The David Seymour Enigma

Imagine, if you will, that David Seymour of ACT becomes the next MP for Epsom (it’s easy if you try). He is likely to argue that his victory was not one pre-arranged by some cup if tea between his leader and the PM, John Key but, rather, because of his prolonged door knocking campaign (or maybe his inadvertently amusing campaign videos). Now, maybe you think that’s nonsense; a victory for ACT in Epsom would almost certainly be the product of National gifting them the seat (especially given the evidence), but for ACT’s David Seymour surely that’s not the point. He went through the motions necessary for saying he won the seat fair-and-square. I mean, you can’t actually tell from any anonymous vote why it was cast (despite what exit polls might possibly tell you).

There is something clever about David Seymour, which if said in the right tone of voice is the snarkiest thing I could possibly say (snark robbed of its strength, mind, by the transparency of that admission). Whatever concessions he gets from National for his support of the next government (oh, how I hope in a fortnight that this post is wrong), Seymour can claim that he might not be a gerrymandered candidate but Epsom’s real choice. Indeed, for ACT to have any credibility with regards to their “one law for all” campaign he really needs to be Epsom rather than empty scare quotes. A small party candidate representing the wishes of a suburb (even a wealthy, white one) is democracy in action. If Seymour can say “Look, I earned these votes!” then his views are worthy (if not worthwhile).

Electorate MPs are, when you think about it, strange in an MMP world. When you cast a party vote you’re endorsing a party and the party then gets someone off of their endorsed list. But electorate MPs are different, since you might (and some do) vote for them not because of their party affiliation but because they are effective at representing their constituency. Now, no one thinks Seymour will be an effective MP (or, they shouldn’t: we just don’t know yet, given his new-ness) but a vote for Seymour doesn’t seem to be one for representation by him but, rather, a way to get a party into Parliament by side-stepping the pesky “appeal to the general public” thing parties like the Greens and New Zealand manage to do.

Seymour might be token in a grand game of politicking or he might have shaken enough hands to really qualify as someone the people (good, bad and otherwise) wanted to vote for. In the end, all we know is that come this time in a fortnight, it’s likely that David Seymour will be looking at accommodation in Wellington and thinking of warming a seat in our Parliamentary debating chamber. He’ll present himself as the man Epsom voted for.

Maybe he will be. Such is the enigma of being a David Seymour.

Doctor Who – Robot of Sherwood

It should be entirely superfluous and yet it starts off with some great dialogue and then settles down to being a decent crispy which plays with the folklore of Robin Hood quite effectively. The link to the season’s bigger plot is a bit clunky and the ending is pure Mark Gatiss (which is to say, big and rubbish) but given I thought it was going to be dire, I actually liked it.

Doctor Who – Into the Dalek

A smart script which races along, a terrific performance by Peter Capaldi which marks this new Doctor as being quite different to his last few predecessors and a return to a version of Clara Oswald is smart, funny and worthy of being the Doctor’s companion. Possibly, I think, the best episode of new “Doctor Who” that we’ve had in a while. Certainly, it feels like it would fit into Moffat’s first, exciting season with ease, rather than the bloated mess that were the subsequent Matt Smith outings.

#edchatnz – A student teacher’s perspective cc: @HelenHaine @Mfknott @CKinNZ

How did you attend the #Edchatnz Conference? (Face 2 Face, followed online or didn’t)?

Face to face both days.

How many others attended from your school or organisation?

Seven! Seven grad dip students from Massey University’s Primary Teaching course.

How many #Edchatnz challenges did you complete?

One, which was the obligatory greflie with Maurie Abraham.

Who are 3 people that you connected with and what did you learn from them?

I’m really not sure how to answer that one. I spent a lot of time with my fellow classmates and a fair bit of time chatting with a lot of interesting and friendly people, but to select just three and make them out as being particularly special for my learning over those two days seems a bit unfair. I must say that helping three of my fellow students, who are new to Twitter and didn’t know the difference between a hashtag and a mention, was really educational. Often we think the technologies we use are immediately user-friendly. Seeing people take their first steps with it, though, is eye-opening.

What session are you gutted that you missed?

I’m just going to quote Paula Hogg’s response to this one, since a) she tagged me and got me into this mess in the first place and b) I was going to say nearly the same thing anyway.

Pam Hook’s SOLO workshop. I have glanced over the work and am keen to know more.

Who is one person that you would like to have taken to Edchatnz and what key thing would they have learned?

Dr. Roberta Hunter, the programme co-ordinator for the Massey Albany Grad Dip Primary (Teaching) students. There was a lack of teacher trainers at #edchatnz and, frankly, I think that’s a shame. Also, I think Bobbie needs to see just how important it is to get some technology instruction and material on modern learning environments into the Grad Dip ASAP.

Is there a person you didn’t get to meet/chat with (F2F/online) that you wished you had? Why?

I would have liked to have had a chance for a longer chat with Claire Amos (ClaireAmosNZ). We only managed to have a short “‘You’re awesome.’ ‘No, you’re awesome.'” moment after the debate.

What is the next book you are going to read and why?

“You’ve got to be kidding: How jokes can make you think” by John Capps and Donald Capps. Mostly because it’s been sitting beside my bed for a year, waiting to get to the top of the pile.

What is one thing you plan to do to continue the Education Revolution you learnt about at #EdchatNZ?

Mind control chips. For parents, obviously.

Seriously, though: just keeping up with what other people are doing rather than siloing. #edchatnz is a good way to practice that mantra, although given the number of assignments I have to complete at the moment it’s hard going even opening Twitter some nights.

Will you take a risk and hand your students a blank canvas?

I’m about to start my third pract, so, yes. Hopefully it’s part of a lesson plan, though, rather than me just making stuff up on the spot.

Tagged:

@HelenHaine

@Mfknott

@CKinNZ

Conspiracy Round Up – 25th of August

This round-up is fifteen days late. Rather than sit on it for another few days, I’m clearing it now so I can focus on something slightly more up-to-date at the end of the week.

Long term listeners to my various radio and podcasting efforts will know that i have a bit of a love/hate relationship with the theories of Noam Chomsky. This article on the bin Laden raid (published this week, so somewhat after the fact) is an interesting read about just how dangerous that raid was in re diplomacy (and the lack thereof).

In my forthcoming book, The Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories, I spend quite a bit of time comparing and contrasting the process of peer review with political oversight. Now, one argument that might be leveled against me come the reviews of said book is that I’m too optimistic about the peer review process, as this article on some controversies in psychology ably demonstrates. I’ll probably have more to say on this at a latter point.

As we’ve known for a while, the CIA spied on the USA Senate’s committee that was investigating the spying activities of the CIA. It seems that no one is going to be punished, however. When people ask me why is belief in conspiracy theories about our governments so prevalent, I like to point them to reports such as these. After all, if people in positions of power can get away with knowingly acting in an illegal fashion, it seems reasonable to assume that there are instances just like these we don’t know about and instances like these which are known about but pooh-poohed for the sake of PR.

Vinnie Eastwood is Aotearoa’s most successful conspiracy theorist. He interviews Graham McCready, the person who successfully brought fraud proceedings against the former New Zealand MP John Banks, here (said link also features Ben Vidgen, who tried to get me on a radio debate a year or so back and didn’t like how I wasn’t willing to immediately accede to his every demand about it, which is why it never eventuated).

Adam Curtis, of “The Power of Nightmares” is no stranger to using conspiracy theory rhetoric in his documentaries. This article from the end of July, on systems of control is certainly interesting.

In lighter (?) news, want to visit a North American WWII-era Nazi compound? Here’s how.

Doctor Who – Deep Breath

Apologies to people coming here for talk of conspiracy theories: over the next twelve weeks I will be posting very short reviews of the latest “Doctor Who” episodes since one of the reasons I ever aspired to get a PhD was to be be called “Doctor”.

“Deep Breath” might be Steven Moffat’s attempt to revitalise the show he has been piloting aimlessly for a while now. I loved the anniversary story last year but hated the regeneration tale. However, the choice of Peter “Malcolm Tucker” Capaldi as the new Doctor was inspired: an older man as the Doctor was a much needed change after both David Tennant and Matt Smith (both of whom I liked). ((Yes, I think a much more inspired choice could have been made but it wasn’t.)) Capaldi’s Doctor is a bit cantankerous, slightly needy and prone to talking rather than madcap running. His introductory story is a bit ho-hum: the focus is really more on who this new Doctor is. The surprise reveals at the end of the episode are slightly more troubling: whilst it was nice to see a certain someone again as a last hurrah (no spoilers for you, sweeties) the introduction of this season’s overarching plot came off as belonging more to Matt Smith’s tenure than it did to the slightly more serious set-up we got for the new Doctor. Still, roll on next week.