What do John Key, Kim Dotcom and Colin
Craig share in common? Quite a lot: they are wealthy, white, male residents of
Auckland, and shaping the politics of the whole country – each in his own
distinctive way.
The gaffe-prone Colin Craig may have blown
$1.4 million dollars of his own money on failing to get into parliament in
2011, but he is tipped this year to be a supporter, if not a saviour, of a
possible third-term National-led minority government. An inside run in a
blue-ribbon electorate would certainly help both him and Mr Key. Alternatively,
it may be Epsom voters who decide the next government.
Meanwhile, Kim Dotcom is ready to splurge on
his so-called Internet Party. He too may fail first time around to win any
seats. But Dotcom has already had a huge impact on New Zealand politics. Had it
not been for him, Peter Dunne wouldn’t have lost his ministerial portfolio last
year, we would not have had that controversial amendment to the GCSB
legislation, and John Banks would not be facing trial over donations to his
failed mayoral campaign of 2010. Dotcom’s political scoreboard isn’t bad for a newcomer
who isn’t even a citizen yet and is still on America’s most-wanted list.
There’s been some confusion about Mr
Dotcom’s political ideology, though. Some see him as winning votes from younger
people who otherwise feel cynical about politicians, and a threat mainly to the
Greens. But make no mistake: Dotcom represents anti-State libertarianism for
the global internet age, or Rogernomics for online gamers and the nouveaux riches sans frontières (pardon my French!) Some young lefties may be attracted by the way
that he sticks it to the big corporates and the spy agencies. But far-right
free-marketeers always were anti-monopoly and anti-State. And that’s where
Dotcom’s loyalties will lie. Deep down, he’s just another rich … fulla.
In contrast, John Key’s brand of
conservatism is trending further and further away from the neo-liberalism of
the Rogernomics era. Picking winners, doing inside deals on golf courses and
tightening control over schools, hospitals and communities represent a new
brand of politics suited to an emerging world economy in which China dominates.
Such a political regime may become more authoritarian as the world’s economy
shifts its gearing from west to east.
What we are seeing in New Zealand is already
quite distinct from the individualistic free-market fundamentalism of late last
century. A few rich white blokes make it on the political scene, as a CV-filler,
after having made their fortunes in the business world. It’s not so much a
story of ‘the patriarchy strikes back’ as ‘the new plutocrats take over.’
Rule by the wealthy is logical when the
costs of getting noticed and waging an election campaign are so high. And, like
it or not, it is an Auckland elite who are now making the headlines and doing
the deals that define the politics of the nation as a whole. The future for the
rest of New Zealand looks like dairy farms, vineyards and oil-rigs, and dotted
around will be retirement villages that we used to call provincial towns and
cities. Wellington will consist of university graduates in dark suits who will
take their orders from wealthy Aucklanders.
