Politicians, How You Speak About Us Matters / A.J. Hendry

Increasingly, we are becoming more and more divided.

Left and right, conservative, liberal, National, vs Labour vs the Greens, vs ACT. We are our party, and our party is us. And so, political discourse drips deeper into the gutter, leaving little room for civil debate, and little space for seeing the humanity in the person whose political perspective we are opposing.

This reality could be no clearer than the display our elected officials regularly put on “for us” within the Bee Hive.

Just prior to Covid I had the privilege of witnessing such a display first hand. After popping into the viewing gallery in parliament on a blustery Wednesday afternoon, I observed (if only briefly) the manner in which our elected officials engage with one another. There was little in the debate (from either side of the house) that moved the discussion forward. Little that served as productive conversation, little that sort to unify, or bring the other closer toward their stated position. It was just two sides of a room talking at one another. Each trying to win points, and score a cheer from their colleagues, or a boo from their opponents.

But, the most concerning aspect of the discussion for me, was the manner in which our people were discussed and degraded. This was exemplified specifically in Simon O’Connor’s speech. In the process of challenging Housing NZ’s “zero eviction” policy for whanau in state houses, he reduced these same whanau to the emotive label of “anti-social tenants” and “meth users”, dehumanizing them, in order to lend weight to his argument.

Now, it’s possible that you may believe that Simon hasn’t done anything wrong here. Perhaps you would argue that these people are anti-social, and that they are tenants of Housing NZ, so perhaps he is just stating the facts?

Yet, by ripping these individuals from the context that has shaped them, while ignoring the root causes of the behavior he condemns, Mr. O’Connor dehumanizes our whanau, reducing them to nothing but a provocative label. A label, easily utilized as a tool to hammer home the point of his speech, and win political points in front of his colleagues.

This is a problem. For if the people who presume to lead us, don’t even care enough to know us, then how the heck do they hope to write policy that will create meaningful change in our communities?

And in the brief time that Simon had in his speech, he demonstrated that he has little to no understanding of the unique and complex challenges of those he so quickly, and easily wrote off.

Each of the people that fit into those labels, these “anti-social tenants” and “meth addicted” individuals, are people. People with stories, with names, with history.

Each of those stories will be unique and complex, each impacted by some mixture of trauma, mental illness and desperation. Each victims of poverty, each struggling to survive in the harsh society we have created for them.

And yet, because he failed to see these people, failed to understand what has led them to where they are currently, the solution he provided (eviction, and blocking access to state housing), was one that failed to grasp the complexity of their individual situations, and thus was a “solution” that was no solution at all. A ‘solution’ that fails to address what’s going on in the lives of these whanau, and thus will only cause more harm, resulting in more of our people homeless and living on our streets.

This is the problem.

We no longer see people any more.

So focused on winning elections, and scoring points for our team, we easily forget what politics is really about. Real people, with real lives, and real stories.

Human beings, many who are currently just struggling to get by.

Simon is not unique. He is not the only politician to reduce people to a rhetorical device in order to further his political objective. Nor, will he be the last. In fact, only weeks prior to this event, NZ First’s own Shane Jones took aim at Indian immigrants in order to drive home a point he was trying to win for his own side. The comments were labeled racist, and harmful, yet Shane refused to back down. But, NZ First and National are not the only parties that use these sorts of tactics.  This is a problem that exists on every side of the political spectrum, in every home, on every FB thread, and twitter feed, a problem that is only growing as we become increasingly more divided.

National, Labour, NZ First, Act, none are better than the other.

In fact in the example I have given, Labour’s response was merely to shout Simon down with calls of ‘nine years of neglect’ and questions regarding ‘who sold the state houses’.

No attempt to truly engage with Simon’s concerns, and in doing so hope to progress the conversation forward, and perhaps build a bridge across the divide.

No, all Simon received was name calling and derisive guffaws.

Like for like.

No, the discussion in the Beehive has come to exemplify the manner we as a society at large engage with one another.

We are no longer engaging in political discourse because we care about the result. We don’t. All we want to do is win. Perhaps, we think that by shaming, and humiliating our political opposites that we are making a difference. We aren't.

This sort of political dialogue only further entrenches the perspective of those you are debating.

And when what we are debating is the lives and needs of vulnerable people, it only entrenches opposition, and confirms dehumanized and stigmatized images of them in the minds of those we’re debating.

Perhaps we have forgotten what this is all about.

Debate for the sake of debate is meaningless.

If we do not care enough, to attempt to reach the hearts and minds of those who stand on the opposite side of the political fence, then we need to reevaluate. Are we really concerned about making positive and lasting change for our whanau? Do we really care about them? Or is politics just a game we’re all playing?

I have no doubt that on the deepest level Simon is in politics for the right reasons. I would put money on it, that if I were to sit down with him and buy him a beer, that he would express to me that his chief desire is to make our nation a better place for our whanau, and that his goal is to create policy that makes a real difference for the wellbeing of future generations.

Yet, in the game that is politics, it seems that he, and many of his colleagues (blue, red or otherwise) have forgotten who they represent. These people so easily written off and labelled as "antisocial" "gangsters" "criminals" and “addicts” are our people. They are our whanau. They have names, and complex stories, they are human beings just like us.

They deserve better from our elected officials than glib phrases, and dehumanizing slogans.

They deserve better than debates, and arguments, that fail to even attempt to unify the house, or bring people together.

They deserve better.

In fact, we all do.

A.J. Hendry