In 1999 at Seattle anti-globalists began to proclaim imminent counter-revolution as the World Trade Organisation trade liberalisation talks collapsed.
In 2003 at Cancun their triumphalism waxed when the G20 (“group of 20”) less-developed nations stymied cynical big-economy manoeuvrings.
Books were written, by John Ralston Saul among others, pronouncing globalisation dead and nationalism resurgent.
Christian religion does not intrude much on most people’s daily lives these days — except to furnish holidays.
Of course, by inheritance and long custom this society is at some deep level judaeo-christian. The latter five of the 10 commandments underlie, however weakly, our social code and the golden rule frames it.
Immigration Minister David Cunliffe framed his proposed new legal framework last week against the Prime Minister’s three priorities, economic transformation, prosperous and secure families and a “strong national identity”. The last has deep importance.
National identity asks: “Who is the nation?” And it asks: “To what values must a person subscribe to be part of the nation?”
Loud, long and legal. That is one business encapsulation of what needs to follow the carbon tax (R.I.P.). If so, business could usefully get in at the design phase.
The point for business to grasp, especially in grumpy Auckland, is that international politics and international business are embedding climate change as a policy threat. Something will fill the carbon tax hole.
Do you think the Greens are optimistic or pessimistic? This question is relevant because pessimists are more likely to be problems than solutions.
The Greens habitually tell us we are unregenerate consumers of our children’s and their children’s futures. We are killing the planet. One climate change website (not run by the Greens) calls itself “ark”, as if we need rescuing from ourselves.
After the binge comes the hangover. Next month’s Budget is a case in point.
The 2005 election was a throwback to 1970s-style spend-it-all campaigning. National spent up to the eyeballs in tax cuts, Labour in tax relief via Working for Familes, interest rate relief via student loans and swags of money for hip operations and much, much else.
From what you hear through the noise of political argument, what would you say the National party stands for?
Lots lower taxes. Lots more hospital operations. Lots of choice of school. Lots and lots more roads, some private. Lots more prisoners in lots more prisons for a lot longer. Lots faster resource consents (except when farmers object). Lots less political correctness, especially for iwi (versus Kiwi).
Bothered about the exodus to Australia? Wait a few decades and water might fix it.
While most promoters of environmental apocalypse focus on oil, of which there is still rather a lot, it might be water that slows the world economy.
And this country, unlike Australia, is pluvial. Prepare for an Australian invasion later this century, gold medals clanking in their luggage.
Politicians like to talk about market failure, the parts of life the market cannot reach. It justifies politicians’ place in the scheme of things. They don’t often talk about democracy failure.
I don’t mean the election expenses disgrace which the police last week compounded: a case to answer was found but no answer shall be called for. Happily for the police, the election result accurately reflected the country’s mood, so the matter will now fade.
Some United States military men have been visiting in recent weeks and militarist Tony Blair will be keynote speaker at a climate change conference in two weeks. It is cause to remember Iraq.
More precisely, it is a time to remember the invasion of Iraq three years ago next Monday by Blair, George Bush and hangers-on .