Comments:Noel Cox talks to Wikinews about New Zealand's constitutional monarchy

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

• Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
• Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
• You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Click here to add a new comment · Add onto existing comments

God Save The Queen! Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 05:00, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt

The responses to the questions in this interview are a classic example of what marketers call the three point dichotomy of FUD - Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. They are intentionally put to entangle the debate in parameters that substitute emotive arguments for reason, they are more to do with disruption than pro-active arguments for the monarchy.

First we have fear:

:"It is hard to be sure what the consequences would be - and this would probably depend upon the circumstances of the change. If is was messy and controversial then there could be heightened political and social tension (which no one would want to see)."

This is empty speculation. As is this:

:"There is also an element of concern about the form of a replacement system - the example of Fiji since it became a republic isn't likely to instil confidence."

Just as the example of Tonga doesn't instill confidence in monarchy. Nonetheless, Prof Cox' uses the fear line of argument (social tension! Fiji! etc) to make his point. But in doing so, he ignores the precedents within the Commonwealth of transitions that were not plagued with social tension or political instability as he claims.

Then we have uncertainty:

Prof Cox states:

:"The Treaty [of Waitangi] is what makes New Zealand unique, and the monarchy is an essential element of the Treaty."

...and yet he also states:

:"Technically, as a matter of strict law, the New Zealand government would be bound by the Treaty even if we became a republic."

Which invalidates the claim that the monarchy is an 'essential' element of the Treaty. If it is not legally essential, then it is hard to make the case for the monarchy, except for emotive attachment. And this is problematic too - the emotive attachment to the Treaty is just that; it does not follow that Maori - or the New Zealand public in general - loves the monarchy. Indeed, more Maori are opposed to the monarchy than support it (cf NZES 2005).

And finally, doubt:

:"...this is achieved through the office of Governor-General, which is nowadays always held by a New Zealander of standing and integrity, without political allegiance."

The 'doubt' aspect is in ensuring that any claims of political allegiance of Governors-General can be denied.

Lewis Holden

FUD is also a method used by the RM Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 04:41, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Care to give any examples Brian? Or is this just your usual one-line attack with no substance? --Lholden 10:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)