Middle East Banker advises focus on agriculture & leaving energy to oil nations
Meguerditch Bouldokian is the Middle East’s leading eye on New Zealand. He has some surprising answers to our five questions:-
There is now this intense wariness, suspicion about China. Australia has torn up for example its Belt and Road trade deal with China. How much of this do you attribute to Covid?
Australia is facing many problems at present due to COVID-19, and due also to the value of its exports to China which doubled from AU$ 75 billion to AU$ 150 billion in the past 5 years (2015-2020).
There is Australia’s position on a number of strategic issues including insisting that the World Health Organisation conduct a proper inquiry into the origins of COVID- 19. Then you have its criticism of China’s actions in Hong Kong. These have clouded its relationship with China and triggered a growing list of export restrictions in return. China asserts that Australia is dumping and generally subsidizing many of its exports. So there are these tariffs on wine, barley and all the other disputes in trade relations including non-tariff obstacles such as China insisting ironically on hygiene, pest and health certificates.
We now find Australia concerned too about its future relationship with the World Trade Organisation in resolving trade disputes with neighbours, although its record with WTO has been more wins than losses.
It has problems too incidentally with New Zealand in using biosafety measures to keep NZ apples out of their market. Compliance with the rules of WTO must not be undermined if it has to benefit from globalization and not accumulating souring relationships with WTO partners.
New Zealand has banned oil exploration and will turn off its natural gas to comply with United Nations targets. This must be good news for the Middle East?
Consider this. If this sector is allowed to grow unrestrained then it will take investment away from other areas of your economy. I refer to the other industries and agriculture, which make 58% - 65% of the GDP and 70% of exports earnings. NZ growth rate is 2.8% compared to Canada 1.9% and Australia 2.2%. New Zealand is routinely cited to be the fifth richest country in the world.
Oil and gas explorer countries have not developed their other economic sectors like yours. I do not say these other countries have a poorly developed and non-diversified economic sector. But NZ has better alternatives from other export revenues beyond oil and gas in the short run.
Regarding the issue of banning New Zealand’s oil exploration and turning off natural gas to comply with UN targets this might be good news for not only for the Middle Eastern Gulf states, but also Russia, Azerbaijan and other natural gas producers worldwide.
In my opinion, this is a good measure for the benefit of New Zealand in the medium and long run because the unforeseen benefit is the way in which investment which might otherwise have gone into trying to compete with these oil and gas producers will now be diverted into premium sectors in which New Zealand is much more competitive.
Still, we are left with the fact that countries such as New Zealand and Australia have their exports dangerously weighted on China. Is there any alternative?
Both countries must initiate and search for new alternatives, while keeping a neutral balance between its Eastern
neighbours and Western alliances. What is short in China and Russia is Western style education in economics finance, banking and social sciences. Exports to China from NZ, was USD 17 billion in 2020 while Australia came second, Japan third, USA fourth, and the Republic of Korea fifth.
It is much the same with Australia. Interrelationships and interconnections can improve the future general relationships of NZ and Australia with China in the long run. China is a neighbour after all. The issue of alternatives is a long term one which needs a thorough study of the economic and financial sectors among the three countries in question. Interestingly this is one area in which my advisory group is routinely asked to evaluate and report on.
We recently saw New Zealand’s dairy cooperative take a large shareholding in a Chinese dairy company and lose the investment. Is bank exchange protocol the only way to deal securely with China?
Yes, a bank exchange protocol is a better way to deal securely with China. The three countries we are discussing are members of ICC (International Chamber of Commerce, in Paris). It has its Arbitration Department which solves any issue of its members including the case you have described. I am a member of ICC Paris Financial Crime Risk & Policy Group and I would be delighted to help if this kind of problem recurs. There is usually room for arbitration, at some point.
Which nation frightens you the most: Russia or China?
Neither. Each country has its problems to resolve. China has apparently the internal issues of Hong Kong, the Uighurs and Taiwan. Then external issues of its defence, space technology, and an opaque position of its human rights most recently with Philippines, which advises China to mind its own business over maritime exercises. China’s expansionist adventure in African countries is over-stretching its forces as it seeks raw materials, especially coal, iron ore and oil derivatives.
Also there remains its Belt and Road trade plan, which requires immense resources for it to be successful in the long run.
As to Russia, it has its internal and external problems notably in the CIS countries. The former communist countries are being aroused for the Moslem religion. This is and with ever increasing intensity being enflamed by Turkey and the Moslem states in the Gulf.
Then there is the internal opposition against president Putin in Chechenia along with the continuing Ukrainian imbroglio over Crimea. Externally there is Russia’s and Japan’s complicated relationship over Kuril Islands near Kamchatka and also Russia’s strained relationships with Europe and the US Administration.
Underpinning all this is that its economic position has not been developed like the China’s. During the past 30 years China’s economic performance averaged a yearly 8% growth rate, while Russia, after the fall of communism in 1990 had nothing to match economic progress like China under Deng Xiaoping.
Gorbachev’s reforms plans of Perestroika and Glasnost came late. Brejnev was too dogmatic and there was a failure to emulate or even observe the Chinese reform plans of Deng Xiaoping.
Nincompoop Harry now a feral threat to royal family
The reason why Prince Charles and Prince William felt compelled to put some distance between they and runaway royal Prince Harry was that they are terrified about what he will pass onto his wife, Meghan Duchess of Sussex.
Ardent believers in the Green Revolution the three, Charles, William and Harry, share an ideology as well as blood. So how did it come to this? The answer is that Harry upon his marriage to Meghan bought deeply into the new victim culture.
His conversion into the victim culture led him into race and thus into the one movement, the most sensitive of all, that the royal family by its own behaviour had up to that moment avoided becoming embroiled in.
At their pomp and circumstance wedding the royal family was convinced that the marriage would ensure that they stayed clear of it for ever.
In the event it was the wedding that saw the royals irrevocably stained by it. Far from being insurance against race smearing, Meghan instead plunged the royal family head first into it.
By now in full victimhood Harry and Meghan held forth before Oprah in their famous double act blending the two, race and victimhood, into a televisual cocktail.
Since the start of the last century the royal family has primarily been in the business of caring, and being seen to care. This purpose was exemplified by Her Majesty the Queen Mother during World War 2, notably in her refusal to let the royals flee the blitzed London. Diana was another natural exponent in her devotion to off-beat causes such as AIDS and land mines.
Charles found a broad gauge caring outlet in matters of the environment most controversially in architecture before establishing himself as a green revolutionary, and he encouraged his two sons to follow him down this planetary saving path, which they did.
But at no stage did any member of the royal family establish themselves as a cause which is exactly what happened when in the tripartite Oprah show Meghan and Harry declared themselves as personifying race and victimhood.
These are the twin horses of the contemporary cultural apocalypse and it was for fear of further feeding these horses that Charles and William were compelled to avoid one-on-ones with their errant brother and son.
They knew that Meghan would pump her hapless husband for the finer details of the exchange and after that what? Another session with Oprah?
Much of today’s mass culture is still composed on screen and print of families coping with the unexpected and often the result of some terrible accident or the impact of something outside the familial control.
Harry’s segue into Hollywood was unexpected, but manageable. His dramatic entry before a global audience into full membership of the outrage industry was unexpected and unmanageable. Unexpected because his family had imagined that there would be a publicity armistice while his grandfather the Duke of Edinburgh lay on his deathbed.
The fact that the duo went ahead anyway with their victim statement shook the royal family if only by its timing.
Amid the British upper class and upper middle class there has been since the 1960s a reverse snobbery in which the privileged seek to portray themselves as hard done-by. Prince Charles is an example here with his references to his Spartan years at the progressive Gordonstoun school. Actually, his contemporaries point out, the pupils were far removed from the rigours that the prince describes.
We can go back further than this to Harry’s great uncle Edward V111 of Abdication fame who deliberately modified his tones into a near Cockney.
Tony Blair a product of a school even more rarified than Gordonstoun is said to have abraded his accent so that it chimed with his political career.
The syndrome in which those with a comfortable way of life seek to identify with those enduring less fortunate backgrounds is the cause of our times. It becomes supercharged when it takes to the streets giving vent to the cherished class belief that the privileged are responsible for the plight of the less privileged.
Nobody expected Harry to take to the streets on this one. He turned up instead on the broadcasting channels.
Until the “step back” from his royal duties Harry was regarded as a nincompoop though a well-intentioned one. He is now in a new guise which is that of a feral creature who if aroused will with his partner turn on his family wreaking further vengeance.
In establishing themselves as professional victims Harry and Meghan have introduced the equivalent of several new university degree courses in such fields as sociology and media studies and at a pinch in constitutional studies too.
Little-known foreign formula is nation’s policy backbone
United Nations Agenda 30 is the political blueprint for New Zealand. It is the operational master plan for the much better known climate change programme and its multitude of associated ideological objectives
According to the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research the poorest households are likely to be disproportionately hurt by climate change regulations with the poorest 40 percent enduring six times the harm of the richest 20 percent..
Agenda 30 has the unquestioning support of the Labour Government and its satellite parliamentary Green Party. They view the agenda as the overriding passport to winning elections.
The same report by the long-established Institute of Economic Research considers the aggressive targeting of the nation’s agricultural sector will cause production to shift overseas and with no subsequent impact on global emissions.
The general public is unaware of Agenda 30 and its stern implications for New Zealand because the nation’s mainstream media zealously approves of any and all United Nations doctrines.
Agenda 30 was propounded by United Nations as a consolidation of its climate change campaign and with the intention of binding in countries such as New Zealand known to have an intellectual class particularly prone to ideology.
After a succession of episodes in places such as Rwanda and the Balkans in which United Nations was responsible for immense loss of life due to its inability to implement its promise to use military intervention to save them, the UN knew it had to find another reason to exist.
This was the beginning of its climate strategy and all the contrived crises and extinctions that have been its hallmarks and all duly propagated by a complicit media. This in spite of the UN even after being told by Taiwan of the imminent Covid epidemic, an authentic crisis, failed to do anything about the genuine version until it was too late.
Agenda 30 is the ticking political booby trap of our epoch. If anyone challenges it and seeks to dismantle it they get blown up. This is why the National Party opposition from time to time applies a delicate stethoscope to it. But that is all. Similarly with the ACT Party which also refuse to challenge the foreign doctrine being imposed on New Zealand and at such cost.
The National Party and ACT understand the ferocity in their upper income urban electorates of the intelligentsia response should they demean climatism as an article of faith.
New Zealand is considered to contribute somewhere between 0.02 and 0.17 of greenhouse gases. Yet New Zealand is used by United Nations as the showcase for its Agenda 30 which uses climate change ideology as its nosecone.
Economists point out that the government’s crash scheme to force the population into electric cars will most harm the poorer people who cannot afford them.
The success of United Nations in imposing Agenda 30 on New Zealand is that throughout the actual, the real crises of recent years, notably the homeless emergency and Covid 19 that the UN has succeeded in keeping Agenda 30 at the head of the to-do list and the overriding priority here.
This is the reason for routine government proclamations about the climate “emergency” and doing so when there have been seismic indications of another real potential emergency. But earthquakes for example are not a current preoccupation of activists under the spell of United Nations. .
The success of United Nations in inspiring unquestioning faith is so evident now in the absence of anyone daring to ask about its role in Myanmar. Burma as Myanmar is now known was an early member country of United Nations.
United Nations is often described as a vast bureaucracy and those involved with it will cheerfully go along with this admitting to privileged lifestyles and generous travelling allowances. They know though that in its new field of high profile ethical posturing it is ruthlessly efficient.
United Nations embedded intelligence channels are often far more effective than those of its nation state members. These networks allow it to accurately gauge the mood of these member countries in going along with its Agenda 30.
It knows that in its fervent adherence to Agenda 30 the New Zealand government can safely order the switching off for example of the nation’s natural gas which is one of the chief resources behind its economy.
Contrived self-harming the UN knows will be outweighed by the ability of activists to portray it in heroic terms, and as a tiny sacrifice to be endured in exchange for the approval of United Nations.
As a bureaucracy the United Nations own priority is to remain one, a bigger one, and this allows it to behave in a sovereign manner. When the government announced the end of oil exploration and did so to a university student gathering the power of United Nations to implement Agenda 30 via this sovereign influence takes on a tangible form.
.When it bailed out of effective peacekeeping United Nations turned to the environment and did so with a strategy designed to convey the impression that nothing much was done to save it before the UN arrived on the scene. This was wildly successful in New Zealand, in spite of its existing and much promoted clean green branding.
Property Investors Federation’s Richard Woodd and Tim Horsbrugh on how runaway house prices hit a brick wall. Or have they?
On the day that the roof fell in on New Zealand’s landlords the president of the Taranaki Property Investors Association Richard Woodd (pictured) delivered a speech on the technicalities of moving houses. Actually of transporting the house itself from one location to another.
Moving house, as in putting them on a truck and then installing them somewhere else, is a peculiarity of the residential side of the New Zealand property sector. Another peculiarity is how in an agrarian nation in which no more than 0.4 percent of the terrain is built on, why even modest residences can now attract buyers happy to pay $1 million or more.
On the day Mr Woodd was scheduled to talk on the technicalities of house moving, the trucking version, the government announced a series of what Mr Woodd described as “disincentives” to ensure that if house prices didn’t actually fall, then they at least hit a brick wall.
Specifically the government announced the end of expensing deductions on bank interest payments incurred by mortgages on rental properties. “We are seeing a capital gains tax,” said Mr Woodd, “and it is arriving by stealth.”
Tim Horsbrugh, president of the Wairarapa branch of the Property Investors Federation, was equally blunt. The government, he declared, was determined to “scare people away from property.”
In terms of leverage Mr Woodd said the government was putting into reverse the traditional gearing of rental residential property acquisition.
He noted however, that in recent times the “mom and pop” class of investor buying a second house to rent out in order to save for retirement or to leave something for their children had tended to be subsumed in the minds of politicians by large-scale professional investors seeking to take advantage of tax concessions originally designed for family home acquirers.
Tim Horsbrugh noted that there was a vacuum in the government’s campaign for getting first-home buyers under their own roof. There was still no solution, he insisted, to the central issue of increasing the supply of houses in order to meet first home acquirer demand.
So the question remains. Why are New Zealand houses so expensive and in a sparsely populated country which has within its borders an amplitude of the raw materials required to build them including timber, cement, steel and quarried stone?
Why, for example, does a subdivision house in the United States or Canada with an in-ground basement, stone paved ground floor, a storey above this, and a dormer storey in addition cost the same as its New Zealand counterpart? This will be a bungalow on supporting piles and a foot or so above terra firma, and with no basement or additional storeys.
Everyone blames everyone else for this anomaly. The building supplies market is said to be in cartel control. Local authorities are said to be impossibly stringent. Lenders are said to be impossibly mean and demanding to first home buyers.
In the background lurks the unspoken fact (by the entire politico-media class) that an emphasis encouraged by all political parties on an abstract university-nurtured education has deprived the nation of the applied productive skills needed to actually build the required houses. People such as carpenters, plumbers, electricians….
The mainstream media is financed in terms of advertising by the property sector. The result is the constant announcement of the latest house price peak plateaux attained delivered in the triumphant terms and tone usually reserved for victorious national sports teams.
Richard Woodd meanwhile traces this new government tax tourniquet-tightening on residential rental property owners to a much earlier determination by the government to empower the tenant side of the landlord/tenant relationship. This resulted in the rental accommodation “Warrant of Fitness.”
Then, he notes, interest rates continued to fall with the cheap money pouring into the obvious destination of property and the consequent frenzied bidding for the limited amount of houses available.
It was now, he notes, that the government switched from the bureaucratic emphasis characterised by strengthened tenancy rights via tribunals and now instead concentrated on legislation.
A feature of the new tax “disincentives” remains that officials concede that they are uncertain of the outcome, he notes.
This in turn translates into the culpability or otherwise of the landlord/property investor aka speculator being revealed as a burden or a blessing. Will the elimination of rental property mortgage tax deduction deter the “mom and pop” rental provider and thus open the way to professional corporate-style investors armed with their tax lawyers and accountants?
When the dust settles will there still be remaining what Richard Woodd describes as an engrained national impression that residential property is a one-way bet, a can’t lose proposition? Is there as Tim Horsbrugh indicates something on the supply side that is the true foundation of the accommodation problem?
Does the supply bottleneck truly reside in town planning regulations, absence of craftspeople, artificially high materials costs, or even in something as abstract as a deliberately choreographed climate of inflationary expectation? Or in some element that nobody has yet considered?
Royal Family, New Zealand, Coronation Street populated by strong women and biddable blokes
New Zealand was cited during the Oprah show as a refuge for the expatriate branch of the royal family. “We had suggested New Zealand, South Africa, Canada,” said Meghan to Winfrey, detailing her proposal for establishing possible residency in the commonwealth.
In court circles Harry remains viewed as being a bit of a chump. How then could this simple soul have been instrumental in igniting the most embarrassing episode to be endured by the Royal Family since the Abdication in 1936 of Harry’s great great uncle King Edward V111?
The reason for the success of Britain’s television saga Coronation Street is that it portrays a reality, a “truth,” as Oprah would say. It portrays strong women and feckless, pliant men.
So it is with the Royal Family. Women run the show. With the exception of the Duke of Edinburgh, the royal menfolk would at some stage simply let bygones be bygones for Harry and Meghan.
There will be no forgive-and-forget from Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, target directly and indirectly of so much of the Harry and Meghan venom. Or, for example, from Princess Anne with her low tolerance of deliberate silliness and pretence, let alone that of premeditated treachery.
In New Zealand women similarly run the show with females as governor general, prime minister, and in most of the power points below.
The Sussexes are a progressive couple. Harry adjusts himself to Meghan’s career which is in films. New Zealand has a film colony in its capital, Wellington, and an equally well defined mogul hierarchy.
New Zealand, and this is still not grasped in the Anglosphere, has its own hereditary royalty, the Maori royal family, a reassuring presence for the diversity-conscious couple.
In the Winfrey show there was much reference to the linkage of titles with the need of the duo for protection, security.
Meghan somehow led to believe or picking up the impression that in marrying a prince she would become a princess chimes with the Oprah topic that Palace courtiers had kept Meghan in the dark about procedures and protocols from precedence to curtseying. An office-bound Harry seemingly had neither the time nor the inclination to bring his bride up to speed.
It was the failure of the Palace to accord the Duchess of Windsor the title of Her Royal Highness that rankled most of all with the exiled Duchess and the Duke of Windsor, formerly Edward V111.
Those who wished to remain in the good books of David, as the Duke was known to his family, or even wish to see again the Duke and Duchess were careful to introduce the Duchess as HRH.
Royalty had its ancient beginnings in tribal warrior chiefs who successfully led their people in battle. Harry who served in Afghanistan with the British forces is in this valiant tradition.
It is also the most compelling reason why only remote New Zealand with its non-porous sea-girt border is the only Commonwealth country, indeed, only country anywhere, that can offer the physical security that the couple told Oprah that is their priority.
The royal family treats everyone the same way regardless of their birth or station. A continuation however of the campaign to destabilise the monarchy could see the rebel royals frozen out of a commonwealth country officially or unofficially.
Diana hovered like a wraith over this most recent and bizarre episode of the renegade royals with their determination to vindicate Harry’s mother by embarrassing the Palace. This rules out as a refuge France, a republic in which breathed their last the Duke and Duchess of Windsor and Princess Diana (pictured with her sons.) History, Harry reminded Oprah, repeats itself.
New Zealand South Seas Switzerland revisited role needs selective electronic niche selling
A global specialist in niche marketing has described focused selling as the most overlooked area in New Zealand climate preparedness. Mathew Collins said that with the era of bulk commodity exporting fading now looming in its place is a new epoch of selective, high process and high value product selling.
This new specialised premium era of exporting is imminent as a direct result of the New Zealand government’s determination to include food production restrictions in a rigidly-enforced regime of conformity to international climate change standards.
Mathew Collins founder of DigitalXMarketing said that in New Zealand he was surprised to find climate change enforcement the centrepiece of political and academic conversation and conducted as if New Zealand was a service economy instead of a primary one.
Why was there so little planning of the marketing techniques required to make up the difference for lost revenues? He asked
The topic he discovered was instead treated as one of ethical righteousness rather than as a three-dimensional commercial threat reality. The commercial priority now was to set in place alternatives to lost revenues through the reduced pastoral grazing capacity.
Mr Collins said he had gathered an “unsettling” impression that planning for the era of regulated climate change and thus lost productivity was what he described as “faith-based.”
This “other worldly” treatment of the nation’s self-imposed export income shrinkage contrasted with the last era in which New Zealand had faced a seismic scale shift in its export pattern when Britain announced it was joining the EU.
Confronted with the EU, he said, in this externally-imposed export shift in contrast New Zealand officials had “grasped the nettle.”
Planners then had adopted the notion of New Zealand becoming the “Switzerland of the South Pacific” in gearing the nation to use premium niche marketing to “get more from less.” In the event the nation had discovered alternative markets for bulk exports in the Middle East and Far East.
Farmers, according to Mr Collins, sought collectively to soothe themselves by believing that climate impediments and restrictions on output in the form of stock number reductions were in the category of “it can’t happen here.”
Agriculture in this ostrich-like attitude he said had collectively absorbed an impression from the oil and gas industries.
There was though a big difference in that the oil and gas sector was international and could cap its wells, tow away its rigs, re-deploy staff, and simply re-assemble somewhere else.
Farming though was tied to the land by its very definition. Therefore for farming there was no escape from the productivity restrictions imposed in the name of climate.
Discussing the replacement of grazing pasture by pine trees Mr Collins said that there would here also be a need for digitally-driven niche marketing for timber products and thus training which should be started now.
Timber exports in order to compensate for lost pastoral income also needed to be streamlined with a digitally-driven emphasis on by-products.
He cited pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, disinfectant and cleaning products, along with hospital-grade disposables such as latex gloves as among the standard by-products of the pine tree.
Pine by-products should be a much-evaluated response to the loss of jobs caused by the “officially-desired” closure of the coal and oil and gas sector.
Ignoring this timber output diversity opportunity is another example of the failure to face the reality of the climate movement, insisted Mr Collins pictured (above) at a conference in Dubai.
Sino Sting Robbed New Zealand of home grown computer base
Forty years ago New Zealand’s Hutt Valley was a mini Silicon Valley as a world research and development focus for information technology.
This was not realised in New Zealand, but it was grasped in China which sought to transfer ground-breaking technology to China, and do so without paying for it.
The computer technology developed in the Hutt Valley (pictured) was a breakthrough in that it speeded up computing to the point at which it seemed to behave like the human brain.
For many years there was a coordinated operation centred on Beijing to lift the technology without being seen to do so and at the same time to avoid paying for it.
The scheme involved Chinese governmental organisations presenting themselves as bona fide buyers and requiring more and more and still more insights into the technology in order to make the hoped for decision about an eventual purchase.
In order to give this verisimilitude the operation was surrounded by demonstrable very high level involvement of the Chinese governing elite.
The technology so sought after by the Chinese was capable of smashing through what at the time was known as the von Neumann bottleneck, the constriction through which must stream the digital symbolic instructions which the machine, the computer, understands.
In the Hutt Valley there had been developed an accelerator device to push through this stream of machine language symbols at an ever faster rate in order for the computer to do the heavy lifting required by increasingly complex demands.
The Chinese had correctly perceived that that the Hutt Valley developers had identified an early solution to revving up computer capacity and thus capability, and which could be copied given enough access to the prototypes and systems.
This whole technique was based on computer programmes compiling other computer programmes which in turn created other programmes and in this compounding power bestowing the human effect on the project at hand.
This is the accelerator process that underlies today’s artificial intelligence which among other things recognises peoples’ faces.
The Hutt Valley pioneering work was taken very seriously by the Chinese.
Their active interest in it started in the late 70s and continued through to the share market and financial collapse of the late 1980s when the by now New Zealand government -sponsored funders of the technology were themselves bailed out.
In the intervening years there had been much toing and froing with among other actors state-controlled Chinese banks lending their name as somehow standing behind the project.
This finance had been talked about. But never appeared in liquid form. There had at one stage even been floated a counter trade, bartering, scheme one of which involved importing Chinese bicycles.
Why didn’t the Chinese simply pay for the programme automation technology at the outset?
The short answer is that this would have run counter to parting with cash for technology and management processes acquirable by stealth.
How did those concerned within New Zealand become party to this?
Never before and certainly not in New Zealand had there been encountered any kind of deal in anything at all in which a central government, China’s, was in fact the potential acquirer and which controlled the potential transaction at every step of its process.
A subsidiary reason is that by dragging out the sale for so long the Chinese ensured that the Hutt Valley software engineers constantly improved the technology and especially so in customising it, adapting it to Chinese requirements which included diverse applications in coal mines to hospitals.
For China it was an early and outstanding example of their win-win principal. They won twice. They got the technology. They got it for next to nothing.
Target Marketeers take advantage of Atonement Cult
In today’s age of the apology proliferating atonements are encouraging another fast-growth fashion in which commercial interests seek opportunities to publicly demonstrate cohesion with diversity and equality.
Advertisers are now on the look-out for mainstream media transgressions that allow them to mass signal their own virtue by withdrawing their patronage from selective broadcast programmes and even from print titles.
Their target demographic is composed of a university-catchment in its later teens and on the verge of entering middle age, the advertising agency prime target sector.
In order to reach this cherished segment the Wellington daily the Dominion Post for example devoted an issue to apologising for itself
It ardently excoriated itself for its value judgements throughout its history that transgressed contemporary diversity/equality criteria.
This contrived atonement edition was ridiculed at the time by the demographic that it was not in fact aimed at.
But it struck a spectacular chord with its intended target market, the graduate one, the cultural elite, the segment with disposable income, money to spare.
In media terms an apology until a few years ago was a quasi-legal device used to stave off a legal action or to mitigate, soften one.
The old please-forgive-us apologies were handled gingerly because they were deemed to call into question the reliability, integrity, of the media operation as a whole.
Now, and in their promotional manifestation the apology is embraced with the same enthusiasm with which in its legal context it had once been shunned.
The now-routine institutional apology trend technique blinds editorialists to the danger that it poses for them.
This is because advertisers now use it to reach the impressionable much-desired younger graduate segment of the purchasing population.
Advertisers actively seek programmes where someone is likely to put their foot in it, just so they are seen to withdraw from backing this same programme and in doing so acquire the resulting plaudits from this same high-minded premium purchasing segment.
In the official and governmental realm meanwhile the apology proclamation has become the standard public relations marketing tool allowing politicians and their departments to quit something from the past and thus unencumbered to market the new replacement policy and approach.
Brisk and perfunctory it nonetheless has the effect of conveying the required level of hand-wringing to those who hitherto had troublesomely and noisily believed themselves to have been wronged.
The mainstream media collectively and uncritically supports the officially approved diversity and equality doctrines
The demonstrable enthusiasm of this community of interest fuels the fervour which now marketing agencies take advantage of.
Now and in its politico-media usage the apology means to “cave-in” on something, the opposite of its original Latin meaning in which it meant quite the opposite, to “defend” this or that.
Thus the slogan Apologia Pro Vita Sua once meant defending ones past actions, and certainly not regretting them, the current interpretation.
Target marketeers grasped the ecclesiastical implications of the word as a technique of signalling to the high-earning and younger impressionable buying classes the corresponding righteous intentions of their clients, and thus of their products.
The journalistic community is only now waking up to the distant rumbling of the apology avalanche which threatens practitioners who go off-piste, off the beaten path of conformity either accidentally or deliberately.
Eliminating natural gas will cripple a hospitality industry already reeling from the absence of foreign tourists.
Restaurants and hotels rely on natural gas to provide low cost power. Especially in kitchens.
But the value to the hospitality industry of natural gas is being tossed aside as the New Zealand Labour government sacrifices small businesses in the rush to accelerate man-made climate anxiety.
The Labour government is determined to be Best In Show internationally in the climate alarmism stakes.
The ACT party in Parliament has been silenced, and even bends a climate knee because it wants to be persuaded that unless New Zealand conforms to climatism it will somehow become a trade “pariah.”
The National Party Opposition is effectively gagged because it believes that it will lose a large slice of its high end professional vote if it is viewed as being overtly hostile to the climate beliefs that have filled the vacuum left by the established churches.
The energy industry lobby has allowed itself to be treated like dirt by the Labour government which at the outset announced to a group of students its ban on energy exploration.
Federated Farmers the agricultural lobby sits on its hands while unknown interests blot out immense swathes of grazing country with trees.
Nobody dare warn, even whisper, that if the globe is in fact heating up that these same quick growing and thus volatile resinous forest plantations present a colossal fire risk.
Nobody dare say that the clamp down on domestic oil and gas can only result in imports and from countries not exactly aligned with the government’s oft-stated human rights imperatives. Saudi Arabia is one example here.
The government’s one-word call sign is “kindness.”
How “kind” is it for a government to deliberately propagate the notion that in Taranaki there is no need to worry about the departure of the energy industry when enterprises like bakeries will take up the employment slack.
This when the same government knows that these same bakeries will not be able to use their ovens because there will be no gas to fire them.
The Labour government and its side kick Green Party promote “green” industries replacing the primary sector while knowing that these green industries are mobile in that they can readily be located offshore and to countries not too fussy about their workforce conditions.
The government and the Greens know too that words such as net zero, carbon, and renewables along with acronyms such as IPCC exercise a curiously paralysing effect on institutions such as ACT, Federated Farmers, and the National Party.
These loaded words leads them if not to “pivot” a knee then to go weak at the knees when they should be stridently indicating the dangers to jobs of the orchestrated litany of half-truths that drives the climate political project.
From the government’s climate bureaucracy we learn that farming is the “whaling” industry of today.
Farming was last proclaimed a relic from a bygone industrial era quite recently, 30 or so years ago.
The financial services sector supposed to fill this farming gap then promptly utterly disappeared leaving New Zealand without even its own trading bank, and with the resulting torrential outpouring of funds that should have stayed in New Zealand.
The New Zealand-based global insurance sector similarly and simultaneously disappeared as a direct result of this “whaling” fallacy syndrome about farming.
The National Party lets the Labour government glibly proclaim unchallenged its climate political project as its overriding priority. Labour routinely trumpets it as a far greater cause than the economy or even the housing crisis, a real crisis this time instead of a rallying one that keeps its faithful from straying
Mysterious Balkan War operative traced to renowned private school in England
A soldier who in three armies participated in at least four wars and changed the face of United Nations has been identified as a pupil of Hill Brow Preparatory School in Somerset recognised as epitomising the high noon of private schools in the 1950s when Bill Foxton was there.
The bizarre disclosure came when the young Foxton was identified in a school photo as the near-mythical soldier of fortune by the mother of his daughter Billie. The mother is Sally Becker aka the Angel of Mostar who teamed up with Foxton in the Balkans during Europe’s biggest conflict since World War 2.
The pair effectively forced attention on the inability of United Nations as a bureaucracy to deal with the fratricidal conflict and Sally Becker also identified the way in which United Nations holds in its thrall media elements, notably the BBC.
The photograph of Bill (see below) featured in the official history of the school compiled by Christopher Newman who was there at the same time as Foxton.
The Hill Brow History shows that Bill Foxton won the school shooting cup two years running and also a swimming cup.
Exactly why Major Bill Foxton was so determined to disguise this background remains unexplained.
His contemporaries included grandees such as jurist Sir Richard Gibbs, educationalist Sir John Dunford and applied ecology pioneer Sir John Lister-Kaye the Laird of Aigas.
Another fellow pupil of the young Foxton was Gordon Strong the authority on the pre-history of England’s West Country.
He believes that Foxton fell under the Influence of the school’s deputy head George Rory O’Brien Newbery who was also the history teacher.
Major Newbery’s great regret was being too young for the First World War. But he caught up in World War 2.
Another fellow pupil at the boarding school at the time recalls Foxton as being exceptionally neat and tidy, of quiet manner and displaying none of the Stalky & Co daring identifying him as the future frontier swashbuckler. A curious observation was that masters and boys alike always referred to him as Bill Foxton instead of just Foxton, the custom.
Still, the real mystery about Foxton remains why he wove a mystery around a schooling that would hardly have been a disadvantage in his transition from the ranks into becoming a commissioned officer. He was similarly obscure about other origins.
His father appears to have come from New Zealand and served with the RNZN, posted to Southampton. Bill was born in 1943. Thus Bill would have qualified for a New Zealand passport, as well as the French one to which he was entitled after his tour in the Foreign Legion.
In the event Foxton’s Buchanesque career took a Hemingway turn in the Balkans when as European monitor he encountered Sally Becker (pictured with Bill above) to whom he soon after applied his paramedic training after a would be assassin shot her through the leg.
The episode is recounted in her book Sunflowers and Snipers – Saving Children in the Balkan War (The History Press.)
United Nations after Africa and then after the Balkans exchanged peace keeping for preaching.
It now substituted for engagement in risky interventions the projection of high-mindedness in issues cherished by the Anglosphere’s politico media sector.
Major Bill Foxton late of Hill Brow Preparatory School for Boys at Brent Knoll personified in operational peacekeeping the end of one era, the soldierly one, in which undertakings were backed up by deeds, and the following era in which covenants are backed by exalted diversions and diplomatic stroking and evasions.
Meanwhile school contemporary Gordon Strong insists that Major Newbery was Bill Foxton’s guiding light inspiring the boy with the shock of red hair to become a participant over the ensuing half century in commotions in Africa, the Middle East, Europe and Asia.
“Rory Newbery taught Bill and did so by example that words always had to be followed through by actions; that contemplation by itself was never enough, and that it was what you caused to happen that counted.”