Could it be Fonterra? Or Fletcher Building? Or Air New Zealand that tells us how the airline "has committed to a target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Our Sustainability Framework [works to] decarbonize our operations, reduce our impact & support our people & communities". Talk about green-washing. But the Prize surely has to go to the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand. How come?
First, the past decade the Greens have revealed their main concern is global climate change and jumping on Greta Thunberg's bandwagon. Its net zero to meet our Paris, Doha, Kyoto, or some other foreign places world carbon targets, even as emissions soar in many nations like India and China. But did the Greens raise a protest when tons of sewerage were poured in Auckland Harbour this past week due to overflowing storm-water caused by heavy rain? Has the quality of freshwater rivers and lakes improved in NZ this past decade? No, the Greens have barely cared a jot about such local matters which are top of our day-to-day concerns. They just call themselves "Green" because that name gets more votes amongst young people. The more times the Party screams things like, "United Nations Global Environmental Development Goals" the Greens hook a few more children & convince them that the world is about to end. Yes the Greens have become NZ's Chief Green-washers.
As for a related green-washing issue, the party has gone and added onto the end of the Green brand-name the words, "Aotearoa". Why? To hook the Māori vote away from Labour & Te Pāti Māori, of course. Its green-washing on a grander scale than even the pretense that the Greens are interested in local environmental concerns over saving the planet. Why? Where the Green Party stands on moral issues & traditional family values would make most Māori & Pasifika families run for the hills and hide. Those stances scare the pants of anyone who holds dear to the values & beliefs of their ancestors. Together with Arthur Grimes, a former Reserve Bank Chair, I once wrote a paper about such values. Nearly 80% of Māori say its one's duty to respect one's parents and nearly 70% say that "abortion is never justified". I can't imagine Green Leader Swarbrick has the faintest sympathy for such views. Green Party Aotearoa NZ is Green washing on indigenous affairs, as well as the environment.
Lets finish our argument that the Greens deserve their Green-washing Award with how they are (not) helping the poor people of Gaza. Party Leader Swarbrick loudly chanted, "from the river to the sea". Its a line which supports the "One State Solution" in the region, supported by Iran. That is, take over all of Israel, call it Palestine and have it governed by Palestinians. Of course, the consequence would be a war in which millions of people would perish. But that's not our point. The point is: what has our Green Party ever done for the Gazans? We're back to Greenwashing. Greenwashing to get the votes of young impressionable Kiwis out of school who want to save the world. Good on our youngsters for that wish. But not good-on-the-Greens for pretending they're making a difference to our local environment, helping Māori & Pasifika in any meaningful way, let alone providing a plan for peace in the Middle East. Yes, the Prize for Biggest Hypocritical Green-washers of the Decade goes to ... Chloe Swarbrick's PR-Marketing-Comms-lovely-named, Green Party of Aotearoa NZ.
First, the past decade the Greens have revealed their main concern is global climate change and jumping on Greta Thunberg's bandwagon. Its net zero to meet our Paris, Doha, Kyoto, or some other foreign places world carbon targets, even as emissions soar in many nations like India and China. But did the Greens raise a protest when tons of sewerage were poured in Auckland Harbour this past week due to overflowing storm-water caused by heavy rain? Has the quality of freshwater rivers and lakes improved in NZ this past decade? No, the Greens have barely cared a jot about such local matters which are top of our day-to-day concerns. They just call themselves "Green" because that name gets more votes amongst young people. The more times the Party screams things like, "United Nations Global Environmental Development Goals" the Greens hook a few more children & convince them that the world is about to end. Yes the Greens have become NZ's Chief Green-washers.
As for a related green-washing issue, the party has gone and added onto the end of the Green brand-name the words, "Aotearoa". Why? To hook the Māori vote away from Labour & Te Pāti Māori, of course. Its green-washing on a grander scale than even the pretense that the Greens are interested in local environmental concerns over saving the planet. Why? Where the Green Party stands on moral issues & traditional family values would make most Māori & Pasifika families run for the hills and hide. Those stances scare the pants of anyone who holds dear to the values & beliefs of their ancestors. Together with Arthur Grimes, a former Reserve Bank Chair, I once wrote a paper about such values. Nearly 80% of Māori say its one's duty to respect one's parents and nearly 70% say that "abortion is never justified". I can't imagine Green Leader Swarbrick has the faintest sympathy for such views. Green Party Aotearoa NZ is Green washing on indigenous affairs, as well as the environment.
Lets finish our argument that the Greens deserve their Green-washing Award with how they are (not) helping the poor people of Gaza. Party Leader Swarbrick loudly chanted, "from the river to the sea". Its a line which supports the "One State Solution" in the region, supported by Iran. That is, take over all of Israel, call it Palestine and have it governed by Palestinians. Of course, the consequence would be a war in which millions of people would perish. But that's not our point. The point is: what has our Green Party ever done for the Gazans? We're back to Greenwashing. Greenwashing to get the votes of young impressionable Kiwis out of school who want to save the world. Good on our youngsters for that wish. But not good-on-the-Greens for pretending they're making a difference to our local environment, helping Māori & Pasifika in any meaningful way, let alone providing a plan for peace in the Middle East. Yes, the Prize for Biggest Hypocritical Green-washers of the Decade goes to ... Chloe Swarbrick's PR-Marketing-Comms-lovely-named, Green Party of Aotearoa NZ.
Professor Robert MacCulloch holds the Matthew S. Abel Chair of Macroeconomics at Auckland University. He has previously worked at the Reserve Bank, Oxford University, and the London School of Economics. He runs the blog Down to Earth Kiwi from where this article was sourced.
6 comments:
Hear, hear!
To be fair Swarbrick last week brown washed the Rainbow Community in its entirety when she flushed them down the toilet defending Doyle......well done to her.
A vote for Chloe is a vote for....
- legalization of an insidious young brain ruining drug
- support for the genocide of Israelis
- support for an MP parading a child online whilst stating the boy has a male pussy
- Shop lifting... Winston thought it was Chloe running cover in the photo.
- calling people racists but when asked for an example of the racism she is calling out.... can't produce one.
- Expensive discredited green iniatives which only serve to wash taxpayers money and feed it to a select few (EV dealers, the multibillion dollar company Blue steel, etc.)
And don't blame Chloe for her nonsensical, destructive, money wasting time as an MP at our expense.....
BLAME the 10% of NZ idiots who vote for her!
What strikes me is that a pre-requisite of being a Green Party politician is to be a radically socially liberal far leftist. Quite what that has to do with climate change ideology (which is actually being pushed by Big Capital, and is therefore deeply establishmentarian) is anyone's guess.
Second, " ....Swarbrick loudly chanted, "from the river to the sea". Its a line which supports the "One State Solution" in the region, supported by Iran. That is, take over all of Israel, call it Palestine and have it governed by Palestinians. Of course, the consequence would be a war in which millions of people would perish."
Also anyone's guess is how the Palestinian cries of "from the river to the sea" differ in principle in the slightest from the Israeli referent of "from the river to the sea" which instead entails being "....supported by the United States. That is, take over all of Palestine, call it Israel and have it governed by Jews. Of course, the consequence would be a war in which millions of people would perish."
Nice work, and indeed all true! How much more pleasant a place NZ would be to live with an environmentally focused party enjoying 10% of the vote, instead of these woke wastrels? Cleaner rivers, enforcement of vehicle noise emission standards (as distinct from pointless 'carbon' emission restrictions), etc. The use of the word Aotearoa as a marketing ploy is Brown washing or Woke-washing, which would have not much wider appeal than to the existing pool of hapless Green voters.
Let's see if the Greens start screaming about Trump rolling back protection for half of the US national forests.
Just how green are Chloe and friends ?
Is this the first they have heard about this ?
Sure as hell makes a mockery of planting radiata in NZ and locking the timber and CO2 up for ever !
Post a Comment