The monster in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is often mistakenly referred to as "Frankenstein," but the name actually belongs to the scientist who created the monster, Victor Frankenstein. The confusion reflects how the monster’s identity has merged with that of his creator overshadowing the novel's deeper themes about responsibility, creation, and the consequences of unchecked ambition.
But most of all, the misconception underscores a deeper truth: monsters are made, not born. The creature in Shelley's novel is not responsible for his existence. He was created through Victor Frankenstein's ambition and reckless pursuit of scientific knowledge (progress). The monster’s tragic plight stems from the fact that he was brought to life by a man who failed to consider the consequences of his actions. By misidentifying the monster as Frankenstein, we shift the focus away from the creator’s responsibility and place it onto the creation itself, forgetting that the monster’s flaws are a direct result of the neglect and rejection he faced from the very hands that brought him into the world.
The Youth MPs who participated in New Zealand’s Youth Parliament this week serve as a striking example of how society often creates its own "monsters." Just as Victor Frankenstein brought his creation to life without fully considering the consequences, these young pretend MPs are a product of the systems and ideologies that shape them. They are not to blame for their existence, but they are the result of a political and educational culture that has, in many ways, failed them. From the way they are groomed by political movements to the rhetoric they are exposed to, these youth representatives embody the ideals and failures of the adults who created the political grifts they now inhabit. In this sense, they are not the monsters, but the creation of a system that has placed them in roles they might not fully understand or be equipped for. Just like the monster in Frankenstein, they are derided, blamed, and demonised for reflecting the flaws of those who created them when it is the adults who bear the true responsibility for what these young MPs represent.
And my goodness, they are little monsters aren’t they?
This week, media-hungry Youth MPs embodied a sense of entitlement and precociousness that often comes from gaining access to platforms of influence, and being big fishies in small, irrelevant ponds, without having earned the wisdom or life experience to back it up. Many of them, particularly the overtly leftist ones, display an aggressive, bullying demeanour when interacting with peers who hold different perspectives. Instead of engaging in constructive dialogue, they lecture and hector pushing their ideologies with a sense of superiority, belittling those who disagree with them. This isn't just youthful enthusiasm or a desire to make change. It's an unchecked sense of moral authority, where anyone who doesn't align with their worldview is dismissed, silenced, or outright attacked. I wonder where they learned this behaviour. They have not been taught the principles of respectful discourse nor had good faith disagreement and debate modelled for them. They also reflect a broader trend in modern politics: the willingness to use positions of power as a tool for ideological enforcement, rather than a means of fostering genuine debate.
The 2025 New Zealand Youth Parliament attracted the attention of the media over allegations of censorship, sparking debate about the balance between free speech and political neutrality in youth representation. Several Youth MPs have claimed that the Ministry for Youth Development (MYD) edited their speeches to remove criticisms of the government, particularly concerning policies like the Pay Equity Amendment Bill and the Treaty Principles Bill. Emails from the MYD, with subject lines such as "Changes required," instructed Youth MPs to soften language and avoid naming or blaming ministers, citing the need for political neutrality and legal protection. These actions have been perceived by some as an infringement on the Youth MPs' right to express their views freely.
In response, Youth Minister James Meager denied accusations of censorship, stating that the MYD's role was to provide feedback to ensure clarity and to protect Youth MPs from potential legal issues, as they are not covered by parliamentary privilege. This means they are vulnerable to legal consequences of unwise commentary like defamation proceedings, copyright, privacy, contempt of court, or broadcasting standards. He emphasised that the final decision on speech content rested with the Youth MPs themselves. However, the MYD acknowledged that their communication could have been clearer and they accepted that the language used in their emails might have caused confusion.
According to One News:
[Ministry of Youth Development general manager John Robertson] said the Youth Parliament was intended to be non-partisan, and this was explained to participants from the start of their induction.
"Both general debate speeches and youth press gallery contributions are moderated, and we may suggest changes. This is a long-standing practice with Youth Parliament."
He reiterated the ministry's guidance was intended to ensure articles and speeches remained focused on policy rather than party, did not breach defamation, copyright, privacy, or contempt of court laws, followed principles of no naming, no blaming, no shaming, and made no false assertions or claims not backed by fact.1
Media attention was drawn to the matter thanks to the very deliberate and strategic comms of certain Youth MPs including Make It 16’s Thomas Brocherie, Gen Z Aotearoa’s Nate Wilbourne, and theatre kid Lincoln Jones. They publicly declared their intention to deliver unedited versions of their speeches, deeming the edits an attempt to suppress their voices. Brocherie criticised the MYD's approach as "fear-based control," while Jones described the experience as motivating him to pursue a career in politics to advocate for youth voices. It is highly doubtful that a lad who has applied for and won a spot in Youth Parliament has never considered a career in politics.
The Labour Party also weighed in, with hypocrite-in-chief Chris Hipkins arguing that the MYD's actions undermined the purpose of Youth Parliament, which is to provide young people with a platform to express their opinions openly. This is despite the rules being the same as they were in 2022 when his government was in power.
In contrast, other Youth MPs, such as Jerry Wei and Bryn Pierce, defended the MYD's actions, suggesting that the concerns raised were politically motivated and that the edits were standard practice to maintain the event's non-partisan nature. They expressed disappointment over the focus on the censorship debate rather than the substantive issues addressed in the speeches.
The event certainly became a circus with a handful of highly-political and groomed young men playing ringmasters. They have been coached on lobbying, media management, and told they are child prodigies as they have fronted political campaigns for precocious pubescents like Make It 16 and Gen Z Aotearoa. They will have been on alert for any opportunity to grab the mic and grandstand.
Radio New Zealand reported:
Make It 16 co-director and youth MP for the Green Party's Lan Pham, Thomas Brocherie, said it was "deeply ironic" that many of them will not be able to vote in this year's local election "despite being invited to stand up for our communities on a national stage".2
One assumes young Mr Brocherie will be horrified to learn that if he is to do an internship he will not automatically be elevated to the senior leadership team. Nor is he entitled to drive without restrictions when he is on his learner’s license. This is not discrimination.
These kids, especially the activists representing hyper-partisan lobby groups, are the monsters of the left’s making. They are the products of an education in self-righteous rage, intolerance, derision, and cancel culture.
There is video of some of the other Youth MPs attempting to hold their own press conference to present an alternative perspective. Instead of allowing their peers room to speak to the media, the activist kids swamped the media scrum making noise to interrupt. They used intimidation tactics to attempt to silence their opponents. Straight out of the Antifa disruption playbook. It was reminiscent of the Evergreen College mob. It is learned behaviour. They think it is normal to scream over opponents and cast them as not only wrong, but evil.
Watching their behaviour this week reminded me of the bullies that I went to school with. In my day the bullies weren’t the woke political tyrants though. In fact, the eco-warriors and politics nerds were more likely to be bullied. The viciousness of school-aged bullies appears not to have changed even if the demographics have. One only needs to watch the video of the press conference they tried to shut down to realise who the bullies are and who are the bullied. I loathed school for these very dynamics and it is a real shame that an event like Youth Parliament that should be a wonderful experience has devolved into a battleground for bullies.
One News reported:
Bryn Pierce, Youth MP for Andy Foster, said some speeches that other Youth MPs disagreed with were disrupted by walk-outs or repeated points of order.
"That is not an environment where Youth MPs can truly feel safe to share their voice," he said.3
Nastiness aside, it is the sheer egos on these kids that astounds me the most. Utterly unearned self-importance and entitlement. Perhaps it is the natural order of things for older generations to look at the young and think “I was never that bad”, but I do not recall any earlier generation displaying the adamance that not only are their opinions intrinsically valuable, but they are entitled to have them taken seriously. We used to be amused by the audaciousness of youth. We used to roll our eyes knowing that one day they would grow up and realise that their simplistic views do not fit in a complex world. Now we give these inexperienced, unskilled, and unqualified brats the microphone and reassure them that they are wise beyond measure. It is Greta Thunberg Syndrome.
I am quite frankly over being hectored and lectured to by wannabe warriors of the good and great. They should be at school, playing sports (or theatre sports), sneaking alcohol from their parents, and experimenting with each other. Adults who encourage and facilitate them to become political agents are irresponsibly creating monsters. They can play politics and lecture each other, but adults should not have to pretend that they offer some kind of unicorn-like insight because they are young. We have all been young and we can all likely conclude that we knew very little back then.
No doubt some of the Youth MPs will one day be actual MPs. It happens. We can only hope that in the interim they learn some humility and how to engage in good faith with opponents. They are monsters of our making. We can at least teach them some manners.
1 https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/07/02/email-to-youth-mps-could-have-been-clearer-ministry/
2 https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/565596/youth-mps-renew-call-to-lower-voting-age
3 https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/07/02/email-to-youth-mps-could-have-been-clearer-ministry/
Ani O'Brien comes from a digital marketing background, she has been heavily involved in women's rights advocacy and is a founding council member of the Free Speech Union. This article was originally published on Ani's Substack Site and is published here with kind permission.
6 comments:
Ministry of Youth Development.
Gone by lunchtime.
Recently listened to a Hastings Councillor falling over herself with desire to promote these just out of nappies yoof to put their spoke in to council rates spending.
Be off with you. Go live some life first and come back later.
I remember when I was a teenager, there were various "youth leaders", who were normally the goodie two shoes, who sat in the front row of class, chatting with all the woke teachers. But while their political opinions may have accorded with the teachers', they certainly didn't represent the views of the other students. These are the brats likely to get involved in student politics when they go to university. Then just like Jacinda and Hipkins, into Parliament without any real world experience.
On another note, I remember seeing a display of "student art" from my local secondary school, a few years ago. One painting was of Jacinda who the artist described as an "awesome" PM because she was a woman who had a baby in office. Nothing about policies, leadership or anything else relevant. That is the level of thought of most teenagers these days who reckon they should be allowed to vote.
Well said Ani! Today’s teens think they have all the answers, but without life experience, they will soon find they will have to eat humble pie-although rarely do we see politicians recant earlier statements, even when proven wrong!
Wait until those kids get to uni! Hardly a day goes by any NZ uni without somebody, including senior managers, complaining about David Seymour and the government.
If nothing else, they have conclusively made the point that 16 is too young to vote.
I think this indoctrination starts even before they enter the system. Modern parenting has a lot to answer for. ‘You can do anything my darling”
Post a Comment