What’s your view on how both examples have been narrow and controlling?
Local politics - all parties are going very focused on what’s best for their voters rather than all NZers. And they are actively targeted the oppositions voters to fund their ideas. Eg take from one to give to the other - ultimate division.
Eg labour clearly focused on:
City people over rural/ farmers
Tenants over landlords
Employees over employers
Maori over others
Public transport over car drivers
Etc, etc
All the left loves it and the right hated it.
Now we’ve literally swapped the above and the right love it and the left hate it.
Division where govts (both left and right) are governing for their narrow voting pool over everyone and controlling by using intervention to force benefits away from the oppositions voters to your own.
This is exactly the same in international politics. The US has governed ‘the world’ in their own narrow interests doing the exact same things - forcing benefits away from others to your own countries benefit.
It’s obvious and makes sense to ‘buy’ your support and shaft the oppositions. But it’s divisive and doesn’t help all people.
Clark’s and Key were more central lifting all boats. Jacinda took it to the extreme targeting her voting pool. Highlighting how extreme Jacinda was is when National has simply reversed a lot of those changes back to pre Labour levels (tax rates, brightline, public servant numbers, raise speed limits, etc) they are being called divisive and extreme.