomous to do so and doing so. Arguing that we’re often fooling ourselves and we’re living & acting in delusionary ways (aka sheeple) doesn’t seem to go down well; very few people are truly open-minded enough to change their minds upon new info (data, facts, research, evidence, etc.). Frankly, I cannot blame anybody for such behaviour because it’s intrinsically human (nature).
Frankly, I think you’re wasting your time & energy on being anxious about other people being sucked into rabbit holes. Whilst worrying about others falling into trap(ping)s we may accidentally step into a dog turd or get shat on by a seagull (or sheeple).
A major reason for writing stuff is to get my (own) head around it – there’s no shortage of topics/issues but writing a Post is hard work [for me].
Well, incog, I'm in fact, "lightly anxious": that is, watchful but not really caring about what others do; they make their own beds and will have to lie in them.
I think you should keep writing and posting, for whatever reason. Yours are seed crystals and can form the basis of structures of thought that wouldn't otherwise see the light of day and perhaps you'll gain insight into your own inner life and direction. In any case, your thoughts are interesting to others and that's the way of it; thanks.
Thank you for the encouraging words. I’ll definitely keep commenting here.
I happened to read the following this morning:
https://theconversation.com/how-americas-newspapers-lost-their-voice-285126
That’s the main other reason I write here at all, for myself first, for others second.
Ian Powell is another one who’s getting his head around TOP and who’s far ahead of me. He gives a nice overview of major media viewpoints to help him shake or nod his head.
https://politicalbytes.blog/2026/07/21/for-whom-the-opportunity-bell-tolls/ [HT to Scoop: https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL2607/S00059/for-whom-the-opportunity-bell-tolls.htm ]
[link fixed]
Thanks, that does seem a worthy appraisal (the Scoop link went 404 on me). My fave sentence:
The downside of elitism is popular default to elites in the control system, but the darwinian view alerts us to a natural elite in the adjacent-possible realm. All who are suitable role models of adaptivity currently. Since they self-select subliminally, most such folk don't realise this dimension of their personal reality.
Insofar as taking advantages of opportunities is a tried & true evolutionary behavioural stance for humans, one could argue that the opportunists have ample upside influence potential.
Oh, and I also meant to point out that the best way to handle media questions about policy gaps is to refer the media to `god of the gaps' theory. Faith in whichever god's ability to fill in or paper over gaps has long been helpful. Folks, when using that faith as their operating stance, feel immensely reassured. Paranoia ebbs.
Watch the video for a masterclass in succinct speechmaking. Zohran Mamdani promised in his campaign to arrest Netanyahu as an ICC war criminal if he set foot in NY.
Mamdani hits every head of every nail in his denouncement of Netanyahu here.
https://bsky.app/profile/mayor.nyc.gov/post/3mr722e77z22z
Tamaki turkeys have a realistic prospect of voting for Christmas: https://newsroom.co.nz/2026/07/22/staying-pink-or-turning-blue-again-the-battle-for-tamaki/
Jumped the waka, eh? Edgy chap then. Opportunist, too, so we know the waka he'll jump into after ACT doesn't work for him. Lux senses a real threat though.
Big guns, eh? Blue-rinse turkeys voting for Christmas must be a real threat. Full-marks to the Nats for playing the ethnic card though – sure to bamboozle Nat autovoters! "I must conform to the prescription, but it always meant no foreigners. What's going on??"
Their Auckland Central candidate (ex university there) in 2023 – then vs a Green MP.
Born in India but early to Singapore, then Napier for High School (probably knows our beaches better than those of the Malabar Coast).
The politics
*This time to a winnable seat + Indian electorate party list vote.
*an Indian supporting Nationals KiwiSaver policy in Muldoon's old seat
*large Kiwi Saver Funds are required for investment in India (promises made in the FTA)
(Peters is Muldoon era)(an only citizens voting policy impacts mostly on Indian residents).
It has the marginal utility of a message to DS.
Hopefully the Burnham regime will put an end to this political persecution
In Britain, three things are verboten: pensioners, poetry, and expressing support for Palestinians, Flouting all three of these rules, this pensioner was arrested for reading a poem by Jewish poet Michael Rosen….
https://x.com/DmodosCutter/status/2078844635569394006
Hay Dennis is luxon gonna go after Epsom to or are national still feeding the parasite??
Open a vein, let the parasite suck deep…