WHAT A PIECE OF WORK IS MAN

Now here’s an interesting article:

http://www.interestingprojects.com/discussions/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1128

The article’s premise is that many of the followers of Aardvark (AKA Bruce Simpson of Tokora) suggest that politician-basher Bruce should form the "Aardvark Party". The said party would have "the goal of bringing some pragmatism, commonsense, fairness, transparency and responsibility to the world of NZ politics.” Good luck with that, Bruce.

History has taught me that I don’t think such a pragmatism is possible at all. At best, such well-meaning may be possible only in the short term. The problem is, The Human Beast. Specifically, whenever you have a group of people trying to achieve a goal – even the same goal - then you will have competing agendas within that journey. That's how Man jostles for power. And that’s politics. Look at how the even the Russian revolutionaries split into revolutionary Bolsheviks and evolutionary Mensheviks, as an example. One goal, competing agendas. That's the nature of The Human Beast. Frankly, I often think we've barely moved past "animal" (and I'm doing whales and elephants a disservice, here).

In addition, you may well start off with admirable intentions for a Pragmatic Party, but then someone else will sneak in who thinks they can carry the baton better. And, you may call that person lacking in ethics, or simply politically efficient, but the newbie will often stamp over the incumbent to carry that baton forward. This is the norm for a political party of good people, with good intentions: it becomes hi-jacked by professional politicians. And the previous leader will be pushed aside as though he never existed. Look at Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa. Who??!! Exactly. Google ‘em.

Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa (pictured above) were good men, popular figures without political aspirations or political experience. Politically naive, they both found themselves caught up in the populist drive to democratise Eastern Europe. They became figureheads for the popular revolution and ended up, reluctantly, as the heads of their respective countries. What happened to them? Professional politicians took over and kicked them out.

This is because politics is the job of the envious, and the greedy. I can’t help but look at people who WANT to get into politics as (by-and-large) those who WANT to become part of the establishment. Aspiring politicians look at the establishment with envy and greed. Even those few who enter politics with the best of intentions end up becoming infected by the system and the process. Personally, I think the corruption of Tito Philip Field epitomises the self-serving politician, aspiring to the trough.

Such people want to become part of the establishment to secure and wield power. Why? Alice Miller offers the premise that, at some time in their lives, these power-seekers were victims of power abuse. That is, they have been abused by the power that an authority figure in their life has wielded. So, all their lives, they will crave power to secure it, wield it, and abuse it. This is the Power Abuse Cycle, similar to any abuse cycle. Miller, in her book, “Drama of a Being a Child” explained that these very people, who are power-abuse victims, deliberately seek power to abuse it. So, they are precisely the kind of people who shouldn’t be in power; Thatcher, Mao, Bush, Stalin, Hitler are all prime examples. I lived as a student under Thatcher for six years. I didn't like it. Yes, power might corrupt, but you can’t beat a nasty politician coming to power who’s already got some serious issues. Oh, they’ll give you a real rough ride on the Mare of Steel (pictured below!):

As a result of this power abuse cycle, we end up being governed by an establishment that is self-serving, completely lacking in empathy, and even quite malicious. And, my friends, I would even say that about our farcical, so-called, western democracies. As a resident in New Zealand, I look around the world with dismay. I look at how New Zealand, Australia, and especially America, threw off the establishment chains of their colonial masters – only to create a new divisive society. America surely leads the way, and New Zealand is little better:

• “US Affluent Classes Dwarf China and India”
• “Wealth Gap Hits 30 Year High”
• “NZ Rich-Poor Gap Widens Faster Than Rest of World”

As I ponder all this and look at our lessons in history, I sometimes fantasize that the only way to rid ourselves of this shite establishment, and the flies upon it, is mass, violent, bloody revolution. I often think that the only way the masses can seize back control of their lives is by executing the politicians, the civil service, the judges, the police chiefs and the financiers. The French Revolutionaries literally cut off the head of their establishment. Oh but wait - is France now so very different today, say to Britain (which avoided a similar revolution)? Does France not now merely have a different kind of self-serving establishment? After the American Revolution, how many intelligent individuals truly believe America is the land of the free today? And what about the Russian Revolution? Pfft! Now that was a farce that ended up costing the world large-style - almost to its end! The eminent historian AJP Taylor noted that the Bolsheviks may have executed the entire Russian royal family, but hypocritically still used many of the royals' same generals and EXACTLY the same civil service. Crucially, one ruling elite was merely replaced by another.

In fairness, any revolution has to utilise parts of, or all of, the previous establishment - because the entire fabric of society would collapse otherwise. Economies would collapse and violent crime would become the norm. In that sense, I say that none of the previous revolutions have been sincere nor successful. The so-called revolutions changed nothing. This is because you can’t change the nature of Man. I look today with disgust at the way poverty is ignored, injustice thrives and social inequality continues. I look at the insulting way politicians use our taxes to scheme, plot, then coldly deliver edicts that affect us adversely. As I see these things, I can’t help but think that this crap species of ours hasn’t progressed since Roman times. Indeed, in the words of Shakespeare, “What a piece of work is man” [Hamlet, Act II, Scene 2].

A hippy friend of mine once said that anarchy is the purest form of self-government and civilisation. But you can never have true anarchy, because you’ll always have some twat trying to take over. What a piece of work is man.

JUDITH WANTS TO STAB OUR EYES OUT

Now here’s an interesting article:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/7719245/Collins-appalled-by-Scott-Guy-TV-coverage

And so it continues: the erosion of our democratic rights. The continual right-wing spin chips away, trying to push our democratic status back to that of the industrial revolution. And we, as a result of the structure of our democracy, are letting them do it. For many years, the establishment in this country - dutifully represented by the National Party - fought tooth and nail to prevent cameras in court. Now, Minister of Justice Judith Collins (pictured right) claims that it has become a media circus.

And you know what? She’s right.

But don’t faint at me agreeing with a right-wing hatchet-girl, because here’s her spin. Sick of the media’s selective clips, Judith Collins says she wants to prevent court being turned into reality TV. She wants to take away the only eyes in court we have, when we can't attend actual cases. It has become a drama, but I don't think that’s her real motivation. As my article last year expressed, right-wing governments will try their utmost to erode the democratic rights we’ve fought for. And public access into our courts is one of our democratic rights, isn't it? And so, I would say that access to other recordings of proceedings is a democratic right as well. Let’s face it, who pays for the damn court system? IT’S US, THE TAXPAYER, THAT FOOTS THE BILL! Read these articles:

• "Judges go Under the Microscope" [Stuff.co.nz]
• "Jetting Judges Fly at Taxpayer Expense" [Stuff.co.nz]

So, considering the exorbitant wage and expenses bill of the judiciary, isn't it fair that there should be taxpayer accountability? So, isn’t it fair that we should have intimate knowledge of our courts working, as part of that accountability? You’d think so.

However, when my wife and I went to court to seek a restraining order against our next door neighbour, we were appalled at what information is NOT released into the public domain. For example, what many of us don’t know is that court staff produce a document called “Notes of Evidence” after proceedings. Court staff call it a transcript, but it’s nothing of the sort. Why? Because it doesn’t contain HALF of what is said during the proceedings. We were flabbergasted that some key things were seemingly omitted. This included, what we thought, were some flippant and sarcastic comments from “our” judge Michael J Crosbie:

• Sarcastic comments such as, “Yes, I’m beginning to wonder who exactly the applicant is,” were omitted.
• Comments illustrating the judge’s apparent indolence were omitted, such as, ”I’ve got enough cases hanging over me.”
• His summing up, including confirmation that we had suffered distress, was completely omitted.
• His comments, that he agreed with our transcript of abusive comments from our harassing neighbour, were omitted.

And these were but a few examples. Remember, we pay these civil servants in excess of $360,000 a year to be patient and objective. It took us a lot of courage to take our harasser to court, but do you think Michael Crosbie was able to to be patient and objective after hearing THIS case the very same day?

We didn’t think so. We also think he simply couldn't be bothered with our case.

If you go to court - and I encourage you to sit in the public gallery of any court room - you'll be surprised. You’ll be surprised at the time-wasting. You’ll be surprised by the inefficiencies. You’ll be surprised by some of the comments from the judge, as we were. In the research for my complaint to the Judicial Conduct Commission, I was flabbergasted by the sheer contempt of judges and the court system for its paymasters – us, the taxpaying public. There is an entire regime dedicated to NOT releasing information - in a supposedly free society. This regime of arrogance exists because not enough of us know that such contempt exists. It exists, because there are no apparent target outputs or key performance indicators for the judiciary or court system. In other words, this contempt exists because there is no accountability to the public.

And this is the real reason why Judith Collins and the rest of the establishment can’t abide cameras in court – because they show up the true farce that is our legal system. The legal system is not for you and I. It is for the rich, for big business to resolve disputes and to put away criminals who threaten property. Everything else involving us, the public, is a protracted mockery. Our legal system, based on the English system, is not designed to protect us, but those to protect those who rule us.

My belief is that judges have become so resistant to any kind of accountability, that they will push and push and push to avoid it. Jonathon Temm, Law Society president, has cynically used this opportunity to call for cameras in court to be removed. And I think his comments vindicate my take on the self-importance of the legal profession elite. I suspect they have been lobbying Collins for some time for the removal of cameras, or any kind of recording that lets us into the true minds of our deeply arrogant and flawed judges, and our deeply flawed legal system. For example, we tried to have the tape recording of our court hearing released, but the judge wasn’t having any of it. Crosbie had the power to release the tape, but I think he knew there were many things on there that he said during the hearing, which shouldn’t have been said – otherwise they would have been on the “Notes of Evidence.”

Yes, judges make mistakes. We all do. Yes, judges are flawed. We all are flawed. However, unlike judges we have to be ACCOUNTABLE for the things we say and do. Despite the Judicial Conduct Commission, I don’t think judges are accountable, at all, for the things they say and do.

So let’s get back to Collins and her transparently fake disgust. If you were that bothered by edited, dramatic segments of the trial being shown, Judith, why not show the whole trial? Put the video of the trial online as a public document. Have the guts to follow up on your convictions. Oh hang on, I can hear it now: “We can’t show the whole trial, because we want to protect the privacy of individuals involved in the trial." Oh, please. If you read between the lines, you’ll see that Judith Collins’ comments aren’t those of someone wishing to protect the privacy of individuals. Let’s be blunt, after Paula Bennet’s outings, this government has lost its opportunity to say it respects the privacy of individuals.

No, I think Judith Collins’ comments are those of someone who wishes to protect the failings, secrecy, and machinations of our farcical court system - and the contemptuous judges who lord over us.

Further reading:
http://blog.greens.org.nz/2012/09/27/message-to-media-jump-or-be-pushed/
http://www.lawfuel.co.nz/news/442/heralds-take-on-temms-cameras-in-courts-comments
http://www.lawfuel.co.nz/news/440/cameras-in-court-and-on-the-princess-what-judge-neave-might-do
http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/opinion/7728853/Editorial-No-reason-to-remove-TV-cameras
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/14949530/support-grows-for-cameras-in-court-ban/

HOW TO UNLOCK VODAFONE 3G USB K3565 STICK

PREVIOUSLY, ON "A CUP OF VITRIOL" ....
I had given up. I had accepted that my £80 UK Vodafone K3565 Data Stick was about as useful as a paper condom. Here in New Zealand, I looked for unlock software on the internet, only to have intrusive browsers and unwanted software on my PC. I persevered. And then I found THIS tutorial .... IT WORKED!! Not only did it unlock my K3565 for use in New Zealand, but I can now use it on the New Zealand 2-Degrees 3G/GPRS network with a 2-Degrees SIM chip. So wrapped am I, I re-post it here as a "Screw you, Vodafone!"

INTRODUCTION
Vodafone 3G USB K3565 Stick users: you might have noticed that the Stick doesn’t work upon inserting another provider's SIM. In addition, you might have noticed that the Stick also doesn’t work in another country - even with a local Vodafone SIM! It's a pity, because the K3565 Stick provides high internet speed anywhere within range of a GPRS/3G network. At the time of its release, with a top speed of 3.6Mbps, it was one of the best Huawei USB modems. This tutorial will show how you can use any SIM on the Vodafone USB K3565 Stick, in any GPRS/3G country, to access the internet. What’s more you can even make and receive voice calls, video calls from the Stick using the Mobile Partner software. All you need are a few tools and firmware. Although this post is specially written for Vodafone USB K3565 Stick, this tutorial works for all other Data Cards manufactured by Huawei (Idea Netsetter, BSNL 3G etc).

The Vodafone Mobile Connect (VMC) version of the Stick usually comes with VMC Lite software stored in the stick. When you insert the Stick into a USB slot in your PC, the VMC Lite software triggers your PC's Autoplay, asking you to run the software. Before implementing the steps in this tutorial, make sure your VMC Lite software IS installed. So, allow the Autoplay to run the setup file. If you can, make sure the Stick is working on the Vodafone Network of the country of purchase, even though the Stick will not provide internet connection in another country or with another supplier's SIM at this point.

The green or blue blinking light is your indication that, at least, the device is detecting a GPRS or 3G data network in your country, with the SIM you're using. However, your K3565 is still locked to Vodafone, the country of purchase, and even to the Vodafone of the county of purchase! See the Vodafone user guide HERE for details on what the respective lights tell you. This tutorial should leave your K3565 region-free and supplier-free! Follow these steps:

STEPS TO UNLOCK THE K3565

STEP 1 - Find the IMEI Number
First, find the IMEI number of the USB Stick. It's usually written on the USB Stick itself. If the IMEI number isn't written on the K3565 cover, you can use the DC Unlocker Client to find the IMEI number written inside the card on its firmware. Click HERE to go to, and download, the DC Unlocker Client software. Insert the K3565B in a USB slot in your PC. Once it's detected by the PC, run the DC Unlocker Client software to reveal your Stick's IMEI number. Copy and write this number down for use in STEP 3.

STEP 2 - Download the Unlocker Software
Download all the necessary software files and firmware from HERE, through the Reference site at the end of this post, or from Forums mentioned at the end of this post. Move them into a folder where you can see and run the files easily. If you download the software files from the Skydrive Live site (recommended), you should see three grey boxes, like this:

STEP 3 - Find the Unlock Code
You have the IMEI number. You now need to find the Unlock Code for your Stick. To do this, run the “Huawei Unlocker” software you downloaded. It should look like the screenshot below. Make sure you click on the "Huawei" tab, not the "Connection" tab. Type in the IMEI code in the box provided, then click the "Calculate Code" button to reveal the code. Copy or write down your newly-revealed Unlock Code.

STEP 4 - Unlock the Stick
Run the “CardLock UnLock” software you downloaded (screenshot below) and then type in the Unlock Code when you just noted down. Press OK and wait for the "Unlocked Successfully" message.

STEP 5 – Uninstall VMC Lite
This step is where you wish to use the K3565 for a SIM other than Vodafone, by uninstalling the VMC Lite software on your PC. The K3565 USB Stick is now unlocked but it won’t work just yet with another supplier's SIM. First, make a backup of the VMC Lite set-up files, somewhere accessible on your PC. This gives you the option to re-install VMC Lite in the future, in the event you may wish to use a local Vodafone SIM for broadband use. Now, uninstall the Vodafone VMC Lite software that comes with the stick. Only uninstall VMC Lite if you are NOT using a local Vodafone SIM.

STEP 6 - Flash the K3565
Now it’s time to flash the Data Card. Run the installer software “Mobile Partner UTPS16.001.06.01.500”. The software will search and detect your stick (as in the screenshot below). Then, go through the Steps carefully and wait for the process to complete.

That’s it! Now open (run) the Mobile Partner software and you will be able to use the Stick with any supplier's SIM on their GPRS or 3G Network, in any supporting country. This is what your Stick will look like to your PC after Flashing:

Here's an example of the Flashed (unlocked) Vodafone 3G USB K3565 Stick working on the BSNL 3G network.

So if this worked for me, I hope it would work for you too. Caution: Try it at you own risk. I am not responsible for any damaged caused.

Reference Site:
http://indiabee.blogspot.co.nz/2010/07/unlock-usb-modem-latest-technique.html

Data Card Unlocker Forum
http://www.dc-unlocker.com/forum/showthread.php?p=9310

MY “VODAFONE EXPERIENCE”

Now here’s a couple of interesting articles:

“Vodafone earns a Tui's from Aardvark”

“Vodafone's deception uncovered?”

With so much Vodafone talk about the “Vodafone experience,” I want to share MY “Vodafone experience” with you. Today, I have concluded my 6-month struggle to make my Vodem (Vodafone broadband modem, pictured right) work here in New Zealand. And what is that conclusion? I'm told, "Your [80 quid!] UK Vodem can’t be unlocked for use in New Zealand.”

When I was in the UK in June 2010, I was in a house with no internet. I needed internet. I was cut off from the world – naked, alone. Mother says, “You need a Vodafone data stick – they’re amazing and cheap.” £80 down, and a struggle to get it to work, I remind myself NEVER to seek technology purchase advice from my Luddite mother, ever again. The Vodem’s installation certainly wasn’t intuitive! It worked to a fashion, but I was also in a house with poor Vodafone coverage. As I was only in the UK for 7 weeks, I wasn’t too worried about the cost or inconvenience of getting it to work. After all, I could use it back in New Zealand, couldn’t I?

Come the Christchurch earthquakes of 2010-11, I was ruing the fact that I did not test my Vodem stick on landing back in Godzone New Zealand. I didn’t have a New Zealand SIM chip for it, and I didn’t have any credit on it. Power went out as a result of the quakes, and I had no way of emailing, Facebooking or blogging folk to say “We’re OK!” So, I had to (gasp!) plug in an old cord analogue phone, and actually talk to people.

But why shouldn’t my Vodem work? I shouldn't have needed to test it - should I ? After all, Vodafone is an international brand. You should be able to take your Vodafone devices around the world, put in a local SIM chip and use them as you see fit, shouldn’t you? I took my Ericsson phone from New Zealand, bought a UK SIM chip, and BINGO! It worked. Much cheaper than Vodafone Global Roaming, and I still had my NZ phone numbers. However, as the articles above imply, this ability to take MY devices overseas and use a local SIM chip is an increasingly rare occurrence. Vodafone are starting to lock devices so that they only work in the country of purchase. Hands up who thinks that’s bloody wrong?

Vodafone might say, “Well why didn’t you just take your NZ SIM chip over to the UK and use the full ‘Vodafone experience’ with global roaming? Retain your phone number and still send/receive texts as though you were in New Zealand?” Why didn’t I? Because it is sodding, prohibitively expensive. I have heard too many first-hand accounts of friends who have done exactly that, and ended up with a Vodafone bill at the end of the month for THOUSANDS. By locking phones, Vodafone are forcing us down that path. Hands up who thinks that's an exercise in fleecing?

So, when I finally came to test my Vodem here in NZ, I encountered an increasingly ridiculous set of barriers to having it work. When I plugged the Vodem into my new laptop, unsurprisingly, a message told me; “Your software is out of date for your device – please update to the latest version.” So I did. I downloaded a larger, more intrusive Vodafone application to my laptop that wanted to control all my network connections! Sigh. Still, the Vodem didn’t work. I took my laptop and Vodem to the Vodafone shop to be told, I had the “wrong kind” of money on the SIM chip. It needed to be DATA money, you see. Hands up who thinks that’s just silly? So, still no joy. The Vodafone rep continued by telling me, “Hmm … Because you bought it in the UK, you need to phone our Helpline to get the settings changed.” So I phoned the helpline. And just now, “Abdul” from the overseas “Vodafone” Helpline has told me that the device – MY Vodem that I paid 80 quid for – is locked to the UK and can’t be unlocked. In other words, folks, Vodafone devices are now being "zoned."

This is as insidious as the whole DVD-region-zoning farce. As with zoning of Vodafone devices, Region Zoning of DVDs by the film studios has absolutely NO BENEFIT at all to the consumers, and is designed PURELY to achieve the maximum possible additional marginal revenue in the targeted country. In other words, UK consumers are prepared to pay more for a DVD than NZ consumers – but the only way corporations can take advantage of that – C O N T R O L T H A T – is by the region zoning. They make a DVD that will work in the NZ, but not the UK. SO, UK customers can’t buy the cheaper NZ DVDs – they have to buy the more expensive UK DVDs. It is a market aberration - something that the right-wing hacks never talk about when their precious corporations break the rules of their precious “free” market. And they wonder why pirate downloading is so prolific? Vodafone's programme of locking of devices is another perfect example of that market aberration. There is absolutely no reason to lock its devices. The customer doesn’t want it. But Vodafone wants it. Vodafone wants the lucrative, get-money-for-doing-nothing-extra revenue. Actually, it comes down to our misperception that Vodafone is an international company. It’s not. It is a set of local companies called “Vodafone” who all have their own, separate accounting to an international holding company. This, then, actually lends itself to individual country Vodafone companies competing with each other; Vodafone NZ doesn't want Vodafone UK poaching "their" revenue. So, with roaming, Vodafone NZ will secure the revenue when I take my NZ phone to the UK – but not if I buy a UK SIM chip! Hence, the anti-competitive, anti-customer moves from Vodafone to lock devices - when it suits Vodafone.

It gets better (!). Wait till you hear about the hypocrisy. When the boot is on the other foot, Vodafone bleat, “Foul.” In Germany, T-Mobile are also starting to lock their devices - iPhones in this instance. Vodafone wants to prevent this to get a slice of the action. So determined was Vodafone to ensure unlocked devices in Germany .... IT WENT TO COURT:

“According to the [Vodafone] injunction, filed at a regional court in Hamburg, the goal is to stop the sale of the iPhone if it is sold only in connection with a 24 month T-Mobile contract and/or is blocked in such a way that it can only be used in a T-Mobile network.” [Reuters].

In other words, Vodafone wants T-Mobile, the German incumbent, to UNLOCK iPhones (because it suits Vodafone in Germany, of course). Yet, in the UK and New Zealand, Vodafone is doing the exact opposite! Unbelievable. This kind of hypocritical, greedy, anti-competitive behaviour is exactly what sprouts protest from the people [CLICK HERE]. God Bless social media.

And God Bless true competition, in the form of newbie, 2-Degrees. So, stuff you, Vodafone. I’ll bin my worthless £80 Vodem, and buy a rival $45 2-Degrees data stick. At least they seem to be trying to help the New Zealand customer – for now. And yet, I wonder if 2-Degrees will behave in exactly the same way as Vodafone, when 2-Degrees becomes as big. Why did the scorpion sting the fox as he was hitching a ride on that fox across a wide river - knowing he too would drown? Because that’s what scorpions do. Like the scorpion, big corporations will always try to sting the consumers they depend on – because that’s what big corporations do.

KISS THE ALL BLACKS GOODBYE

This is a mighty rugby union country, where kids can start playing the game as young as 3. All three of my kids play for Parklands Rugby Football Club, here in the City of Christchurch, New Zealand. My youngest (5 years) is in his second year of Rippa Rugby. Last weekend, he had the unfortunate experience of playing against a third team from Christchurch RFC. Despite the fact that Rippa Rugby is supposed to be non-contact, at least two players came off injured after being thumped by Christchurch players. One was such a blatant tackle near the try-line, that it should have been a penalty try. This is the fourth time I have witnessed a Christchurch RFC team use illegal tackling and shirt-pulling in a (supposed) non-contact scenario. Saturday’s game has prompted me to pour you another Cup of Vitriol.

Woah! Hang on. Back-up; what the hell is Rippa Rugby?!!!!

Well, Rippa Rugby is the junior (Under-6 and Under-7 grades) version of Rugby Union. Instead of tackling, the kids rip off fluorescent tags from a Velcro belt. It’s not too dissimilar to Touch Rugby. Tackle rugby, in New Zealand, starts at the Under-8 grade. Rippa Rugby is the precursor to that collision game. The clever use of bright tags focuses the kids on the future tackle area; the hips. For my sins, I have the huge honour, privilege and pleasure of coaching my son’s Under-6 Rippa Rugby team. However, with that coaching comes significant responsibility.

I have a responsibility for the kids’ enjoyment of the game. I have a responsibility to develop their skills. I have a responsibility to the Parklands Rugby Club to uphold their good reputation. However, more than anything, I have a responsibility to the kids and their parents to keep the players free from harm under my care.

I believe the worst offenders of these physical infringements, that I have ever seen, are 2012 Christchurch U6 Bronze (and yes, I’m naming you!). Here’s a quote from the official NZRFU site on Rippa Rugby; “It is a very safe, non-contact, easy to play game…” I think the coaches of Christchurch Bronze need to read that statement many times; “very safe and non-contact…” I had FOUR players off injured from contact in that particular game, three weeks ago. “...it’s fun and exciting for all involved…” Two of those players – and we’re talking hardy kids here – had been thumped to the ground so many times, they didn’t want to go back on. The parents of our team, my co-coach, and I were appalled. It was such a disgusting display, that one of our parents wrote a strong and eloquent letter to the Canterbury Rugby Football Union to protest. As a result, Christchurch Bronze will be audited by the Union. But Christchurch RFC is a very large and successful rugby club, and a major part of the provincial Canterbury RFU. I’ve heard parents sign up their littlies at Christchurch RFC, in the expectation of becoming a part of that successful, winning culture. It's apparent that parents sign up their kids there, thinking they'll all be All Blacks. When you see that, you see why winning becomes everything there – at any cost – even in the junior teams. The parents' need to win becomes secondary to the little kids' enjoyment of the game.

I’ve become a cynical boor in my old age, when it comes to “process,” “auditing,” and “taking action.” So here’s what I think will happen; Christchurch Bronze will be audited, I’m sure. And, the coaches might be apologetic: “Oh, it’s kids being kids. We’re trying to rein them in, but they love their rugby soooooo much. And they so want to play for Christchurch.” [yeah, right. The PARENTS want them to play for Christchurch].

From my experience, the Christchurch perspective will be full of spin, and our account will be trivialised: “Oh, come on, they’re exaggerating, this is a physical game, it’s nowhere near as bad as they’re making out, they’re sore because they lost. We’re trying to breed hard kids here. Rugby isn’t tiddlywinks.” In other words, I think nothing will come of it.

Please prove me wrong, Canterbury Rugby Football Union. Show me you’ll take action when our concerns are corroborated, when the safety of 5-year-old kids is threatened.

Setting aside for now, the injury potential for my son and his mates (and that WILL be difficult), there’s a deeper worry the CRFU need to think about. It’s been whispered in my ear that the real reason Rippa Rugby was introduced, was because Mrs White-Middleclass became worried about all those big Pacific fella’s thumping down on poor wee Johnny. Pfff! Really? True or not, the NZRFU say, "Rippa Rugby will promote excellent ball handling and running skills, and give all kids a chance to participate in our national game," before the kids enter the tackle aspect of rugby. Now that, I do agree with.

Yes, yes, yes. I know that my Under-6 kids will have to get into the collision game eventually. I can hear my critics screaming now, “Rugby is a physical, contact game – get over yourself!” I truly don’t have a problem with tackling, per se. My issue with sticking to the non-contact rule in Rippa Rugby, is about giving my players a level playing field (no pun intended). Why should Christchurch Bronze players be allowed to tackle when my players aren’t? Why should I have to take my Under-6 kids, who have been taught running and evasion, onto a field with Under-6 kids who seem to have been taught tackling and shirt pulling? I want to develop my kids LOVE for the game first, before they mature into tackle-readiness. THEN, I’ll develop my fit, hardy players into tackle monsters.

So here’s the clever part from the NZRFU (in my humble opinion): mums LOVE Rippa Rugby. It is truly a fast, exciting kids’ sport that parents love to watch. AND, kids can be playing Rippa for up to four years before they enter the tackle game. By this time, the kids are hooked. They have fallen in love with rugby, as my three sprogs have done. Once the love for rugby is there, the KIDS are in control of their sport, not the mums. I've seen Rippa suck those faint-hearted mums inexorably into tackle-rugby. So, when the tackle game comes along and Johnny gets thumped at Under-8, the mums can “Ooooh! Ahhhh! Ouch! Poor Johnny!” all they like, but Johnny now loves the game - and wants to keep playing! “No Mum, I’m fine – I’m going back on the field!”

And here’s the threat to all that: When asses like the coaches of Christchurch Bronze fail to rein-in the physical play at the non-contact Under-6 level, lots of 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds are going to get hurt. Enough to put them off the game! And if that proliferates to other Under-6 teams, a heap of mums will start to pull their kids out of rugby – before the love takes hold. The mums will take their wee ones back to (gulp!) that strange game with the spherical ball, for histrionic prima donnas. By definition, there will be less young talent going into the All Blacks Funnel. So when that happens, lack-of-depth will threaten the very future of our national rugby side.

And if that takes hold for any length of time, my friends, you can kiss the All Blacks goodbye.

THE PAIN OF BEING RIGHT

Now here’s a couple of interesting articles:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/6673730/Electricity-prices-tipped-to-rise-steeply
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6675785/Tax-cuts-blamed-for-zero-Budget-admission

How are they linked? Well, I predicted electricity price rises as a consequence of reduced income tax revenue in my article last year:

“...all that results in lowering income tax is this:
• It empties the government’s coffers of much-needed tax revenue. Governments then find new taxes to fill them – usually regressive taxes – such as increased GST, increased power bills, or increased duty on fags and booze.
• It gives more money to those who already have it, not to those who need it
• The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer”

And guess what? What have we seen since the Smiling Shark came into power:

* increased GST
* increased customs duties on cigarettes and alcohol
* increased electricity prices.

[Heavy sigh]

I hate it when I’m right. I really do. It gives me no satisfaction when I’m proven visionary and correct (as well as modest) on these issues. This is because I still have to endure the pain of the wrong, when everyone says, “You’re wrong.” In this specific case, my budget is hurting like yours. But when I’m later proven right, it’s too late to change the wrong. I bemoaned another term of right-wing spin after the 2011 election, and everyone laughed at me for exaggerating like an old gay socialist. Well, they ain’t laughin’ now, with their increased GST, increased prices on beer crates and increased power prices. One year on, and the derision on this old leftie is replaced with, “Hmm, why can’t I afford some of the basics anymore? Why is my pay not going as far? Why is my tax cut not helping?” Because lowering income tax doesn’t work. And we still have another three years for the Smiling Shark to do even more damage. Read this exchange about the effect of tax cuts on affordability:

"Tax System Changes—Effect on New Zealanders"

Did you like Bill English's spin? Right-wing governments, eh? You can always trust ‘em to raise regressive taxes and not care about the effects on low-income families. What amazes me is why we let them do it?!! Regressive taxes adversely affect many more of us - real people - than the few who are part of the rich establishment. If you think about it logically, there is no way that a voting populace in a mature democracy would allow a rich 10% of the population to benefit from almost half of the total tax cut revenue. Surely, there is NO WAY that a mature democracy would allow subsequent taxes to be placed on the very people who can’t afford them?

The answer to “How can these happen?!!” is an easy one: because selfish human greed allows it to happen. First of all, the rich few sponsor a political party with the intent on having their own taxes reduced. They bleat that they pay more tax than everyone else. Duh! That’s because they earn more than anyone else! So, when The Few lobby and sponsor a political party to reduce income tax, it’s simply an opportunity cost for them; there is no moral or ethical consideration of the effects. However, that’s only an elite minority with few individual votes. For that party to come to power, we, the voting populace, have to vote them in. How on earth did enough of the population agree to such madness? Well, you, the mortgage whores, allowed it to happen by prostituting your vote. You are intelligent, thinking people, yet you sold your vote to a regressive tax government; for the “crumbs from the rich man’s table.” [Luke 16:19-31]. Do you remember this line when you voted National:

“A tax cut for every New Zealander.”


WERE YOU MAD??!! Did you really believe that GST wouldn’t be raised? Did you not realise that electricity prices would be raised again to raise revenue??!! How did you THINK such tax cuts were going to be funded?!!

Was it worth that temporary little increase in your budget? Your vote was bought.

"The Government is having to borrow in order to cover the tax cuts that they gave and so now it is putting pressure right through the Budget." [Dr Russel Norman, April 2012].

And please don’t whine and tell me, “But I never agreed to raising GST and other taxes. It wasn’t part of their election promise. I didn’t vote for that!” Well here’s another quote:

“To point out the blindingly obvious: New Zealanders in 2008 voted tax cuts for themselves that we could ill-afford as a nation... No one who voted for National in 2008 can genuinely claim ignorance – we were warned. News of the building crisis and recession filled the media. New Zealanders’ greed for money simply outstripped their common sense.” [Frank Macskasy]

You voted for tax cuts. You voted in the National Party. You voted in right-wing spin doctors who had enough financial backing to buy the advertising which kept them there for a second term. So the National Party can do pretty much anything else it wants to for the next three years. Haven’t you learnt that yet?

Clearly, I’m angry and bitter about the behaviour of this National government. I was an impoverished student during the Thatcher years, so after 17 years of right-wing government corruption in the UK, I swore blind I would never vote for a right-wing party. And I haven’t. Sadly, not everyone agrees with me. But surely many of you have similar experiences, haven’t you? Yup, you sure do.

But then a professional “Labour” party gets in and fucks it all up, so that a right-wing party sings sugar-sweet in your ears, and the entire rotten cycle begins again.

Sigh.

RUGBY AND POLITICS - HOW TO CORRUPT THE WORKING MAN

Now here’s an interesting article:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/australia/6273863/league-is-the-game-they-play-in-heaven.thtml

To summarise the article, Mark Latham is lauding the simplicity of rugby league, and lambasting the complexity and elitism of rugby union. However, as I read though the entire article, there was an underlying thread that made me think about the journey of the working man through history. In that context, there is a comparison between rugby and politics. Mark Latham reminds us that the working man founded rugby league. Rugby league was founded as a professional sport to answer the working man’s needs for travelling expenses and subsistence while playing the game. There’s a similar journey by the working man in politics.

But first, I need to point out that Aussie Mark Latham’s logic doesn’t quite add up for rugby union in New Zealand, does it? Here, rugby union has always been the every-man’s game. Colin Meads, Zinzan Brooke, George Nepia and many other working-men All Blacks legends say they played for the All Blacks, despite the fact that they didn’t get paid. Indeed, any resentment or envy has only come out in the last few years when such legends grizzle at the salaries of our new generation of All Blacks legends. Even despite that, rugby union still draws more grass-roots support in New Zealand than rugby league. The article’s premise may hold truth for Australia, but not for New Zealand.

So let’s get back to politics. You know, the pursuit of subsistence while pursuing politics is exactly why the Chartists protested in 19th century Britain. Their Six Point Charter listed demands from the establishment, to allow the working man to have a democratic voice. Indeed, we have since adopted all of those points but one (we’ve rejected annual elections) as the building blocks for our modern democracy. I should add that the Chartists, at the time, were all imprisoned for their efforts.

Eventual success by the Chartists led to the adoption of one-man-one-vote and paid electorates. This led inevitably to working men founding Labour Parties across the commonwealth in the 20th century. Let’s have a look at their record today, say, in New Zealand. How many radical acts or policies do you remember to come out of the “Labour” party in modern times? How many working men in the street would say that the $150,000-earning Labour electorates are in touch with them? There aren’t many voices coming out of the Labour party in support of the Auckland wharfies, are there? Does anyone else find it cynical that such Labour Party hacks are creeping out the wordwork only when the Auckland wharfies dispute has gained mass, popular support? And I wonder how fewer would be those supporting Labour politicians, if Labour was in power managing the dispute?! Despite 11 years in power by our so-called Labour Party, New Zealand is still a right-wing country.

And here’s the comparison: politics is exactly like sport for the working man. As soon as you have a professional sport, paid representatives, it stops being the every-man’s game. It becomes A BUSINESS for the Executive Class to milk. The problem is that working men still think that the legacy sport is “there’s.” Take soccer in the UK. Long ago, former players would end up as coaches, and subsequently form part of the (voluntary or averagely-paid) board of the club. Many a working man still goes to the matches on a Saturday afternoon, but working men no longer run those clubs. A swathe of rich owners and executives own the sport in the UK. How few of those soccer executives actually played the game in the past?


And that scenario is the same for rugby league. Mark Latham’s article is true on the history, but the working man no longer owns rugby league. I find it supremely ironic that Mark Latham, former Australian Federal Labor leader, has written this article. I agree when he says, “rugby league has … maintained its working-class fan base” but I would add that working men have been deceived into thinking that they still own the game. In the same way, we no longer own rugby union here in New Zealand. It is owned by the sponsors and Sky TV. We have sold our soul to the devil (pictured left).


However, the ball sports executives still need the collective money and the collective viewing figures of the working men to feed the game – which is why the illusion is maintained. The ball sports still need the TV ratings to allow the corporate sponsors to sell to the fans. Yet, it is these very corporate sponsors which, like parasites, threaten all ball sports by deluding the working man. Social commentator John Clarke (pictured right) expressed that Sky sports would love nothing else for rugby union than the stadium to be filled with corporate boxes, and the working man sit at home watching the game on Sky – being sold to by adverts and sponsors.

Indeed, I’ll tell you where all these football codes are going. The working men still thinks the team is “Their Team.” Southern men still believe that the Highlanders are from Otago!! The thugs at Chelsea still scream at rival London fans, as they watch “Their Team” compete. But how many of those players were born, or even bred, in Chelsea? The teams from the working mens' ball sports are not “Their Teams” any longer. They are franchises. They are businesses. They are corporations. They no longer represent the working man, whatever the code of football. In America, a number of grid-iron franchises (not teams!) upped-and-left their host cities to move to other cities. The “Oakland” Raiders left Oakland in 1982 – then left Los Angeles to go back to Oakland in 1994!

Fans would become so incensed at “Their Team” leaving, some grid-iron franchises had to move city in secret, in the middle of the night, to avoid the anger from those betrayed, delusional fans. Such is the loyalty of the franchise model and corporate business to its customers – the fans.

And politics is no different. How many Labour politicians do you believe are there to genuinely make a difference for the working man? Or are they there for themselves, at the trough? That’s the dilemma and consequence of having professional politicians in the Labour Party. Sadly, I believe that Taito Philip Field was not the only one guilty – he just got caught.

In the same vein, I wonder how many of the Executive Class in rugby league are there for the sport, Mark?

Let’s leave my radical, rambling rantings finally, and focus on the sport. I’ll focus on the difference between the rugby codes. I agree with the article, to the point that League is more free-flowing. However, I love the technical aspect of the Union game. I love the set-pieces, the scrums, the mauls, and the clever, brutal conflict up-front. Rugby Union has become the thinking-man’s game, while League has become Thug Rugby. And that’s exactly how the elite at the IRB want it. As a prominent board member of the English RFU said to Will Carling (and that’s not all that bloody long ago!), “We can’t have just anybody playing this game, you know.” The IRB want to keep a certain “quality” of individual playing the game – ideally from a fee-paying school! That’s certainly happening in Australia, England and Scotland. Wales and New Zealand still seem to be resisting that, thankfully. However, I wonder with sadness, how long it will be until the IRB makes Rugby Union so complicated, that the game becomes unplayable?

THE CONVERSATION

Parklands residents in Christchurch seem to be screaming out to “Go Red.” They want to take the government “offer” following the earthquakes and get out. I think there’s a lot of folk missing a fundamental point here. If we “Go Red,” those of us who are not insurance re-builds will have to find the $100,000 shortfall - or more - to pay for the same kind of home we had before the quakes, as a result of John’s “offer”. Yes, if we stay “Green TC3,” we may be subject to liquefaction. I know neither scenario is palatable, but if we “Go Red,” the government will deliver us into the waiting hands of the mortgage lenders, property developers and lawyers. Call me old fashioned, but that’s why I paid off my mortgage in the first place – to be rid of those parasites. Uh, oh - I can hear my critics now. I’m going to be accused of being harsh; “These are not parasites - these are professional people providing you a valued service!”

“parasite n. interested hanger-on; sycophant; animal or plant living in or on another.” [Oxford Dictionary]

Now, if I was a cynical man (and recent events are getting me there), this is the kind of conversation I bet took place last year:

JOHN: Hmm. This earthquake’s a bit of a bugger, Gezza. And we’ve got a recession. Our corporate friends are finding it pretty tough in Christchurch. What can we do?
GERRY: What about making those middle-class mortagage whores in Parklands homeless?
JOHN: How would that help the economy?
GERRY: Well, they would need to find and pay for new homes. There’ll be all kinds of spin-off revenues for our friends; land deals, new sections, lawyers’ fees, new mortgages, new house sales. Yummy.
JOHN: We can’t do that! We can’t just turf them out of their homes … Can we?
GERRY: Oh.... Yeah … Good point. Hmmm. Hang on! What about giving them a little “compensation”? Not enough to buy a new home as they had, but enough to give them some more vain hope.
JOHN: Sorry; what do you mean by “more vain hope”?
GERRY: Well, they’ll have to work even longer and harder to afford those new homes (the ones they already had before the quakes), in the vain hope of perhaps getting promotion at work, a pay rise, or even (snigger!) paying off the mortgage.
JOHN: Not sure about this. They’ll be mightily pissed off that we’re not fully compensating them for the loss of their home in the quakes. Let’s face it, we’ve had sixty years to prepare for this, and we’ve given it all away in tax cuts to our friends. Remember, you big bugger, you said publicly on Campbell Live, “It’s all about equity preservation.”
GERRY: Pfff! They’ll forget that. I’ll just deny it or put another spin on what I really said. They’ve been through quakes and liquefaction – they’ll want out at any price.
JOHN: But how the buggery would we afford that? Even SOME compensation is going to cost. Putting up income tax would hurt our friends – the ones who sponsor us.
GERRY: Pfff! We’ve bought off the mortgage whores before. We gave our establishment friends big tax cuts, and those pokey homeowners were happy with crumbs off the rich man’s table. No, we’ll just put up GST and other regressive taxes, instead. Tax the proles.
JOHN: But GST hurts our friends as well – it would mean luxury boats, designer suits and exclusive cars would cost more.
GERRY: That’s OK, they can afford it. They’ve got that back in spades from the huge income tax cuts we gave them three years ago.
JOHN: What about the proles – petrol, food and power will be much more expensive in relative terms.
GERRY: Fuck ‘em.
JOHN: I’m listening.
GERRY: And because jobs are so scarce in Christchurch right now, our friends wouldn’t have to put up with all those moaner mortgage whores asking for pay rises.
JOHN: So what you’re saying is, we make the quake-shocked homeowners homeless, give them some (not a lot) compensation for their house, so that they’ll work harder and longer to pay for the additional mortgage payments? We deliver traumatised, vulnerable people into the waiting hands of our mortgage lender, property developer and lawyer friends?
GERRY: Yup.
JOHN: Get it done.