We don’t normally go for words bigger than wheelbarrow or marmalade on this blog, but there was a call for a specific term, one that owns a little sophistication, to assure the so called ‘left wing elites’, that we understand the extend of their pain and suffering; the disorientation and confusion that they are dealing with as Labour looks for a way through the Shane Jones departure disaster, discussed in this previous post Shane Jones Leaves the Big Red L.

The aftershocks started with this dithering, ah, er, well, um, interview with Labour party president Moira Coatsworth and um, well, er, what she didn’t know about her party and the departing MP, and what she hadn’t been told was rather obvious – they’ve got a party president that exudes as much acumen and clarity as a headless chook on its last legs. (The idea that the Jones Boy has any chance of an on going relationship with Labour; that was comedy)

It couldn’t get much more embarrassing for Cunliffe’s caucus little bunch of cuties, when in the midst of an election campaign the entire left wing commentary turns into a full blown analysis gorgeous little debate about what’s wrong with the Labour Party.

It is summed up in a reasonable fashion in this article from Stuff.co.nz: Labour founders reels in Jones’ wake

With comments from Left-wing political scientist and commentator Dr Bryce Edwards who described the situation as an “identity politics dispute”.

“You’ve got a lot of people debating about whether he was a plus or a minus for Labour, whether he was a working class hero for Labour and whether he attracted that so-called blue collar vote, and whether he was a misogynist.”

Really says a lot for the level of debate in the left wing. Hell, just ask his partner; I am sure she’d know whether he hates women or not.

Having an opinion about feminist politics doesn’t make you a misogynist, except if your a feminist, but this may be a little beyond their thinking capacity, when there is only one identity in their political thinking to which all should aspire.

Another former Labour casualty, John Tamihere cut to the chase saying; Jones reached out to those turned off by Factional Politics:

“The real debate isn’t about Shane Jones, it’s about certain sector groups in Labour having far too much say in advance, well in advance of their constituencies in the street.”

And this goes to a related issue that is mentioned in the article (and I don’t want to put words in Tamihere’s mouth) but I think this is indicative of what he is referring to;

Council of Trade Unions president Helen Kelly pointed out that the unions had overwhelmingly supported Cunliffe, who took 71 per cent of the union vote compared with 12 per cent for Jones.

The strength of that vote would appear to be in union hands, but I don’t think so.

It would not have been determined by the unions themselves but rather the other way around. The feminist clique of the Labour Party would have told union leaders like Kelly and PSA secretary Brenda Pilott who they had the most control over and who they wanted out front, and as we know unions will accept leadership advice and vote accordingly.

We know what flags Helen Kelly and Brenda Pilott fly and with Pilott having a pivotal say in New Zealand’s largest union which is 70% women you can see why the feminist element of the Labour Party have constituted the way the Labour Leader is elected. It gives the impression that this is the Labour party the left wing faction of the country wants, and it also gives the feminist clique control of the caucus even if they don’t have the numbers.

The fact is the Jones Boy could never have become leader of the Labour Party (as things are now) and neither will anyone else that can make a difference to Labour’s fortunes.

Labour isn’t electing a leader it is electing a dummy whose strings are being pulled from the back room.

We owe Shane Jones a debt of gratitude. Whether it was an intended consequence or not doesn’t matter; the issues surrounding ‘Red Fems’ needed to be brought into the media spot light – they won’t like being debated.

This discussion has only just started though, and the Red Fems are not going to enjoy being seen for being responsible for reducing the mighty Labour Party to the Big Red L and for feminising the union vote.

It is time for union members – especially men – to wake up to how they are being used by the Red Fems to support feminist politics through the Labour Party.