Knighhoods etc reinstated

It's a done deal.

Interesting..

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10560629

I always thought it was an odd move to do away with them. The reasoning seemed very overthought - as if having them somehow meant we must be England's little bitch. Why can't it just be us continuing a well regarded, globally recognised honours system? Not everything that it old means we are behind the times or not being ourselves. If it did we may as well do away with marriage or rename it... Oh.. wait..

The thing I object to about awards, no matter what the system, is the seeming dishing out of them to people like Michael Fay etc who primarily led lives in pursuit of personal fortune - not for achieving great things or helping others.

what is wrong with having our own awards?

does national intend to undo everything labour implimented?

: yawn :

Welcome back to the 90's... the 1890's. John key and the national party clearly loves grovelling at the feet of his colonial masters, be those our cultural forebears in the U.K. or new overlords in the USA.

THE SKY THE SKY! come on fb it means nothing of the sort.

By my understanding, we have our own awards but the titles are back.



Seems fair enough. Why reinvent the wheel?

Principal and Distinguished Companion don't have same ring or even the same weight.

It sort of is one of those things though that Labour possibly shouldn't have fucked with, but National may as well have left now it was done.

And all the supporters of each party, it would be nice if you could see past your little political divides and stop criticising just because the other side implemented it.

Just to be clear, i am not too fussed either way but it seems to be a perfect solution to let the recipients decide whether to adopt the title or not.

I certainly would take the title Sir if I had the option.

What effects do these titles have? Does it get you special treatment, or is it just a title with no extra privelages?

I don't mind the titles at all.

FB - as we come from both English and Maori cultures do you have a similar view on Maori culture making us somehow less of a nation?

Nothing. But there was nothing wrong with the old ones either. Change for change sake isn't always progress. I don't think going back to the old system is necessarily progress, but ditching them in the first place wasn't either.

The changes Labour made were seen as a cheapening of our awards by many. Being able to call someone Sir or Dame was a special thing compared to *whatever they became* if even only in public perception.

If it is about public recognition (which I do) then public perception is an important part of an honours system. In that case the old system wins hands down imo. If it is about pretending we're not anyone's bitch then the new system is fine.

That's not it - it's just easier to be critical when it is. Same way as I'd slate any party who privatised ACC for example, but it would hold more satisfaction if it was done by a party I didn't vote for.

I don't think perception is a important consideration - its about recognition for good deeds by NZer's, how the public percieves that is up to the public

I'd suggest a lot of people see these awards going to people due to political reasons more often than actual reward for great deeds - all political parties that have held power are guilty of dishing shit out to their 'mates'

I'm for a system that is uniquely kiwi not one that emulates our colonial past

saying all that you lot can now call me Sir Bob and please remember to bow ya fuckers

Interestingly, Labour stopped the practice of applying Ministers and Judges to the Privy Council, so the new PM/Ministers etc AREN'T "The Right Hon" any more.

I like the idea of our own awards completely independent of the British Monarchy, and can see that Sir and Dame were inextricably linked. Personally I think that Sir and Dame carry more meaning and those people deserve that meaning. But frankly, we're being rather presumptuous to ditch their system but say "oh yeah but we like your titles so we're going to steal those, chur".

This is all about grovelling to privilege. Right wingers love it because they love the idea of hierarchy and privilege - because of course they always imagine themselves as part of the squatocracy. It is all about ensuring National can reward all its mates in big business - because apparently it helps you sleep straight in bed at night if you rewarded for sacking New Zealanders and looting our country is a "Sir" or "Dame" in front of your name.

New Zealand is a country founded by people who wanted none of the aristocracy and entrenched privilege of the decadent ruling class in their homeland. Our forebears wanted nothing of the forelock tugging deference of the U.K. when they came here.

All this does is show what a backward looking, white settler mentality the national government has. Those who support this can IMHO keep their cultural cringe, their sense of insecurity and crawling Quisling sycophancy to our FORMER imperial masters.

And anyway - if you want honour, you can just pop over to the U.K. and buy one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_for_Honours

This country is ncreasing brown and yellow, and Pacific focussed. I suppose restoring honours makes old white men in the Northern Club feel better, but it is a huge step backwards in our nationhood and more akin to King Canute than a progressive move forward.

Still, could anyone expect anything else from the national party, a party dedicated to the privileges of rentiers and founded on the principle of New Zealand as a study in economic colonialism?

That's total hypocrisy if you think this guy wasn't honoured primarily for donating possibly millions of dollars to Labour. You can't get more of a back slapping honour than his.

Oh yeah... as for the honours bestowed on people doing just the job they were paid to do in parliament - Margaret Wilson, Steve Maharey and Mark Prebble.

Total lol at those political back-slaps.

So what is your point Rob? That the system is totally corrupt and rather than going backwards to the "Sirs" and "Dames" of another error we should totally ditch the lot of it?

I would have thought Owen Glenn deserved it for the huge donation to UoA alone...

Owen Glenn - and anyone else - don't deserve honours just for altruism. After all, an act of philanthrophy should be made with no expectation of reward.

Deserve was the wrong word - my point was that the support of the University could be seen as the driving force for his honour, as opposed to purely political back-slapping.

That your example of your hated Nats grovelling to their English masters and giving their business mates the nod conveniently ignores that Labour do the same. They are no better in this regard, not one bit - don't even imply they are.

lol. Glad I don't need to change a few words to feel freedom.

Hey, I am sure slaves still felt free under all those chains. After all in touchy-feely land it's all about how you feel, right?

Pretty sure they didn't.

youre a laugh FB. Using dame/knight doesnt not equal slavery in any far fetched sense of the concept no matter how many times you shout it hysterically.

Rather than actually arguing facts you have just been desperately trying to associate the concepts by tedious repetition.

Sounds a bit like the US with terrorism and saddam.

I also notice youre using english, to communicate, i think you should stop immediately least you are being seen to be bowing down to your English masters.

if we didn't bow down to our english masters at high school we'd have got the cane

are you suggesting a return to capital punishment in the school room bob?

I don't like where all this is heading

Huh? What language would you prefer i used?

At the end of the day this is a retrograde step of a dying settler class. I suppose they can hold up progress with stupid decisions like this, but at the end of the day, these will be gone again as soon as national lose and that'll be the final end of it.

Can you tell us under which government the big business mates Ron Brierly and Michael Fay were knighted?

Seems like Labour to me.

Care to explain from a Labour point of view?

pfft that easy Rob "to highlight how corrupt and biased the awarding of titles are in NZ we the labour party award the following doshbags the following awards"

"ha ha national, we sucked their cocks before you"

Here is something interesting. That bastion of liberal thought and leftist argument, the Herald "your views" section, seems to be having the illiterates with keyboards voting 3 or 4 to 1 against bringing back these honours.

yeah the yourviews has been quite out of sorts from the herald massive

suggesting NZ'ers perhaps don't get off on titles and all the hoopla they represent

Yay! I'd rather have awards with 1000+ years of tradition than some artificial claptrap

Fishy, you yourself said you preferred Hawkes Bay to Super 14 artificiality...

Given the make up of this National government, with it's constant godwhistle of it being the revenge of the white male, I suspect they've completely mis-read how New Zealanders see this issue.


Put simply, the sort of British decent, white, upper middle class male that National's front bench is the very symbol of is in decline this country - yet it still thinks of itself as "mainstream New Zealand".

Just because it's not the majority doesn't make it an ideal

And knighthoods are not merely "British." Whether it's "ritter" or "von" ... it's still important

I don't see an inconsistancy. Hawkes Bay is MY place, like New Zealand is my place. It is OUR tradition i want to protect. The Super 14 is an imported marketing construct that is already dying as it can no longer deliver the constantly spiralling upwards entetainment "hit" that something that is rootless and without tradition needs to deliver to keep a feckless public interested.

Similarly, I want NZ to be a proud, independent, and Pacific centric country, where the archaic practices of a foreign, privileged aristocracy are reviled, not aped by a backward looking wannabe squireocracy with the typical small minded world view of an insecure settler class.

Why is one an "imported marketing construct" and the other not? Why is one "archaic" and the other "tradition."

What great deeds have been achieved by knights! My God, man. Agincourt. Crecy. An empire painted red. What have Pacific people ever done that can rival the glory that was Britain?

They made it from Taiwan to Easter Island without charts or GPS or even a compass, and did a thousand years before Cook even turned up.

You mean, of the possibly thousand or so who left their homeland, one or two fluked finding land?

Yeah - what pioneers!

And the Vikings made it across the Atlantic... navigation is only one miniscule part of human existence. Yes, it was impressive, but the British arose from a perfect melange of Roman, Celtic, and Saxon blood; a blend so potent it dominated the world for nigh on half a millennium!

Hey! I must say it is funny to see a bit of open and shut racism every now and again.

Good one Rob.

Bollocks. You conveniently omit the very likely chance that much, if not all, significant pacific migration got where it was was by complete fluke - not planned exploring as the British etc were doing (albeit much later) and who still had an element of chance to their voyages.

Achieving something by complete fluke is not the same as achieving through planned intent. It makes as much sense as hailing a lotto winner as a business expert based purely on the end result.

interesting you say that because......you know what, fuck it, different thread

and when NZ becomes a republic (which johnny boy supports) then what is gonna happen? makes the whole thing kinda pointless doesn't it

Yea, and the odd xenophobia too!

heh you really think it was all complete fluke?