MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Our Confused World

Filed under: General — Downunder @ 11:27 am Tue 9th November 2021

Thoughts on our ‘Confused World’.

In the Meditationes Sacrae (1597) by Sir Francais Bacon he says “knowledge itself is power”.

In our view of the world today we could look at that and agree that possession of knowledge, restrictions on knowledge, censorship, selective release, or interpretation play a major role in our political and personal authority.

Our modern mainstream media in their mimicry of this pattern with ‘Breaking News’ and ‘What We Know So Far’ are inclined to propaganda rather than journalism.

In the context of that period of history rather than our own it is possible if not probable that in a more cooperative age of men what he intended held a different meaning.

Progress emanates from knowledge, the transmission of knowledge and the sharing of knowledge.

That as I see it is or was the primary goal of the internet.

It has been the cornerstone of professional reputation. A means of influence in which we can place trust but see marginalised with confusion replacing clarity.

When we move away from the concept of, power to act, and the right of authority and control, especially total cooperation or enforced cooperation there is an area of collective cooperation.

Looking at the power to progress there is a question of influence and what part knowledge plays in that influence or the ability to influence and the reason to influence.

And of course the influence that is used in terms of financial reward and personal progress.

It is an essential part of democracy but throughout my entire political experience I have noticed increasingly it has become a subversive process rather than a reasoned process.

In our social climate there is an appeal to authority through the concept of knowledge, “We all know’.

The effect of this is a censorship on critical thinking, a call to obedience and the power to attack those who in a confused world apply some degree of critical thinking regardless of their qualification to do so or their expertise in any discipline.

For the man in the street that can translate to beliefs, a cause to fight for or radicalism and a cause to die for in obedience.

Knowledge in this respect can be weaponised beyond adhominem being a destructive process rather than a productive process.

Knowledge becomes essential beyond itself and fashions not only progress but the rate of progress (or not) and is an essential ingredient in the way that we relate to each other as individuals, families, communities, professionally or in an amateur setting and politically.

This determines not only our society but the strength and security of that social setting and in essence it’s future path … a pre-determined destiny … how we might treat each other in the future; possibly in a worse way than we do now.

4 Responses to “Our Confused World”

  1. Evan Myers says:

    Copied from today’s Herald

    “ One of New Zealand’s most well-known economists, Cameron Bagrie, has delivered a searing rebuke to the National Party, saying they’re stuck in a “historical mindset”.

    Bagrie was ANZ’s former chief economist, but now runs his own independent economics consultancy.

    “I think New Zealand is stronger when we have two strong mainstream parties, even under MMP.

    “We get more contestability, better genuine policy debate and accountability. We simply do not have that at present,” Bagrie said.

    “The world we live in is changing rapidly. Disruption is everywhere, economically, the enduring impact of Covid, the environment, technology and changes in social values.

    “It does not matter where you look; at businesses, households, individuals, change and adapting to change is the new normal. The same applies to every political party. The Nats look stuck in a very historical mindset,” he said.

    Although he is not a party member, Bagrie has spoken at National Party conferences as an independent economist, giving a snapshot of the economic landscape and joining panel discussions with the party’s economic portfolio holders: Paul Goldsmith, at the 2019 conference, and Andrew Bayly and Michael Woodhouse at the 2021 conference.

    Bagrie was speaking out after growing frustration that the party had lost sight of important issues, which he said was bad for politics as a whole.

    “It puzzles me why a political party does not go harder on education. Or maybe it is just in the too-hard basket? But NZ’s future in 30 years is partially dependent on the education system and outcomes today. The signs are not great,” he said.

    Bagrie argued that politics had neglected the balance that needs to exist between social issues, like wellbeing, and the economic base that needs to exist to fund programmes that drive wellbeing.

    Cameron Bagrie, managing director at Bagrie Economics, said National has a mindset that is stuck in the past.

    “For decades we have swung from the economic ledger to the social ledger and back and forth,” Bagrie said.

    “We need better balance and a data dictated, well-executed policy prescription down the middle. Wellbeing needs an economic base just as the economic base is dependent on wellbeing including housing and education outcomes,” he said.

    He warned that tough economic choices were coming down the pipeline, warning the age of “sugar candy economics” needed to end.

    “The Government has done really well supporting the economy by running expansionary fiscal policy and spending money.

    “But that sugar candy economics does not deliver an enduring economic base wellbeing is dependent upon,” he said.

    Parliament returns from a one-week recess on Tuesday. Changes to Parliament’s Covid-19 rules means that more Auckland and Waikato MPs are likely to return to the city this week.”

    It does state what has been clear since January this year if not before that education is definitely an election issue.

  2. DJ Ward says:

    Downunders comment.

    “Our modern mainstream media in their mimicry of this pattern with ‘Breaking News’ and ‘What We Know So Far’ are inclined to propaganda rather than journalism.”

    I think that just happened, in the Collins event.


    The one sided, look at money.
    It is very human.
    Fighting over money.
    And who pays.

    It does mention male victims, once.
    We have heard this before.

    “Financial abuse researcher Dr Ayesha Scott says women are the most common victims of economic harm and abuse, but there are men who fall victim to it as well.”

    Obviously the “women are the most common victims of economic harm” is fantasy.
    The one comment about the male victims.
    After falsely claiming harm, the males a minor problem.
    Only female stories, told.

    What research is the doctor looking at.
    If females mostly get the house.
    They will mostly get the power bill.
    100% certain that paternity fraud, isn’t included.
    In any calculations.
    Or going into bank accounts, stealing money.
    Female stealthing, child support scams.
    If living in the car is his only option.
    With all his financial burdens.
    Should he have nowhere to live.

    Matrimonial property decisions should sort these issues out.
    But they don’t.
    Due to the enormous cost of litigation.
    If it costs $10,000 to argue in court.
    Why argue.

    No new law, seeking retribution, will help.
    Again you will need a lawyer.
    Inherently it becomes a matrimonial property decision.
    So why argue.

    Is there no small claims court in NZ.
    Can one not be set up, for this issue.
    With low court costs.
    Judge Judy like.

    How much domestic violence, is related to this issue.
    Men and women fighting over money, and things.
    Leading up to, and after the relationship ends.

    Making another thing a crime, solves nothing.
    It would criminalise every transaction, in a relationship.

    Social service providers, and lawyers, will do well.

  3. Evan Myers says:

    Not exactly what you would call propaganda.

    Collins released a leader statement which was reported in good faith.

    Given what was reported in the ODT this morning the Board couldn’t realistically consider anything but her departure.

  4. DJ Ward says:

    Sometimes it’s not until the end, that you get context.
    The writers final comment, and start as well.

    “For who hasn’t been Jacqui Dean, a woman thrown under the bus.”
    That is to say that, males don’t exist.
    That they don’t get thrown under the bus.
    Was that not Bridges experience.

    “What he should have said was that they were sexist and demeaning.”
    How is that a resultant.

    “He was making a vulgar – and not even very funny – joke about sex with his wife.”
    It was a joke about conception.
    Anything about conception and women is banned.
    Feminists hate the subject, if a man says anything.

    “Do you say nothing, and laugh, joke around like “one of the boys.””
    What about all the jokes about men and sex.
    The girly coffee table, useless men jokes.

    “But Dean says “it continued to play on her mind.””
    Lots of bad male examples, given.
    Why then don’t they name all the women, who slept with Ross.
    If women were only judged, by the same standards.

    So the author reveals the source.
    “ It’s what Auckland University psychology professor Nicola Gavey calls the “cultural scaffolding of rape”, or what the “It’s Not OK” campaign refers to as a “social tolerance for violence.””
    An author that views males as unrapeable.
    So unlikely to have read a FTP case.
    Or a BPD compulsive liar case.
    The Not OK campaign, that excludes male issues completely.

    The truth, the opposite to the source.
    Sexual crimes against men are normalised, in culture.
    To the extreme.
    It is not that misogyny, does not exist.
    But it’s not a rape culture, towards women.
    The joke was about sex, not rape.


    What are men going to be banned from doing next.

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar