United by idiocracy

Wellington-based writer challenging the status quo. Crafting stories of resistance and solidarity from Aotearoa's vibrant capital. Community organizer, cooperative supporter, and advocate for social justice. Fighting for a more equitable world, one word at a time.

Image.
Salient article: "Is Unity the Answer to Division? Nigel McFall Thinks So" Salient

Just what New Zealand desperately needs - another political party. This time it's called the Unity Party, invented by one Nigel McFall, a security guard whose main qualification appears to be a self-diagnosed case of ADHD which he claims makes it "hard for him to see below the surface." Well, at least he's honest about his limitations.

Victoria University's student magazine "Salient" recently published a piece on him and his Party, titled “Is Unity the Answer to Division? Nigel McFall Thinks So”, devoid of any analysis whatsoever.

Image.
Salient article: "Is Unity the Answer to Division? Nigel McFall Thinks So"

By his own admission, before this diagnosis, McFall "hadn't given much thought to politics at all." What a stunning endorsement for New Zealand’s newest political ‘leader’. Most serious politicians spend decades studying governance, economics and social policy, but McFall's approach is refreshingly unburdened by such trivialities.

According to the article, watching Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke's haka in Parliament was a transformative moment for McFall, who profoundly concluded: "there was just this overwhelming amount of hate, and I kinda just sort of thought, wouldn't it be great if there was someone who could show people how it works?"

Show people how what works? Parliament? Haka? Democracy? Hate? The statement is as clear as mud, yet the Salient reporter apparently didn't think to ask for clarification.

The article attempts to position the Unity Party in the political spectrum, suggesting it might occupy that ‘famously’ unoccupied "centre" of New Zealand politics. McFall is described as "pro community organising" and "strives to honour Te Tiriti" - positions that distinguish him from absolutely no one else in New Zealand politics.

Perhaps the most amusing part comes when we learn of McFall's "outside-the-box" policies, which include "funding New Zealand students to study overseas in places like the Philippines." The Philippines! I'm not making this up. One wonders why ambitious Kiwi students haven't already been flocking to Philippine universities, given that seven of our eight universities outrank the highest-ranked Philippine university on QS’ international rankings. But apparently the Salient journalist didn't think this idea warranted further questioning.

Then there's McFall's flagship policy of "transforming social housing into a community village model with a rent-to-own scheme" along with interest-free government loans for low-cost homes. Has either McFall or the Salient considered the economic absurdity of interest-free loans? Without interest or penalties, what incentive exists to repay them? This is ECON 101, but apparently not covered in either security guard training or student journalism.

When asked about feedback on his party, McFall reassures us that he’s "had a lot of good feedback, but certainly, a lot of hate..." followed by the explanation that people who don't support him "want to keep being angry about the same things rather than trying to understand and learn." This is the sort of profound analysis that surely justifies forming a new political party. Not that people might have legitimate objections to his ideas - no, they must be trapped in anger and ignorance. Yet incredibly, in his next breath, McFall declares: "That's what I want to do. I want to give some understanding to people, because we divide. Politics is about division." This from the man launching a party called "Unity." The irony appears lost on both McFall and the Salient.

The article concludes with McFall's political philosophy, expressed as: "sometimes it's not about what flavour of ice cream you choose, it's about what you decide to sprinkle on it." I'm not making this up. McFall actually said this, and the Salient published it without comment.

What's most depressing isn't McFall's political naivety - that's to be expected from amateur entrants to politics. It's the complete absence of journalistic inquiry from the Salient - a questioning mission. Not a single challenging question, not one request for clarification of these vague pronouncements, not even basic follow-ups like "How would you fund interest-free loans?" or "Why the Philippines specifically?"

The Salient original article is what passes for student journalism in our universities today. At least McFall has an excuse for his superficial thinking - he's told us he struggles to see "below the surface." What's the Salient excuse?