TPPA Flag Change not connected? Yeah Right.

Apparently my anti TPPA blog on Due Authority
has up set the apple cart in the anti TPPA protest movement itself.

This is my 6 points on why I think my blog has relevance.

1. If my point about the flags gets average Kiwis passionate against the TPPA how can this be  bad thing?

2. DUE AUTHORITY two simple words.

Everu one understands the concept of “due process” how it apply to the law this is same concept but relates to the issue of authority as it stands in the social contract between a people and their state.

Under whose authority is this deal being signed?
Under whose authority do our courts answer to?
Under whose authority is our constitutional authority currently interpreted ?

Our flag is simply a symbolic answer to all theses question.

If you chance one these things it does not change a great deal.

Yet if you change all of them – then yes it changes the very nature of what DUE AUTHORITY means and that has huge consequences in relation to the TPPA even being legally binding under NZ law if we sign it.

A flag is more than cloth - its a symbol of where an authority draws it authority - upon who name they serve and to whom they answer.

THE ORIGINS OF HERALDRY; A flag is much more than cloth – its a symbol of where an agent draws it authority – upon who name they serve and to whom they answer.
( is it not interesting to see how keen the pro TPPA Republicans are to also change flags in Australia too)

3. Professor Kelsey herself, the defining NZ expert on the TPPA, has said we need to mount a legal challenge against the TPPA.

I concur with that sentiment whole heartily with but if that was to happen you would require legal specialists with a expert skill set in the Treaty of Waitangi and constitutional law.

In other words the very same kind of people you find sitting on the flag change panel, the constitutional change panel, and those who helped dismantle the privy council and replace it with a supreme court.

Dismantling it with the assistance of the neo liberals who sit in both the Greens, the Labour party and in Nagi Tahu. Forces who are shaping policy and direction at levels of these parties at caucus and on campus and in huis around the country with frightening level of control. Chris Trotter is just one writer who remind us that these fraction exist through out our political landscape.

The very fact I was BLACK LISTED from speaking in my own home town where I hold a media profile quite considerable larger than the many of the very fine speak and good kiwis who were allowed to speak but after speeches were given by first Green Party city Councillors then Green Party Mps then a Labour Mp with a distinct neo liberal CV  (and I thought this was people protest) is proof of that.

Oddly the same pattern has presented itself increasingly over the years in a number of issues for example the anti Anadarko protest where the major speakers at these alleged grass roots rally were again in fact MPs from major political organisations and city Councillors, with political party affiliations.

Political parties let us not forget who actually voted for the very change that saw us replace the privy council with a supreme court. The first step in dismantling NZ constitutional protections and opening it wide open for the TPPA invasion.

That change was a major step in DUE AUTHORITY where our legislative changes will now be interpreted by judges who answer not to the Westminster (founded on the Magna Carta) Law Lords of the Commonwealth but by politicians,

SONG OF THE JUDGES under the supreme court system thy now sing by the same book as our politicians

SONG OF THE JUDGES under the supreme court system thy now sing by the same book as our politicians

Judges will now be given their jobs by those who will want the laws interpreted how they want them to be enacted.

I wonder what people will think if people like lawyer Peter Chin (known in Dunedin by the nickname corrupt-chin) who sits on both the flag panel and the constitutional panel [ netting-him $NZ1280 a day] ends up being picked by the National Party as a supreme court judge. Under this scenario it will be Peter’s job to interpret any legal challenge made for or against NZ signing the TPPA. Bear in mind it will be quite some years before the final paper work is sorted out or for such challneges to made and reach the highest courts in our land.  These steps are about as much protecting the TPPA from retropsecrive challenges as they about the there and now.

Will people still maintain the matters are not connected?  Will the Greens cry unfair when that happens after all a long with the neo liberal in Labour they are ones that supported it on the advice of those with expertise in the Treaty of Waitaingi. Love to know which iwi had hand in that. I originally put the block against me down to small town politics and just accepted it as the nature of beat when you live a life sticking your head above the castle walls.

Standing up and being counted at the GCSB rally organised by grass root the MP'ss had to wait their turn.

Standing up and being counted at the GCSB rally organised by grass root the MP’ss had to wait their turn.

Protest by faceless committee - gives me the shivers - cant get behind that.

Protest by faceless committee – gives me the shivers – cant get behind that.

That is until I received multiple feed back from around the entire country that my blog on the flag (which combined with social media hits has given me the highest ratings online to date this year) and had sent ripple through though out the country.  Which kind of took me by surprise.

Instructions, had being made, so I was informed, that talk of the flag change was to be kept out of anti TPPA protest and I was now person non gratis to the TPPA movement.  My points were to be kept off all social media pages and meeting agendas. Inquiries as to why this was the case, made by curious third parties, who thought this all a it excessive, were met with the cross response of because we say so – do as your told. For a moment the mask slipped a tad to show what was really behind the principal of anonymous where we let unknown faces stand up for us – make decision on how we can and cant protest – in which all protest the people have to take their turn and once again sit quietly as the politicians tell us how it going to be  – instead of letting all who would stand be given the chance to have their say and make this a day where the politician shut up wait patiently and listen to us before they get their say.

4.Law Change / Constitutional Change/ Packaging (flags anthems currency) Change, are the very building block of the social contract between the state and the people.

This is their Due Authority

Change that you change what the state can and can not get away with.

So don’t Tell Me the Flag and it $640 dollar club of experts has nothing to do with the TPPA.

That is just absurd and argues in the face of every doctrine on political theory  (in which I got my degree from the very institution whose flunkies are now gnashing their teeth at my comments now).

And frankly I find their hostility and denial of what is simply political science 101 and the fear behind this naked aggression simply bewildering.

5. More importantly the average kiwi gets what I’m saying instantly and whats more they get passionate about it when you tell them “He’s doing what get your hands off my flag you fucking wanker John Key” (see point 1).

But if these self appointed gate keepers actually get angry at one dude who is simply expressing an opinion. I cant help it if my dyslexic scribbling have resonance with so many.

And is that not what were trying to do inspire people make them get passionate.

Okay you personally don’t get my argument but if it get people off their couches and on the streets so our ranks swell are not the results more important than what you might personally think.

Hell even the main stream media got it with an awesome report on the $640 club last week by Tim Wilson.…/640-per-day-pm-s-flag-committee

This is the stuff kiwi get and this the stuff which get then angry and we need that right now.

I did not get to speak but such was the power of those words that totally unwittingly they rung a bell that reverberating better than my miserly five minutes could have ever done – so unwittingly their action simply made people more curious as to what I was saying that was so bad, it was upsetting so many. So they went and  read it for themselves — and they got it instantly —  funny that.

It time to take back our DUE AUTHORITY  to use those powerful symbols the flag – the anthem – the phase Lest we forget – all things that make us kiwi and bond us as one  — for our own ends.

Too not use these powerful weapons is insane its poor marketing and a lousy tactical decision.

Kiwis at home, the ones were trying to reach,  will respond better to seeing the NZ flag at the front of a TPPA march than they will ever to seeing a sinister looking plastic anonymous mask that is made in chinese sweat shops, that promoting a Hollywood fictional movie, based on ideas that simply sale over most people head.

On the other hand show them whose behind John Key Flag change – his constitutional change – who now sits on his supreme court and this causes quite a jolt and shock many.


Show them the bigger picture in a language they can understand its not rocket science. 

I pointed this out to the person (who single handily made the decision that I would not be given the chance to speak) by sending her the links to Tim’s Wilson TVNZ piece on the $640,00 a day club – along with high lightening how my blog DUE AUTHORITY had gone viral and oddly I got no reply.

Oh well I guess you no your winning the other side refuse to debate you.

Yet those who have appointed themselves the gate keepers not only disagree with me, which is cool, no one said we always have to agree, but to actively go out of their way to censor me to make sure that the debate was shut down is weird and very passive aggressive.

You have to ask your self what is so frightening about what I have said that spooks them so.

How does this differ from John’s “do as I say not as I do ” behavior where is the democracy in such action. Were not marching against the TPPA so only they get to have a say and tell us how it should be – Sorry but what the frog I cant get behind that.

Personally (and this is my opinion only ) I suspect my comments have greatly upset the neo liberal who sit in these camps (or on its fringe) masquerading as agent of democracy and whose job (even if they are not fully aware this is the case) is to subtly guide and to make sure the protest does not wonder into waters that will upset the apple cart.

6. I guess the biggest point which I feel reinforce my viewpoint this is wrong is the complete shut down – the total absence of a will to even debate this point in a transparent manner–  those angry at me argue “he is wrong” he is an agent of disinformation” (er for who exactly and if I am i very poorly aid one??) – come on folks that just childish. Your meant to be the academics you can do better than that.  In my experience if a fraction cant debate the message and they have to resort to shooting the messenger (and in this case behind his back) then you are kind of high lighting the fact that this is not about the argument being wrong (and it was just an opinion) but it is more about how that argument challenges their own knowledge base and I can hardly be blamed for that now can I?

Ben Vidgen (B.A. polcitical science/Kia Kaha – Less We Forget

TPPA Flag Change not connected? Yeah Right.

Comments 7

  1. gregfullmoon

    I am one of the faceless folks who suggested we disassociate the flag debate from TPP.

    This is because some ‘especially Ben’ advancing their object ‘no flag change’ made and continue to make false claims in respect to the legality of the proposed flag change.

    Having now read both of the postman production posts on Ben’s view of the ‘Flag Change’ I’m somewhat illumined as to the mischief of Ben.

    In the original postman productions article ‘on Due Authority’ Ben made a number of ‘legal claims’ – these were false. There is no doubt of this fact. The ability of the New Zealand Government to alter the flag bears no relation to the Sovereignty of the state nor its inhabitants.

    TPP will live or die independent of the legalities of a flag change.

    Ben maybe correct in this second article the one referenced herein that the authority of the state is maligned by the death cult known as neo-liberalism. We here agree. It is how we interpret the relations of all the connecting projects – are they legal, conspiratorial or populist in their implication? Or any combination?

    Ben has been adamant in his ‘belief’ when talking to TPP Action participants especially in the period immediately prior to the March 7 Nationwide Rally – that it was ‘a legal rather than populist issue’.

    He is now spreading bullshit in respect to his stance. This is unfortunate. Ben is evidently passionate in his efforts and knows a thing or two. He however does his integrity and his cause for ‘no flag change’ a great disservice by spouting spurious legalistic semantics which lie on sandy ground.

    I have attempted to engage Ben on this in discussion elsewhere in the Facebook realm. Others also – including Jen Olsen from TPP Action Dunedin (not on Facebook and only alluded to in this article). I will attempt to put this straight wherever I come across Ben’s shares.

    TPP Action views the neo liberal agenda as anathema. This is a categorical statement. For Ben to slur folks within TPP Action as he does is a low act and one based on a poor retention of the stated facts.

    I’m now on a mission Ben see you around the traps on Facebook.

    greg’s proverbs 2015 – democracy is like a muscle the more it is exercised the stronger it grows

    1. Post
      Ben Vidgen

      Greg – Im publishing your comments because

      1. Im democratic that way and I actually let people have their say and don’t censor them because they have differing point of view.

      2. Your comments prove my point – again my original article points (in the quoted section) out the flag itself has no legal impact full stop. This is a FACT people can read the blog and see i make this point so why do you and your mates keeps insist other wise.

      3. I like to know when you will get round to discussing the other points I made which TPPAction seem so painfully to not want others to discuss e.g. the Privy Council changes, the nature of Flag and the Constitutional advisory board panel, who sits on it and the conflict of interest at work here.

      Again its a FACT these are the real points of merit to the TPPA and we need to know these things.

      Why will TPPAction not have that debate (Im not the only one who want to) and try to argue with me on something I not only never said but which is the very opposite of what I wrote in the fist blog – again people if you don’t believe me check out my bog on DUE AUTHORITY your selves.

      What my article did do is raise how the flag change had an impact when COMBINED with MANY things.

      I flush that point out in my second blog and on face book many times now.

      Namely how the legal threat to defending ourselves against the TPPA comes from change from the privy council to a supreme court and a new constitution which is being shaped by those who sit on the flag constitution panels and have close ties to ACT National & only one (and oone alone) iwi Ngai Tahu who have aid yes to oil exploration here in Otago and pther part of NZ and who people are ambassadors for the singing of the TPPA.

      I have pointed this out numerous times along with the fact the critics keep trying to draw the argument to a point I never made WHY IS THAT?_
      I was NEVER “adamant” the flag by ITSELF ALONE was a legal issue “please” show the public where I say this.

      I did want the chance to highlight how all these issues related to the TPPA – and Oh thanks I never mention Jen Olsen name until now so you just outed yourself and proved my claim visa an orchestrated TPPAction black listing of me.

      And to ram that point home how would you know what I said to Jen as you were not there – unless she talked.

      It seems to me TPPAction have interpreted my issue about the flag in a very shallow manner – and not once addressed the wider and deep issue of the privy/supreme court/ the expert picked/ even ONCE. And now having gone down that road in public you dont want to reverse up and say oh sorry Ben we did not quite get what you were saying let start again becuase those big points are indeed very pertinent. Basically don’t want to admit you were wrong and your initial analysis flawed.

      Mr Moon and any one who cares to look at the FACTS why don’t you examine those facebook pages (the one were I’m allowed to make comments because they are not controlled by your faction) and the comments you and your elk (all from the same club I note) are sole voices that same I wrong the overall feed back from around the country has being thank you Ben thank you. Not only that my points deemed irrelevant by TPPAction concerning the nature of the flag/constitutional panel were picked up and given air to 10O,000 on TV. I dont know for certain they picked up off my blog but I know Tim Wilson (the reporter who did the story) knows who I am having reviewed my book State SECRETS IN 1999 for Metro. And I know one else was raising that point tell I came along. But it does not matter as the key thing is that point was deemed by network television as news worthy and in broadcasting that story they proved my point.

      Frankly I don’t think TPPAction objection to my opinion (and that is all it is) has is nothing to do with defending the TPPA protest but a lot to do with ego. Some one has come along who has raised ISSUES (Note plural not singular) that TPPAction have not considered and it got your knickers in twist – Shame on you all

      If TPPAction view neo-liberal as the enemy (and we would hope so) do a bit more research and who you invite to speak — Labour under Clark brought in the TPPA / Labour and Green both voted in the bill which brought about the supreme court — but I suppose your going to tell me that has no legal ramification on the TPPA ever — no of course not because TPPAction refuse to even debate that point.

      And I really suggest you begin that debate Mr Moon because I hope the good folk at the TPP Action get it that

      A; other people are reading these comments and
      B;they are not as one of you members suggested wrong and ignorant.

      Keep it up my brother it not my grave your digging and its awfully fun to watch.

      And tell me my brothers and sisters of TPPAction what are you going to do when the people who have being watching this debate do turn up with NZ flags and banners saying “bring back the privy council to protect us against the TPPA” are you going to confiscate their flags

      He he yes democracy is a muscle and you should see the punch it delivers when used by those who know their kung-fu.

      4. Im publishing your comments because you not swearing – you can even make allegation against me but please prove them – defamation in NZ carries a fine of $250,000 and if you defame me at any point further on my website or on social media in future correspondence please be prepared to understand I will sue. So choose your words carefully Mr Moon – and don’t say you were not warned if you ignore that advice.

      For the record are you speaking here as individual or are you speaking in the capacity as an authorized agent of TPPAction and if so which individual in the TPPAction authorized you to speak. Finally under whose authority (flag if you will) do these individual act – just so we can be clear just how much gratis the reading public should give your words. Can I have that in writing (send to media

      Also can you outline for the reading public your professional qualification visa your knowledge of law and polticis.

      I have made it clear I wished to speak on the nature of due authority as a graduate of political science (1992 Canterbury University)

      Thank you Mr Fullmoon (lol love that name) consider your self mooned.

  2. Internet Business clickbank

    Just desire to say your article is as astonishing. The clearness in your post is simply nice and i can assume you are an expert on this subject. Well with your permission allow me to grab your RSS feed to keep up to date with forthcoming post. Thanks a million and please keep up the rewarding work.|

  3. Jason

    I really wish you would get a friend or someone with good English writing skills to sub-edit your articles and give you general advice on how to present an argument/point of view.

    I\’ve read a few of your pieces and, while they contain some interesting points worth pursuing, the structure, presentation (persistent basic grammatical and spelling errors) and over-emotiveness of your argument counter-balance any good points you make. This is all very frustrating as it presents your views on par with the countless, low-brow, scare-mongering websites out there.

    Am just giving honest advice here, I am definitely on your side and hope you can find a way to penetrate the thick skulls of middle New Zealand and the world.

    1. Post
  4. Geoff

    Never cite Wikipedia as a reference if you want to be taken seriously. Also you should spend extra time ensuring your editing is done correctly

    1. Post
      Ben Vidgen

      I dont just site wikapedia – but why not it cites it own sources – on the later point your correct were still in construction nd never anticpated this kind of exposure that quickly – ooops you live and learn.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *