You would have to agree wouldn’t you. The practice of politics must be reconciled with the imperatives of honesty and integrity. But is that possible in todays political world?
Rousseau’s ideas were a huge spark for the Enlightenment, a movement that basically took over Europe in the 1600s and 1700s. It was all about using logic and real-world evidence to chase after happiness and knowledge. Think of it as the era that put big concepts like freedom, progress, and just government on the map.
But what is honesty or dishonesty to a politician? Is it possible for a politician to be honest at all?
That question goes to the heart of democracy.
Research suggests many politicians may naturally have honest personality traits but the high-stakes environment of a campaign trail often shapes them into using “strategic falsehoods” to enhance their image or undermine opponents. Using a specific lens or “spin” to distort the understanding of an issue, such as redefining what counts as “employment” to make economic figures look better.
Geoff Parker in his article linked below uses the phrase “An election year is when politicians pay attention. Not to noise — but to patterns”
To me this phrase highlights the “elasticity” of politicians and how a fundamental shift in political strategy during campaign periods can be brought about. While public life is filled with “noise”—isolated complaints, fleeting social media trends, or one-off protests—politicians habitually view these as manageable distractions.
However, politicians are acutely sensitive to patterns! Bombarded with a steady, consistent stream of communication from various demographics saying the same thing is what gets campaign managers attention and that attention is disseminated to the politician.
Patterns represent voting blocs and emerging mandates that can determine an election’s outcome. By focusing on these reliable trends rather than chaotic “noise,” politicians identify which issues have enough sustained pressure to require legislative action or policy shifts to secure victory.
The toughest test of an honest politician comes when he or she must defend ideas that are unpopular but truthful.
This exactly where I think Chris Luxon finds himself right now! Especially in regards to race relations.
Not every politician passes such a test, particularly when elections are approaching. However, only the dishonest politician equates politics exclusively with popularity.
How many voted Party Vote for National because we believed Luxon when he asserted “We are one country; we deliver our public services to people on the basis of need, not ethnicity.”
Geoff Parker is correct when saying – “An election year is when politicians pay attention.” “Not to noise — but to patterns.”
https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2026/04/geoff-parker-when-did-consultation.html
Pee Kay writes he is from a generation where common sense, standards, integrity and honesty are fundamental attributes. This article was first published HERE
But what is honesty or dishonesty to a politician? Is it possible for a politician to be honest at all?
That question goes to the heart of democracy.
Research suggests many politicians may naturally have honest personality traits but the high-stakes environment of a campaign trail often shapes them into using “strategic falsehoods” to enhance their image or undermine opponents. Using a specific lens or “spin” to distort the understanding of an issue, such as redefining what counts as “employment” to make economic figures look better.
Geoff Parker in his article linked below uses the phrase “An election year is when politicians pay attention. Not to noise — but to patterns”
To me this phrase highlights the “elasticity” of politicians and how a fundamental shift in political strategy during campaign periods can be brought about. While public life is filled with “noise”—isolated complaints, fleeting social media trends, or one-off protests—politicians habitually view these as manageable distractions.
However, politicians are acutely sensitive to patterns! Bombarded with a steady, consistent stream of communication from various demographics saying the same thing is what gets campaign managers attention and that attention is disseminated to the politician.
Patterns represent voting blocs and emerging mandates that can determine an election’s outcome. By focusing on these reliable trends rather than chaotic “noise,” politicians identify which issues have enough sustained pressure to require legislative action or policy shifts to secure victory.
The toughest test of an honest politician comes when he or she must defend ideas that are unpopular but truthful.
This exactly where I think Chris Luxon finds himself right now! Especially in regards to race relations.
Not every politician passes such a test, particularly when elections are approaching. However, only the dishonest politician equates politics exclusively with popularity.
How many voted Party Vote for National because we believed Luxon when he asserted “We are one country; we deliver our public services to people on the basis of need, not ethnicity.”
Geoff Parker is correct when saying – “An election year is when politicians pay attention.” “Not to noise — but to patterns.”
https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2026/04/geoff-parker-when-did-consultation.html
Pee Kay writes he is from a generation where common sense, standards, integrity and honesty are fundamental attributes. This article was first published HERE
3 comments:
The writer opines that NZ voted last election because they believed National would "deliver public services to the people on need not ethnicity" That is correct .
However National have ignored the election promise , ethnicity issues have solidifyed into accepted policy , and the only solution now is to behead the racial monster and remove every trace of ethnicity from NZ law.
Would that be difficult is the compelling question Not really because Parliament is still sovereign and the issue can be debated under urgency and the issue put to the people as referendum this election .
Then NZ can move forward together as a nation
Liar, liar, pants are on fire!
Perhaps Mr Luxon could explain his Government's funding and its 'bang for the taxpayer's buck' of the Waipareira Trust, MUMA, and now Te Kaika health authorities? Is he comfortable with their operations and alignment with his statement of 'need not ethnicity', and are those in need receiving it and where are the statistics to prove their success?
We seem to be well past the point where politicians actually reflected the views of those who cared about the health of the nation they inhabited and personified. If so, we are also well past the point where politicians are a benefit rather than a curse. We can see this decay all around the Anglophone world. We surely cannot continue to assume that more of the same is a solution to this very severe political disease. A major remedy is required. Can we introduce it before the patient dies?
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.