"It is their job to make sure that the system works. They are not its owners; but neither are they its victims; they are simply the people charged with keeping everything going."
Hmm.... Well I shall reply to myself on this issue, given what Very Left writer Danyl Mclauchlan wrote in the Spinoff in 2022 as he contemplated the mayriad failures of Ardern and company.
"The crisis in the health system is happening alongside an $11 billion project to reform the health bureaucracy. Also underway is the centralisation of the polytechnics…. “FENZ had $468m capital expenditure in the last five years and firefighters are questioning where the money has gone,” Muller said. “There has been no improvements to resourcing over that period… We are witnessing fire trucks breaking down across the country.”…"
The reason has been around for some time, and Mclauchlan didn't reach for Scruton but somebody much closer to his area:
"In 1994 the US historian and cultural critic Christopher Lasch died, and a year later his final book The Revolt of the Elites was published. Lasch started his career as a socialist and ended it as a hard-to-categorise hybrid of anti-capitalist, anti-consumerist pro-environmental conservative. The revolting elites in his book are the professional managerial class: the educated technocrats who occupy a commanding position across post-industrial economies, not by direct ownership of capital or overt command of the political system but by managerial control of all our institutions. They run everything. I’ve written about the professional managerial class [PMC] before – I don’t think you can understand 21st century politics without them – and for Lasch their most important qualities are: a) they’re a global class; b) they’re more concerned with the virtual and abstract than the physical, and, c) the primary purpose of their politics is therapeutic."
At the dawn of the Weimar Republic, Max Weber, the original technocrat, identified the centre with what he called the politics of responsibility, as opposed to the politics of conviction: whether socialist in the sense of the German Communist Party which refused to cooperate with others, free-market in the sense of those who would restore the currency by letting the workers starve, or the proto-Nazis who would eventually come through the middle. In other words, the whole point of centrism is to prevent fascism and demagoguery by being *responsible* about what works and staving off those who merely want to smash things up in the *conviction* that an ideal world will emerge from the ruins (it seldom does). This is the original and best definition of centrism, which doesn't look so bad when compared to the conviction politicians of Thatcherism and Rogernomics, let alone anyone worse.
It is a sign of the innocence of the English-speaking world that we use "conviction politician" as a term of praise. Not like the Germans, who have for the last 80 years made a virtue out of being boring, at least until recently,
I like that definition of centrism because it's pretty much how I define myself and how I vote. I am completely non-tribal and each and every election genuinely keep an open mind and vote for who I think will be the best for the country (something that has become more and more difficult)
I am neither "left wing" or "right wing" although I am influenced by aspects of both.
I certainly vote for policy and not personality. I've noticed that people hold centrists in a certain amount of contempt as "not having an opinion" which is complete crap. I just won't blindly follow team red, green, blue or anything else, and I despise politicians that try to treat me as an idiot.
I notice that you don't mention of the capture of the PMC by Critical Theory and its off-shoots which had its genesis in Germany between the world wars then migrated to Stanford to pollute the rest of the West. Yes, I know, it's one of my hobby-horses, but the effects of this capture are pervasive and pernicious and are going to be with us for a long time. So long as the members of the PMC operate from a position of there being no absolutes or truth we're going to be stuck with what you describe here: "They did not even try to hide their contempt for the poorly-educated and uncredentialled citizens who dared to challenge the prerogatives of expertise." I voted Labour all my adult life (I'm nearly 80) until the last election and I've really resented being described as extreme right-wing, regarding myself as more of a centrist, but perhaps now I'll let go of my umbrage and forget about labels and continue to vote what I call strategically.
I often see someone described as "Far Right", then listen to what they say (usually somewhat different to what is reported) and think "that sounds reasonable". I thought I was a right leaning conservative but, accordingly, I must be far right too.
I think women are starting to see the danger in their embrace of compassion applied where it shouldn't be, Eve's eternal snake taken to the breast. That brutal murder of young Iryna Zarutska by someone that should have been in preventative custody has opened a few eyes. Not that there is any shortage of murder and brutality.
The great Mary Harrington: The mutiny of Middle England’s mums.
Excerpt: "one of the crucial background factors that makes the difference between life as a mum being pleasant or stressful is the safeness and familiarity of your everyday environment: for example, how likely you feel to be physically threatened or robbed, or encounter random hostility, or worry about your children going out alone. This sense of safety is both intangible and immeasurably valuable.......
...a reminder to our feckless, faltering regime that Middle England’s public-spiritedness is the engine of grassroots social organising. And the flip-side of sugary sentimentalism is a vengeful mob. So Starmer and Farage alike should be grateful that the country’s normie mums are still just about willing to trust the political process. Should that trust be disappointed, as it has been so often before, the sequins may be swapped for something more steely."
The "Yes, Minister" excerpt by Tom encapsulates it rather well.
Both National and Labour are moderate parties, though obviously from different perspectives. It is a recognition that in a democracy, people value choice and freedom. And importantly, societal cohesion.
So no extremes. Not Libertarianism or Marxism, neither of which will have the support of the majority. It is highly unlikely that the Green's utopian vision, which could only be achieved by a truly ruthless state apparatus, could ever appeal to the moderate majority.
Our host had an interesting speech at the NZF conference (which he should post here for comment). A Radical middle. A contradiction I would have thought.
Yes a fine speech that one. Chris did put it up on here (The Once and Future Nation) a couple of days ago but you may have seen the transcript on The Good Oil - paywalled but accessible for 99cents.
Ani O'Brien has a very good essay up on her Substack, The Path To The Balkanisation Of New Zealand that might interest you as well.
The accepted interpretation of centrist was something I thought was relatively straight forward until you give us this essay Chris. Being politically centrist may well differ with all of us depending on how extreme our political views are. Socialist, centrist and Liberal can all be authoritarian if need be or if that is what their leader becomes. We saw that clearly as Chris has described, with the Covid response. IMO regardless of political persuasions when a crisis happens we require our leaders to make decisions some of which are regretful and certainly not popular. Many NZrs have no issue with the Labour government’s initial response to the outbreak of the pandemic. Our memories are short in that the Delta virus was killing large numbers of people. With only being able to guess what might happen, they made their decisions and I agreed with them. It was only further down the track that their authoritarian decisions got it wrong.
We would hope that a Liberal government such as Act would lead, would make the same initial decisions rather than follow their hearts, and let the general public make their own minds up individually how they would treat the situation.
Maybe for most people who describe themselves as centrist, they see their vote as a hand brake, or insurance , against the views of those who they see as too socialist or too liberally radical. Others simply vote for change because change isn’t happening fast enough for them. IMO TOP is an interesting mix of everything. Environmentally the polluter will pay, Health and education will have extra support, there would be a land value tax. Maybe they could call themselves the Greens, however slashing benefits in favour of a universal wage is more Acts territory I would have thought.
One thing is for sure those who see themselves as disenfranchised won’t be anywhere near what is commonly called centrist.
NZ politics is strewn with the wreckage of "sensible centrist" parties. TOP is just the latest example previously paved by United Future and the 1990s Liberals. Furthermore, the fence that sensible centrists sit on has been blown over by the Great Recession, and the upwards shift of wealth in favour of the superyacht class.
Chris I think TOP may now be centred on Christchurch because in the 2023 election their then leader stood in the Ilam seat. If the next leader is from there too that would probably confirm what I say.
Every small party in parliament has come from an offshoot of a bigger party. Apart from ACT(directly) maybe. TOP probably did well to get to 2.5%, without been gifted a seat , or a defector , 5 % has proven to be insurmountable so far.
"It is their job to make sure that the system works. They are not its owners; but neither are they its victims; they are simply the people charged with keeping everything going."
I am reminded very much of this discussion...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPsHfVCFLhU
Sir Humphrey: "Government isn't about morality."
Hacker: "Really? What is it about then?"
Sir Humphrey: "Stability. Keeping things going. Preventing Anarchy. Stopping society falling to bits. Still being here tomorrow "
Hmm.... Well I shall reply to myself on this issue, given what Very Left writer Danyl Mclauchlan wrote in the Spinoff in 2022 as he contemplated the mayriad failures of Ardern and company.
https://thespinoff.co.nz/the-sunday-essay/28-08-2022/the-sunday-essay-an-administrative-revolution
"The crisis in the health system is happening alongside an $11 billion project to reform the health bureaucracy. Also underway is the centralisation of the polytechnics…. “FENZ had $468m capital expenditure in the last five years and firefighters are questioning where the money has gone,” Muller said. “There has been no improvements to resourcing over that period… We are witnessing fire trucks breaking down across the country.”…"
The reason has been around for some time, and Mclauchlan didn't reach for Scruton but somebody much closer to his area:
"In 1994 the US historian and cultural critic Christopher Lasch died, and a year later his final book The Revolt of the Elites was published. Lasch started his career as a socialist and ended it as a hard-to-categorise hybrid of anti-capitalist, anti-consumerist pro-environmental conservative. The revolting elites in his book are the professional managerial class: the educated technocrats who occupy a commanding position across post-industrial economies, not by direct ownership of capital or overt command of the political system but by managerial control of all our institutions. They run everything. I’ve written about the professional managerial class [PMC] before – I don’t think you can understand 21st century politics without them – and for Lasch their most important qualities are: a) they’re a global class; b) they’re more concerned with the virtual and abstract than the physical, and, c) the primary purpose of their politics is therapeutic."
At the dawn of the Weimar Republic, Max Weber, the original technocrat, identified the centre with what he called the politics of responsibility, as opposed to the politics of conviction: whether socialist in the sense of the German Communist Party which refused to cooperate with others, free-market in the sense of those who would restore the currency by letting the workers starve, or the proto-Nazis who would eventually come through the middle. In other words, the whole point of centrism is to prevent fascism and demagoguery by being *responsible* about what works and staving off those who merely want to smash things up in the *conviction* that an ideal world will emerge from the ruins (it seldom does). This is the original and best definition of centrism, which doesn't look so bad when compared to the conviction politicians of Thatcherism and Rogernomics, let alone anyone worse.
Right, suitably chastised for channeling Roger Scruton, I shall proceed to read Herr Weber.
It is a sign of the innocence of the English-speaking world that we use "conviction politician" as a term of praise. Not like the Germans, who have for the last 80 years made a virtue out of being boring, at least until recently,
And I don't mean boring in the Keir Starmer sense, of course ...
I like that definition of centrism because it's pretty much how I define myself and how I vote. I am completely non-tribal and each and every election genuinely keep an open mind and vote for who I think will be the best for the country (something that has become more and more difficult)
I am neither "left wing" or "right wing" although I am influenced by aspects of both.
I certainly vote for policy and not personality. I've noticed that people hold centrists in a certain amount of contempt as "not having an opinion" which is complete crap. I just won't blindly follow team red, green, blue or anything else, and I despise politicians that try to treat me as an idiot.
Here's an article about the Weber definition, by the way: https://www.project-syndicate.org/onpoint/max-weber-and-the-crisis-of-democracy-by-enrique-krauze-2025-09.
I notice that you don't mention of the capture of the PMC by Critical Theory and its off-shoots which had its genesis in Germany between the world wars then migrated to Stanford to pollute the rest of the West. Yes, I know, it's one of my hobby-horses, but the effects of this capture are pervasive and pernicious and are going to be with us for a long time. So long as the members of the PMC operate from a position of there being no absolutes or truth we're going to be stuck with what you describe here: "They did not even try to hide their contempt for the poorly-educated and uncredentialled citizens who dared to challenge the prerogatives of expertise." I voted Labour all my adult life (I'm nearly 80) until the last election and I've really resented being described as extreme right-wing, regarding myself as more of a centrist, but perhaps now I'll let go of my umbrage and forget about labels and continue to vote what I call strategically.
These points bear repeating, Aroha. Thanks for reminding us.
Same.
I often see someone described as "Far Right", then listen to what they say (usually somewhat different to what is reported) and think "that sounds reasonable". I thought I was a right leaning conservative but, accordingly, I must be far right too.
I think women are starting to see the danger in their embrace of compassion applied where it shouldn't be, Eve's eternal snake taken to the breast. That brutal murder of young Iryna Zarutska by someone that should have been in preventative custody has opened a few eyes. Not that there is any shortage of murder and brutality.
The great Mary Harrington: The mutiny of Middle England’s mums.
Excerpt: "one of the crucial background factors that makes the difference between life as a mum being pleasant or stressful is the safeness and familiarity of your everyday environment: for example, how likely you feel to be physically threatened or robbed, or encounter random hostility, or worry about your children going out alone. This sense of safety is both intangible and immeasurably valuable.......
...a reminder to our feckless, faltering regime that Middle England’s public-spiritedness is the engine of grassroots social organising. And the flip-side of sugary sentimentalism is a vengeful mob. So Starmer and Farage alike should be grateful that the country’s normie mums are still just about willing to trust the political process. Should that trust be disappointed, as it has been so often before, the sequins may be swapped for something more steely."
Oops. Link to Mary's essay: https://unherd.com/2025/09/the-mutiny-of-middle-englands-mums/
Thanks David. Will watch when I've caught up after a couple of days away.
Here's a great conversation for you, Aroha, gets to the nitty gritty.
Mary Harrington and Paul Kingsnorth: The only way is through.
https://youtu.be/o_7cBBEbOJA
Thank you, indeed it does get to the nitty gritty. A great watch.
Isn't Centrist the same as being Moderate?
The "Yes, Minister" excerpt by Tom encapsulates it rather well.
Both National and Labour are moderate parties, though obviously from different perspectives. It is a recognition that in a democracy, people value choice and freedom. And importantly, societal cohesion.
So no extremes. Not Libertarianism or Marxism, neither of which will have the support of the majority. It is highly unlikely that the Green's utopian vision, which could only be achieved by a truly ruthless state apparatus, could ever appeal to the moderate majority.
Our host had an interesting speech at the NZF conference (which he should post here for comment). A Radical middle. A contradiction I would have thought.
It's up on this site, Wayne. "The Once and Future Nation".
Yes a fine speech that one. Chris did put it up on here (The Once and Future Nation) a couple of days ago but you may have seen the transcript on The Good Oil - paywalled but accessible for 99cents.
Ani O'Brien has a very good essay up on her Substack, The Path To The Balkanisation Of New Zealand that might interest you as well.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-172596183
The accepted interpretation of centrist was something I thought was relatively straight forward until you give us this essay Chris. Being politically centrist may well differ with all of us depending on how extreme our political views are. Socialist, centrist and Liberal can all be authoritarian if need be or if that is what their leader becomes. We saw that clearly as Chris has described, with the Covid response. IMO regardless of political persuasions when a crisis happens we require our leaders to make decisions some of which are regretful and certainly not popular. Many NZrs have no issue with the Labour government’s initial response to the outbreak of the pandemic. Our memories are short in that the Delta virus was killing large numbers of people. With only being able to guess what might happen, they made their decisions and I agreed with them. It was only further down the track that their authoritarian decisions got it wrong.
We would hope that a Liberal government such as Act would lead, would make the same initial decisions rather than follow their hearts, and let the general public make their own minds up individually how they would treat the situation.
Maybe for most people who describe themselves as centrist, they see their vote as a hand brake, or insurance , against the views of those who they see as too socialist or too liberally radical. Others simply vote for change because change isn’t happening fast enough for them. IMO TOP is an interesting mix of everything. Environmentally the polluter will pay, Health and education will have extra support, there would be a land value tax. Maybe they could call themselves the Greens, however slashing benefits in favour of a universal wage is more Acts territory I would have thought.
One thing is for sure those who see themselves as disenfranchised won’t be anywhere near what is commonly called centrist.
The PMC’s grip on the US Democrats is part of the reason Donny Pooh Pants was so easily able to fire up the MAGA crowd & others against them.
NZ politics is strewn with the wreckage of "sensible centrist" parties. TOP is just the latest example previously paved by United Future and the 1990s Liberals. Furthermore, the fence that sensible centrists sit on has been blown over by the Great Recession, and the upwards shift of wealth in favour of the superyacht class.
Chris I think TOP may now be centred on Christchurch because in the 2023 election their then leader stood in the Ilam seat. If the next leader is from there too that would probably confirm what I say.
You are 100% correct, Donald. I'm kicking myself for forgetting that!
Every small party in parliament has come from an offshoot of a bigger party. Apart from ACT(directly) maybe. TOP probably did well to get to 2.5%, without been gifted a seat , or a defector , 5 % has proven to be insurmountable so far.
ACT's founders were Roger Douglas (ex-Labour) and Derek Quigley (ex-Nats).
I wasn't sure if they went directly to Act, or had break in-between.