It certainly appears that New Zealand is facing a number of concurrent, and often interconnected crises. Worrying signs are evident, and worsening, in education, the economy, the health sector, race relations, crime, media, governance, adherence to (and respect for) due process, freedom of speech, parenting, and so on. The speed at which this is happening has taken most by surprise. The dominos seem to be falling in all directions, and with astonishing speed.
A crisis can be aptly defined as a point of
difficulty, danger or decision. This is a relatively good definition, because
it contains within it a sort of escalating hierarchy of imperatives (or calls
to action). If we apply this definition the word “crisis” seems a helpful
description of where we are at, or at least where we might be heading.
And maybe the word danger is not as hyperbolic as some might suggest.
We can point to specific litmus events as evidence
that something is going terribly wrong. Race-based surgical waiting
lists, proposed (draconian) changes to resource management, co-governance, the
revolving door on cabinet, nepotism, persistent incursions into free speech,
the shocking state of our education system, critical race and gender theory in
schools, social dislocation, the growing influence of gangs, escalating crime,
ram raids, an obsession with climate change and wealth redistribution (with the
latter freighted with a fair amount of resentment), and a pervading sense of
disillusionment, as well as anger. We might even add the ubiquitous
potholes to the list. This state of things could not have been foreseen
five years ago.
We also know intuitively that things are not right
when the words of politicians, the pronouncements of academics, and the
incantations of media, do not match what people in the street are
experiencing. No matter what they are saying, we know what we see, hear,
and experience, and we remember that it was not always like this. In the
mists of this unfolding madness, it isn’t easy to put your finger on what
exactly is happening, why it is happening, how and where it started, and
what might be done to halt the decline. But we know that things are not
right. And while New Zealand has been governed by probably the most
incompetent and dishonest government in living memory, these crises have been a
long time coming.
Root causes can be elusive, sometimes because they
conflict with a strongly held opinion, or a prevailing narrative, so we deny
them, and sheet causality elsewhere. Oftentimes we look in the wrong
places, simply because we have lost our confidence in common sense, and
inherited knowledge and wisdom. We can be incredulous that, while effects
look complex, tangled, and difficult to define, causes can be right under our
noses.
With this in mind, I believe that a compelling case
can be put that the ultimate crisis in New Zealand, and in the contemporary
West more generally, is a crisis of virtue, and, in particular, a crisis of
genuine (not contrived or superficial) responsibility. There is a very
real sense in which an increasing number of people no longer have a sense of
responsibility, or duty, toward anything outside of, or beyond, themselves and
their immediate sphere of interest.
Not too many generations ago it was a given that
employees, as a general rule, knew they were responsible for the quality and
output of their work, for the good name of the company for which they worked,
for an honest days work. And equally employers for the well-being of
their employees.
Not too many generations ago parents generally
believed they were responsible for the children they brought into the world,
for teaching them to respect others, to abide by rules, and to aim for
something noble.
It was not too many generations ago that mowing the
elderly neighbour’s lawn, for no reward, was more virtuous than taking a day
off school to wave placards, or to look up from a device to give someone else a
seat on a bus.
Not too many generations ago journalists felt a duty
to report both sides of a story, to present information rather than their
opinions, and politicians felt a sense of responsibility for those who elected
them, which even overrode their personal ambition and blind loyalty to ideology
or party.
Not too long ago most people accepted their responsibility
to respect those from different backgrounds or with different opinions, even if
they vehemently disagreed with them, they had a right to call things how they
saw them.
Not too long ago there was virtue in telling the
truth.
That is not to say things were perfect, that virtue
was universally and consistently applied in all, or even most, cases, such
things are always a work in progress. But it is simply to say that it was
there as a yardstick and as a counterbalance to the overt assertion of rights
alone. It persisted as an ideal, an abstraction of what good citizenship
meant. While the wisdom of earlier generations is often viewed with
condescension, as contaminated with racism and privilege, compared with the
tribalism of today it bears the trappings of a more civilised and enlightened
age.
In contemporary New Zealand, responsibility to duty,
and to others, is not celebrated as openly as it once was, while assertion of
rights is everywhere evident. We have institutions designed specifically to
teach and safeguard rights (as opposed to responsibilities). From the
family, through our educational institutions, young people (and not so young
people) are armed with an encyclopaedic knowledge of their rights. Rights
to disregard rules that do not suit, to question and challenge without end, to
subordinate all considerations to personal ambition, to dismiss the wisdom of
those who have gone before, and to enjoy, without reflection or gratitude, the
fruits of other's labours.
To aid in this process myriad organisations exist to
ensure, often selectively, whose rights need to be prioritised, and even
encoded into legislation. The Human Rights Commission, the Race Relations
Office, the Waitangi Tribunal, Ministries of Women’s and Pacific Affairs, Rainbow
organisations, Workers Rights organisations etc etc. I am not saying
that these organisations do not add value, although some clearly do not, I am
saying that an undue emphasis on rights, devoid of responsibility, of personal
effort, and sometimes of truth, have contributed to our rapid deterioration,
and that of the West generally.
By contrast, few organisations exist today to promote
the concept of responsibility.
In schools, teachers cannot interview students on
serious matters without their parent being present, cannot search a student’s
bag, restrain or isolate a violent student, or even insist that a dress code be
upheld. In many schools, it is now a sin to genuinely celebrate
excellence and hard work, for fear of its impact on those less excellent or
hard-working. Student advocacy makes their rights paramount in every situation,
despite the message that this sends.
Fairly recently New Zealanders were advised by poverty
action advocates that everyone has a right to a house, not a right to an income
that would make a house a possibility, but a right to a house, period.
Several generations have been taught they have a right to things that others
have worked for because of the actions or inactions of others, sometimes many
generations ago. The welfare state, the treaty industry, and fiscal
policy have created a dependent underclass with no hope but to lean upon the
state. And it suits the state to keep things this way because this is
where it gets its power. It is the state now that determines what is
right, what views may be expressed, what its citizenry might think, and the
price that should be paid for not playing the game.
But It can, and should, be argued that rights
and responsibilities are flip sides of the same coin, they are derivative of
each other, dependent on each other, and have meaning only in respect of each
other. Person B’s rights are person A’s responsibility, and person A’s
rights are person B’s responsibility. This is a two-way street. But
to too many people, rights are their business, and responsibilities are the
business of somebody else. An endless tidal wave of rights has deafened
countless New Zealanders to their responsibility to put shoulder to the wheel,
and to assist others in doing the same. It is far easier to take than it
is to give. And to take until there is nothing of value left to
give.
Postmodern relativism and cultural Marxism are
undermining the virtue that is the foundation of all thriving societies.
The former through dismissal of the collective wisdom of generations, and the
latter through the constant denigration of those who build up, in favour of
those who break down. The former for its arrogance, the latter for its
vengeance. The French Revolution failed because it exalted rights without
responsibility. The American Revolution succeeded because the founding
fathers knew that the rights enshrined in the new republic would be sustained
only when buttressed by a sense of duty (responsibility) to community and
republic. In so doing they created, in spite of obvious imperfections,
the most extraordinary and influential republic in the history of the
world.
It is much easier to understate than to overstate the
predicament we face. We know intuitively that New Zealand is at a turning
point.
While it is comforting to know that cultural Marxism
carries the seeds of its own destruction, because eventually it runs out of
enemies, and then turns in on itself, what will be lost in the process, and how
much of that will be regained, and at what price?
There will be readers who will consider this an
overstatement of the risks ahead. I would say not. New Zealanders
do not value sufficiently what they have had, because they do not realise how
much it cost, how quickly it can be lost, and how bad the alternatives
are.
Nietzche, Jung, Orwell and Huxley foresaw a time when
people would no longer worship the paradigms, and institutions of old, but the
state instead. They would no longer be guided by a conscience”,
undergirded with a sense of duty and responsibility to others, but would be
mirror images of the state, a state more than keen to take from them the burden
of speech and thought, and replace it with รค country in which “peace is war,
freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength.
Perhaps in microcosm, in the machinations of our
present cabinet, we can see what we are all destined to become, as happy
citizens living in the “kinder” New Zealand that we were promised nearly six
years ago!
Caleb Anderson, a graduate history, economics, psychotherapy and theology, has been an educator for over thirty years, twenty as a school principal.
4 comments:
Brilliant essay. It deserves wider circulation.
Absolutely agree with this author. I think my generation born in the 70s were the last generation to know freedom.
Its not only NZ at a turning point. Every western democracy is being destroyed from within by design. To build back better!! This is the NWO Agenda 2030 in play and lockstep throughout the west to achieve a 'One World Government'. The NWO globalists are determined, through whatever means necessary, to achieve two goals in the near term: the assignment of a trackable digital identity/QR Code to every human being, followed by the rollout of a globally recognized digital currency.
Replacing God by the state as the source of authority and truth. Unbelievably this is what we were told. The Christian presence in the parliamentary protests last year would have hardened the resolve by Jacinda to refuse to acknowledge the protesters. This is so Apocalyptic. Progressivism's hated of and unrelenting attack for decades on traditional values and morality, has resulted in the nightmare we now have.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.