marsden_online: (write)
Before we get to my submission, here are some guides to writing your own.

* Emily Writes: How to make a submission against the Treaty Principles Bill
* No Right Turn: Submit to defend te Tiriti!
* Green Party:
Make a submission - Treaty Principles Bill

* NZCTU: How to make a submission on the Treaty Principles Bill
* PPTA: How to make a submission on the Treaty Principles Bill
* Greenpeace: Treaty principles bill submission guide
* Honour The Treaty: Submissions

And the official online submission form.

If you want to draw on mine as inspiration for your own personalised submission go right ahead, but please write something unique, don't cut and paste from this without making it clear that you are quoting from another submission :)

Submission )
marsden_online: (Kea)
D had a Significant Birthday this year, and with some money from her inheritance chose to take us both Sydney for a long weekend, and to cram as much into the few days as possible.

This was my first time out of the country, which meant that I had to bite the proverbial bullet and get a passport. This was a bit of an exercise in itself as the photo we paid for from the chemist wasn't adequate and we ended up just having E take photos of me against the kitchen wall with my phone and using the online tool at passports.govt.nz until we got one that was good enough (the main issue was shadows around the eyes).

Travel log, very long with photos and links to galleries )
Overall despite some hiccups it was a very enjoyable and interesting, if full on with little-to-no time to relax, trip with lots of new experiences and many good memories made.
marsden_online: (write)
It's the first New Zealand observance of King's Birthday Weekend since 1952, following the ... transition from Queen Elizabeth II to King Charles III.

A poster on mastodon whom I will credit if I ever manage to find the post again, made mention of tripping over the change in name of the public holiday, and I agree that it should henceforth be called simply "Quing's birthday weekend" until such time as we manage to strike it from the calendar and replace it with something more appropriate to modern Aotearoa / New Zealand. Perhaps a memorial day for the past, freeing up more of Waitangi Day for celebrating the present / future.

Anyway that post put this image in my head, and now I put it in yours.

Jonathan Groff portraying King George in the musical Hamilton, captioned “It's my Birthday!”, “Hooray for me!“

Historical note: the regular observance of Quing's Birthday in New Zealand was set during the reign of a later George than the one portrayed above, George VI.

~~~

People have been pointing out that now is a good time to make the move away from Commonwealth state to Republic, but there is still not the /political/ will do so. Unfortunately our politicians are still for the most part either part of or beholden to the class of people who fear that making that necessary step away from our colonial past will mean having to

* admit to and maybe even [horror] /give up/ some of the social and economic privilege bestowed upon them by the historic and ongoing wrongdoings of the "Crown" and
* take on the challenges of becoming something new, properly recognising the principles in Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

While I am definitely keen on us making the move as soon as practical, there are national conversations we need to have first, and one of those is around what we do about having "head of state" (a.k.a. king, queen or president). I question what we actually need a separate head of state - particularly an elected one - for at all.

The most common suggestion is simply to transfer the duties to the "Governor General" - a title which is already a misnomer as it has had no relevance to the actual governing of the country in decades. The responsibilities as they stand are purely ceremonial/diplomatic/social and actually I would be fine with the idea of codifying that as a (suitably titled) position for conveying and upholding the mana all peoples of Aotearoa on the public stage, as long as it doesn't become just another plum political appointment for MPs who are past their use by date.
marsden_online: (Evil GM)
So one of the side effects of being a temporally challenged DM/Player is that I often have stray character backgrounds and worldbuilding ideas running around in my head. This one is currently not letting me get the sleep that Covid recovery is demanding of me, so I'm going to inflict it on all of you.

[Scene: a group of adventurers sharing background stories]
"So I had a comfortable upbringing you know, wealthy and important family, indulged in pretty much anything I wanted while being prepared for my eventual role in the family empire. When I came of age the suitors also started calling, and that's all I expected, a comfortable marriage suiting both family's business interests.

My most persistent suitor was also someone I thought was a real jackass, you know? And there's a history of bad blood between our kin. Then it turned out they had been quietly challenging any other suitor who seemed to be gaining my favour and either maiming and forcing them to leave the city as a condition for their life or outright killing them.

So I challenged the evil [spits] myself, in public with the proof, and when they condescendingly refused my challenge I ran them straight through their hateful little heart.

So that's how my family ended up owning their family the cost of a Raising and I ended up exiled until I pay my family back. Which is proving harder than I thought, because there's a lot of people out here who need that treasure a more than my family."


Unsurprisingly there's a lot that hits my high points as a DM looking at player background here. Firstly there's some very clear reasons why the character is out adventuring and why that goal might be hard to accomplish. Bonus points for a treasure sink which isn't going to destabilise the local economy.

There are connections to other parts of the world: possibly-mixed loyalties to a family trading business, a potential rival or nemesis, a tendency to get involved with the less well off; all of which could be drawn on for story hooks or provide resources the character might turn to but only by advancing that aspect of the story. These aren't presented in a way where they have to feature immediately or regularly. (If I really want that level of connection, I'll mention it before character creation).

And while good at heart [I would expect that their] actions are going to be strongly influenced by growing up with
- a legal system which they were mostly immune to and
- where duelling (fantasy staple anyway) may or may not be formally acceptable but happens (especially given)
- the standard fantasy RPG availability of healing and even death-reversing magic to those wealthy enough exists,
... in a way which may well lead them into conflict with the laws and customs of the cultures they now find themselves in.

Finally this is a character that can function not only in the dungeon but also at some level of society. (In the general case it doesn't have to be /high/ society, but some people skills, please).

real world introspection )

A later scene )
marsden_online: (Default)
On Friday the 15th of March NZ had it's own mass-shooting(s). I was at an event nearby which was ended early (although we didn't known why at the time) and then returned to my workplace also only a couple of blocks from the worst event.

To start with there was only shock and sadness. Not shocked or surprised that something like this happened, like many others I considered a mass shooting in NZ only a matter of time, or at the direction in the violence was aimed. Just what you would expect from the immediacy of the event.

Once I had time to process things I also began to feel how lucky I am - not to have not been involved but almost the opposite

- the shooter was a blond, white male. I am also a blond white male, but I am at no risk of suffering any sort of "reprisal" because I happen to share one of these physical characteristics with him
- I did not need to spend the next days and nights worrying that there might have been another gunman still loose out there for whom I was a target. I do not need to worry that another radicalised individual might be out there planning a repeat or variation in which I will be a target, or even that just by walking down the street I might become a target of opportunity for someone equally full of hate and just a little less stable.
- my personal risk of being a victim of gun violence or indeed any sort of violence feels no more immediate than it did last week.

There was no anger at that time. There is still no anger towards the event. I believe that exhaustion from other areas of my life simply left me no energy to be angry. But then articles like this one:
At least five years of solid government engagement across a National-led and then a Labour-led government. We begged and pleaded, we demanded. We knocked on every door we could, we spoke at every forum we were invited to.

At a major security conference in February 2018, Aliya challenged the sector: if you can spend so much on surveilling our community, why can you not spend on preventative programmes?

and this one:
Planned and executed with complete impunity and without any hesitation, the massacre took place because the perpetrator, like so many others before him, felt a confidence that in our societies is afforded only to white men.

He felt this confidence, and was vindicated for it. As media, politicians, and everyday discourse focused on the threat of radicalisation supposedly harbored by Muslim communities – a suggestion that would now surely be farcical if its consequences weren’t so tragic – as the SIS and the GCSB were busy scouring the facebook accounts of Māori activists and Muslim youth, this man blithely and unashamedly made his violent intentions plain and clear, and visible for all to see.

I’ll never forget the many meetings and roundtables I attended, alongside other Muslim advocates and leaders, where we argued and pleaded, pointlessly it seems, with different government agencies to turn their attention from our communities and mosques to the real threats in this country. I’ll never forget the empty reassurances, let alone the smirking faces as someone dismissively joked, in reference to the far right and white supremacists in New Zealand: ‘it’s hard to take these guys seriously.’


... stirred the coals of a different anger. About our unquestionably white-centered "security" services, who would rather browbeat environmentalists and create phantoms of Māori or Islamic violence to chase than look into genuine threats to our citizens.

I wrote then (on Facebork)

"Up until now I haven't had it in me to feel angry about this situation. Now I am angry. At the so-called security services of this country and other agencies whose job it was to recognise and act on the concerns of these communities and who absolutely failed in that duty. In doing so they have failed not only the Moslem citizens of New Zealand but *all* of us and they should be held to account commensurately.

They won't be of course. They never are :( "

~~~
There have also been a lot of (white) people crying "this isn't us, this is not our New Zealand." I'm glad to say that there has come a great pushback against that in opinion pieces from white writers I respect as well as from less-white ones sharing their experiences.

Toby Morris summed it up in cartoon format here.

But if you have any doubt about the depth of racism and other isms in New Zealand society you only need to pause and imagine what the ... I'm going to use outcry as a moderate term for it ... would be if one of the "major" political parties were to elect or appoint as leader someone who was something other than a practicing or passes-for-lapsed Christian, or anyone clearly of other than Pākehā or Māori descent. The dogwhistles and allusions of loyalty to "somewhere else" which would permeate an election under those conditions.

Or to quote from the first article linked above:
I would ask you to picture this: what if the shooting had been a Muslim perpetrator, and it was 50 non-Muslim New Zealanders who had been shot? Would our community be receiving the same level of support that we have today?

Imagine what the media commentary would have been like. We would not have been able to leave our homes, the level of retaliatory attacks on our community would have been swift and immediate, and the police would have struggled to provide any meaningful protection.

Yet I can walk without fear.

~~~
On a final note there are of course people saying that the shooter should receive a death penalty, whether delivered formally or informally. I say that is too good for him, a martyrs end. He deserves to grow old in a place from which he can influence or harm no-one, watching New Zealand come together into a more integrated and caring nation despite of or even because of what he has done.

I believe that we do currently have the political leadership to act on the current mood and momentum for change but whether we actually mange to accomplish that better nation is left as an exercise for the reader.
marsden_online: (write)
Emailed to Mr Peters and CCed to the other elected members of the NZ First party after the 2017 election
-----
Dear Mr Peters,

I fear it has taken me too long to find the time to write to you. Nevertheless as in modern times democracy is considered to be a one man, one vote system and right now in New Zealand you are that man and you have that vote so I am writing to you as my representative under the circumstances to express my preference in the matter of the forming the next government.

I urge you please to not go with National. We have had 9 years of men and women who to all appearances view the business of government as one of rulership not representation. This attitude is boldly reflected in their insistence that having the largest minority of a vote somehow entitles them to continue to "govern". As you yourself have stated this is not how things (are supposed to) work under a proportionally representative system such as MMP, and it saddens me that our national psyche and in particular our media continue to maintain an abusive relationship with the idea of "winner takes all" in our political system.

While my ideal would to be to see a fully functioning coalition of NZ First / Labour / Greens working together to re-establish and repair the social safety net New Zealand could once rightly claim to be proud of, I also believe that my second option of a minority Government, Labour simply supported by your party and the Greens from the cross-benches on supply and confidence issues would in the long term be better for the maturity of our political system and our whole country's understanding of politics. Let every piece of legislation be debated thoroughly and stand/fall on it's merits rather than because it's proponents happen to be able to whip an unassailable majority into line.

Please step up to demonstrate government by consensus instead of by fiat and tribal opposition to the policies of others; please do not give more fuel to those who loudly proclaim the idea that one party must dominate over the idea of visible representation for those who most dearly need it and can least afford it.

But please also bring decisions and debates out into the open. Put an end to negotiations and horse-trading behind closed doors, the outcome to be revealed as a fait accompli (or rammed through as such under urgency) when the final vote happens. I would not have mentioned this except for the disquiet raised by recent reports that this decision which will set the fate of our country for at least the next three years is being made behind closed doors by people we quite possibly did not elect to be our representatives in this matter. You and your fellow NZ First MPs are those we have elected and while I certainly expect you to seek counsel from others; I also believe the credibility of the next government of NZ hinges on the those who are ultimately making the decision being visible and accountable; with the sort of transparency you yourself have so often argued for in our politics.

But to come back to my main point: I would much rather have a mostly deadlocked government which made slow progress or at least made things no worse than another 3 years of those who have proven to be very good at further disenfranchising the least well off in this country to their own benefit. I have seen the effect of National's policies among my own friends Mr Peters, and I do not believe that even you can convince them to manifestly reverse or even halt the harm they are doing. That sort of change withing the party will require will require some time out on the, and you may correctly surmise from my above comments that I strongly dislike the continued use of this term post FPP, "opposition" benches and the same sort of generational change within their ranks as Labour has seen.

We are now seeing the possibility for the first time in my life of a "prime minister" younger than I, and I would also love for this to become a reality. Youth are our future.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. I am also taking the liberty of of publishing it openly in my journal which can be found at https://marsden-online.dreamwidth.org

Due regards etc etc,

[Contact information redacted]

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Most Popular Tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Style Credit

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios