Brief Political Commentary

The recent debate in New Zealand in re legalised child abuse (sucks to be you if you think the repeal of Section 59 was about anything else) has ended with a cross-party compromise. Seeing that I’m currently very interested in Social Epistemology (and that one of the ways you can characterise the constitution of a group is whether they share the same beliefs) it fascinates me that the Labourites and the Nationalites are making out that their party leader won and that the other has made a strategic mistake. If you support National, then John Key has outsmarted Helen Clarke by being able to be all Prime Ministerial. If you support Labour then Helen Clarke has outsmarted John Key by making him agree to a compromise of the Labour Party’s invention. If you belong to a minor party then both Helen Clarke and John Keys have betrayed the electorate and will suffer at the next election. In all cases it seems that people are selecting their beliefs based upon the domain of interest that is ‘Which party do I prefer most?’ Now, of course, this is exactly how politics works, but even so I still find it most amusing.

Still, yay for the repeal.

PS. I know; two posts in one day? What will I do next.


About Matthew Dentith

Author of "The Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories" (Palgrave Macmillan), Matthew Dentith wrote his PhD on epistemic issues surrounding belief in conspiracy theories. He is a frequent media commentator on the weird and the wonderful, both locally and internationally. On occasion he can be caught dreaming about wax lions but, mostly, it is rumoured he works for elements of the New World Order.