This is how heads roll: did Luxon take a leaf out of Machiavelli's The Prince?

And another university chokes on its "critic and conscience" obligations.

In 1513, a sacked public servant, Niccolò Machiavelli, retired to his estate and wrote a guidebook on statecraft for the new rich-prick boss in Florence, Lorenzo di Piero de’ Medici (the same guy who’d had him tortured). Machiavelli advised him that, if heads need to roll, then (ffs) do it once and get it over with. As a usurper, if you take too long over killing enemies, you’ll only cause the hatred to fester. A quick and decisive move, in contrast, will soon be forgotten by those frightened sycophants whom you’ve let live. But that was back in the Renaissance, and there’s no resemblance to anyone living in New Zealand.

---

“This is how I roll”, said Luxon proudly, having stripped Melissa Lee of the broadcasting portfolio and Penny Simmonds of disability. He may as well have said, “This is how I make heads roll.”

There were two main takes on this move, from opposing points of view. Most commentators gave it the thumbs up, choosing to see it as smart political tactics, suited to a time when people are fed up with “kindness” and want to see “strong” leadership.

The opposition naturally held a different view. While they agreed that the two ministers really had screwed up, their sacking had to be construed negatively. They said that it showed that Luxon wasn’t any good at “team-building” after all, and that “the wheels are falling off” his three-party coalition government.

Readers can choose their preferred narrative. I won’t play referee.

Concerning the broadcasting portfolio in particular, though, there’s also a third plague-on-both-their-houses version.

After all, Labour also made a mess of broadcasting. Lacking any helpful ideas about what to do, they went with their habitual approach: “if you see a problem, amalgamate and centralise it”. In this case, it was a proposal to merge TVNZ and RNZ – which then got thrown onto the “policy bonfire” in early 2023.

National then inherited the mess, as TVNZ’s and Newshub’s news services were in trouble. Luxon gave the broadcasting portfolio to someone dispensable – who didn’t cope well with the pressure and was duly hung out to dry.

Sacking former minister Lee may make it look like Luxon is decisive, as the commentariat have largely opined. But it also distracts from the awkward fact that he really doesn’t want to do anything in broadcasting that might be costly or in the public interest. Indeed, he may be quietly happy to see left-biased news media fail while right-biased Newstalk ZB prospers.

Machiavelli would have understood what was going on. But, before you follow any advice in his manual The Prince (available in all good bookshops), remember that it was dedicated to a ruler whom he detested.

---

Did a university actually cancel its freedom of speech event?

Freedom-loving readers may have felt perplexed to learn that a “freedom of speech” event planned at Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington on Monday 29 April had to be “postponed”. It’s ironical, moerover, that the university’s Facebook has an automated announcement that this free-speech event “was canceled”.

As if to prove its critics right, a university has tried to stage “a panel discussion about the rights and responsibilities associated with freedom of speech and how we can find better ways to have challenging but respectful conversations” and then has had to postpone and reorganise it – in response to “a depth of feeling”. According to the Vice-Chancellor’s message apologising for the postponement, “paradoxically, the mere framing of this event has surfaced a depth of feeling and a polarisation of views on how we should proceed, that has made it challenging to even schedule a conversation about how to have challenging conversations.” One senses a tone of frustration.

The VC said that he now wants to get “a cross-section of balanced and representative views in the discussion” at a reformatted event at a later date. It appears that “a large number of voices have expressed an interest in being part of this conversation”.

Perhaps it’s good that there’s been so much interest in the matter and that more people now want to be heard. Having attended such events in the past, they’ve been fairly mild affairs, as some hand-picked people make a few righteous comments about academic freedom, and, once it’s over, everyone goes back to whatever they were doing.

Nowadays a university has trouble even talking about how to talk about how to talk. When do they take a breath to say anything serious?

I’ve copied the cancelled event’s blurb in full below, for the record, and in case it gets deleted.

It’s not hard to see some sticking-points in the planned agenda. It mentions, rather ambiguously, “separating the topic under discussion from identity politics”. That isn’t always possible to do, as speakers will need to provide examples, which must inevitably include experiences of minority groups who’ve been targetted with hateful rhetoric. And the people who issue such rhetoric often refer to “free speech” as some kind of licence or cover for what they do.

But was the real sticking-point the inclusion of two speakers from non-university organisations regarded as right-leaning?

I’m not privy to any discussions that led to the postponement of Vic’s free-speech seminar, but I wonder whether they may have considered other options, for instance: going ahead with the event anyway, and letting those who feel concerned about it exercise their freedom of speech by staging a protest and/or supporting them in organising an alternative seminar on the same or similar topic. For the time being, the university has left itself open to the usual barrage of “cancel culture” criticisms. (Note: I’m not levelling that particular criticism at the university myself.)

It looks as though the VC was genuinely willing to open up a conversation. University communities are having trouble these days, however, merely talking about freedom of speech. It would be a matter of public interest to know which groups were raising concerns about the seminar and what their concerns were.

When the event – with “a new format” – gets rescheduled, will it bear much resemblance to the original?

---

From VUW’s Facebook events page, this is the blurb advertising the seminar:

“Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington’s Vice-Chancellor Nic Smith invites you to a panel discussion about the rights and responsibilities associated with freedom of speech and how we can find better ways to have challenging but respectful conversations.

“The panellists will explore ideas around contributing to controversial debate, the importance of separating the topic under discussion from identity politics, and what it takes to change the mind of another when the loudest and most provocative views often dominate the airtime. The session will also consider the pivotal role universities can play in these debates, bringing evidence, rigour and critical thinking to polarising views.

“The discussion will be facilitated by Corin Dann, co-host of Radio New Zealand’s Morning Report. He is a senior journalist and broadcaster, starting his career with RNZ several decades ago. He has also worked in television for a number of years – as the political editor for One News and has hosted programmes including current affairs show Q&A.
”Panellists:
1. Professor Nicole Moreham – Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington.
2. Dr John Byron – Director of Government Relations and Policy at Queensland University of Technology.
3. Dr Michael Johnston – Senior Fellow at the New Zealand Initiative, leads the education workstream.
4. Emeritus Professor Jane Kelsey – a former law professor at the University of Auckland.
5. Jonathan Ayling – Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union New Zealand.
6. With one final panellist yet to be confirmed.”