On crime and equity, National's political slogans are the equivalent of Kim Kardashian's climate change contributions
Opinion: Christopher Luxon has not yet repeated a great many of his election campaign promises so it makes sense to take note of one he has – the removal of gang patches and tattoos. This will become a divisive issue if followed through, not because of universal support for gang membership as a lifestyle choice but because of well-founded doubt about its efficacy as a crime reduction measure.
My interest in this policy here though is not about the intent, practicality or outcomes so much as what it tells us about our social attitudes and behaviours. Specifically that we incline to the shallow appearances rather than the real issues.
READ MORE:
* Luxon gets the government he didn’t want
* Luxon’s biggest challenges are public expectations and urgency
I don’t think anyone would argue that a jacket patch or a tattoo in itself is a major cause of criminal activity. Rather it is a symbol of attachment to a gang on the part of the bearer and, it seems, to those it angers a symbol of a lifestyle that is offensive to them. So the proposed action of hiding or removing such a symbol is just that – symbolic and not an anti-crime measure in itself.
Luxon has familiarity with greenwashing through his corporate experience. Air New Zealand has gone to some lengths before, during and after his role there to cloak itself with various thicknesses of green veneer
We seem to place an increasing amount of importance on such things. You may recall election campaign noise about te reo road signs and corporate names. The objections were hardly about practical clarity as often such words are repeated in English, but the symbolism seems important to the opponents of such wording. Somehow people feel lesser or threatened by the unfamiliar or excluded by the knowledge of others rather than their own lack of knowledge. Any thought tells you it is not really about the names or words but much deeper insecurities.
I think this is rather similar to corporate greenwashing, which is where Kim Kardashian comes into it. She has just launched a bra product which projects hard nipples in all circumstances and temperatures. Somewhat amazingly she promotes this by association with climate change adaptation. This is strange, but not much stranger – if at all – than protecting oneself from jacket designs one does not like, or giving places their original names or giving corporates new names in an official language.
The Mob member is signalling, Luxon is signalling, those adopting te reo names are signalling, and Kardashian is too. But there are differences. Sometimes people are signalling things that are not genuine.
The online newsletter Heated picked up this week on Kardashian’s promotion of her product in a joking manner about the climate crisis and allying herself with climate resistance through somewhat obscure donations from possible revenue. The column then links to an interesting study on Greenwashing 3.0 which is worth a read in itself. Trust me, the main intent of the Skims Ultimate Nipple Bra is not to fight climate change.
Luxon has familiarity with greenwashing through his corporate experience. Air New Zealand has gone to some lengths before, during and after his role there to cloak itself with various thicknesses of green veneer. He will even be familiar with its 2019 application to trademark the term “Kia Ora”, which some may find a little odd given the recent te reo place and corporate name concerns of his party. Even the airline's use of “Tiaki Promise” to link their corporate image with environmental concerns and te ao Māori may seem odd too in this context.
There are plenty of other examples of this disingenuous signalling both for positive association and negative dissociation around us. Where te reo is concerned there is legitimate concern among many speakers that both forms of signalling are used, often to the harm of the genuine interests of Māori. There is a difference between gifted, historical and appropriated use of words and symbols.
Gang patches and tattoos are not unimportant to gang members. They are important signals for them as uniforms, team colours, club badges, reverse collars and Masonic secret handshakes are for other groups. If you are content to deal with only the surface of differences or brands there is plenty to keep your social media flows active in such symbols. You can, demonstrably, even get people to vote for you.
But if you really wanted to deal with an existential climate crisis you might want to go beyond the depth at which Kim Kardashian operates. On crime and equity, beyond the political slogans which are the equivalent of her contributions.
