Hear hear. I agree - The New Herald should grab him with both hands, and it’s nothing new, that speaking out, or being different causes problems in Aotearoa. Try being an ex Act MP!
Ha. If I were to be an MP of any shade would result in an instant divorce! Being a commentator is enough for me although that said I have had a very good response from one of whom I was critical. There may be room for debate in future.
Yes! A ‘2-views’ opinion page, where the perspectives of Messrs MacCulloch & Wilson could be contrasted. (You can substitute others for Wilson as we go along but please let him be intellectually shamed first)
Excellent Mr Hobbitsees. I’ve read plenty of brilliant ‘in your face no bullshit’ articles from Prof MacCulloch, he’s usually right on the money (pun intended). You commented at a recent FSU panel evening that we need to ‘put our heads above the parapet’, and boy has he done this, but sadly the ignorant masses, self-interested factions & MSM wear down even the most resilient. I feel for Robert, he is a smart chap and deserves far better for his bravery & passion for a better NZ.
Thanks so much for writing this. I caught Michael Laws' interview with Prof MacCulloch just yesterday and felt completely shocked. I'm familiar with the "soft totalitarianism" that exists in NZ (as elsewhere in the West) around social/cultural issues, but here it is, at the heart of NZ political life. I'm now feeling rather naive - of course it's at the very centre of things, this corruption and decay of so much of value in our Kiwi way of life. I feel that the situation with Prof MacCulloch (the Platform interview and this article of yours, David) should be shouted from the rooftops to wake up those NZers who just go on comforably reading/listening to mainstream media. Is the "new" Herald now a thing? I'm out of touch with developments there.
Thanks Sheryl. There is a governance shake up coming at the Herald NZME and an editorial board is planned. Philip Crump (Thomas Cranmer of Substack) is to be a member I understand.
Serendipitously I just happened upon Peter Williams' Substack post after reading yours and commenting. I was happy to read his report of Mr Crump's views about journalistic excellence, and also about the changes already happening with the Herald board.
Deeply grateful that you bring Mr. MacCulloch’s case to the fore. The silencing and obvious suppression of a highly valued and frankly sorely needed critical voice is alarming and came as a real shock to us.
The oppressive power of the ‘establishment’ is alive and well. Extremely worrying!
Thanks Elisabeth. I try to say what I think needs to be said. I had to sit beneath the parapet for so long that it is unlikely that I shall resume that position. I hope you continue to enjoy my writing.
Now more than ever we need informed criticism and leadership. What we have now is media stagnation, academic failure, parliamentary chaos and a PM with blinkers on.
The most worrying thing about his treatment is he says nothing uncontroversial.
We do have an aging population. We do have a government who's size swells while it's delivery fades into obscurity. We do seem to believe that we can regulate our way to happiness.
We're part of the western decline and even the "controversial" people who supposedly rally against this are struggling against the massive power of vested interest. One only has to look at Doge's failure to meaningfully reduce the US deficit.
Yet in New Zealand most people think the deep state is a conspiracy theory, rather than the obvious result of mission creep and largely unaccountable vested interest.
The West has lost its mojo. To me the only question is whether empires fade as part of an as yet not understood cycle and regardless of what the empire does to hold on it will always fade......or if some great movement / leader / event can halt and reverse this decline.
Hard to see where any rear guard action to revive the West will come from at this point in time.
My comment was meant to be a reply to the previous commenter, in response to his remarks about the fading empire. I wasn't urging the books on you David, as I imagine you are well and truly busy. Darned good books though :-)
Not to worry Sheryl. Any recommendation is good and very much appreciated. Yes - rather busy and returning to familiar and much loved ground which hopefully will see the morning light on Thursday.
I'm reading Master and his Emmissary now actually!! I've heard Gilchrist speak quite a lot and his views are very compelling.
We do seem to live in a world ruled by spreadsheet rather than intuition reductionism is rampant (it's behind all the ridiculous economic / climate / epdemiological modelling nonsense), and we haven't figured what to do with our God shaped holes.
As an economist I have read Robert MacCulloch's blog for several years. One standout feature of his writing was the size of his ego - immense self regard evident in most posts and no sensible filter on his opinions. I persisted in reading his stuff, notwithstanding his readiness to infer and attribute bad motives to people he didn't know, because one had to give him credit for trying to comment on public policy. A feature of NZ academic life is the paucity of public input they make - 1000s of them and very little engagement with the public. There are a few standout exceptions - who write more measured and believable words than MacCulloch did. He may be a good uni prof, but as a commentator on public policy he has very often put about unsubstantiated inferences of others' motivations and behaviour that did not seem to me to be adult. I challenge you to read a year of his output and still decide that this is a person you think might be well-suited to working with a few others on some board or other, in order to produce a helpful report or guide actions.
Thanks Clive - although your response is to another contributor my own view, for what it is worth, is that MacCulloch added to the debate and made hism points in an easily understood way. I should like to see him continue to contribute to the debate which is why I suggested a spot for him at the Herald - if the renewed Board and Editorial people will have him.
I can't comment on his Board suitability but it does seem unusual that he should be sidelined in the way that he describes and the way that Bryce Edwards set out in another article today (Wednesday)
David, I'm intrigued that as a former District Court Judge and Listener columnist (but not an economist), you have read MacCulloch's blog for years and not recognised any of the 'non-economist' traits of his writing that I would have thought would immediately have made you wary of his posts. He used ad hominen invective; he attacked assumed motives he had no way of substantiating, he struggled sometimes to make a coherent point and most of all, he liked to talk about his own abilities. No need to be an economist to see faults. And if like me you were an economist you would perhaps have been frustrated that you could not question many of his assertions via his blog - I could see no way to do so, unlike here. Other commenters might be surprised to know there is a large community of engaged, often semi-retired, economists with public policy experience who like me do not agree with many Government policies, debate alternatives where we can and try to get change any way we can. MacCulloch was saying nothing original, and doing so counterproductively. When this was pointed out (I don't believe his spin on the message he says he got, but it does buttress my earlier view that his ego is outsized) he has tossed his toys.
You are right he tossed his toys. Thanks for your observations and comments. Your critique of MacCulloch is welcomed. If as you say there are a number of economists who have something to say, Substack provides an opportunity.
I have been reading Prof McCullough's blog for some years and he has taught me a lot and always makes a lot of sense. It's clear he is a cut above some of the tame economists regularly trotted out by the media etc.
He will be a major loss but I must admit about six months ago, I remember thinking I wonder if he knows he is shouting in an empty room? He often garnered many likes on various platforms but neither the Labour or National Govt seemed to respond to what he was saying.
So for his sake, I hope he can more richly live his life with more localised or selfish endeavours but I for one will miss him. NZ becomes more impoverished as a result both intellectually and financially.
Rob MacCullogh's "Down to Earth Kiwi" blog is a sad loss to those of us here in the heartland who rely(ed) on it and others like it for alternatives to the main Wellington political narrative.
Hear hear. I agree - The New Herald should grab him with both hands, and it’s nothing new, that speaking out, or being different causes problems in Aotearoa. Try being an ex Act MP!
Ha. If I were to be an MP of any shade would result in an instant divorce! Being a commentator is enough for me although that said I have had a very good response from one of whom I was critical. There may be room for debate in future.
Yes! A ‘2-views’ opinion page, where the perspectives of Messrs MacCulloch & Wilson could be contrasted. (You can substitute others for Wilson as we go along but please let him be intellectually shamed first)
Let’s hope Philip Crump (Cranmer) is reading the comments.
Excellent Mr Hobbitsees. I’ve read plenty of brilliant ‘in your face no bullshit’ articles from Prof MacCulloch, he’s usually right on the money (pun intended). You commented at a recent FSU panel evening that we need to ‘put our heads above the parapet’, and boy has he done this, but sadly the ignorant masses, self-interested factions & MSM wear down even the most resilient. I feel for Robert, he is a smart chap and deserves far better for his bravery & passion for a better NZ.
I took the title from that FSU comment.
The irony of the Professor’s sign off could not be overlooked and provided the “hook” for the piece.
Thanks so much for writing this. I caught Michael Laws' interview with Prof MacCulloch just yesterday and felt completely shocked. I'm familiar with the "soft totalitarianism" that exists in NZ (as elsewhere in the West) around social/cultural issues, but here it is, at the heart of NZ political life. I'm now feeling rather naive - of course it's at the very centre of things, this corruption and decay of so much of value in our Kiwi way of life. I feel that the situation with Prof MacCulloch (the Platform interview and this article of yours, David) should be shouted from the rooftops to wake up those NZers who just go on comforably reading/listening to mainstream media. Is the "new" Herald now a thing? I'm out of touch with developments there.
Thanks Sheryl. There is a governance shake up coming at the Herald NZME and an editorial board is planned. Philip Crump (Thomas Cranmer of Substack) is to be a member I understand.
Serendipitously I just happened upon Peter Williams' Substack post after reading yours and commenting. I was happy to read his report of Mr Crump's views about journalistic excellence, and also about the changes already happening with the Herald board.
Deeply grateful that you bring Mr. MacCulloch’s case to the fore. The silencing and obvious suppression of a highly valued and frankly sorely needed critical voice is alarming and came as a real shock to us.
The oppressive power of the ‘establishment’ is alive and well. Extremely worrying!
Thanks Elisabeth. I try to say what I think needs to be said. I had to sit beneath the parapet for so long that it is unlikely that I shall resume that position. I hope you continue to enjoy my writing.
Now more than ever we need informed criticism and leadership. What we have now is media stagnation, academic failure, parliamentary chaos and a PM with blinkers on.
I've heard Rob quite a bit on RCR.
The most worrying thing about his treatment is he says nothing uncontroversial.
We do have an aging population. We do have a government who's size swells while it's delivery fades into obscurity. We do seem to believe that we can regulate our way to happiness.
We're part of the western decline and even the "controversial" people who supposedly rally against this are struggling against the massive power of vested interest. One only has to look at Doge's failure to meaningfully reduce the US deficit.
Yet in New Zealand most people think the deep state is a conspiracy theory, rather than the obvious result of mission creep and largely unaccountable vested interest.
The West has lost its mojo. To me the only question is whether empires fade as part of an as yet not understood cycle and regardless of what the empire does to hold on it will always fade......or if some great movement / leader / event can halt and reverse this decline.
Hard to see where any rear guard action to revive the West will come from at this point in time.
You might enjoy Iain McGilchrist's "The Master and His Emissary" and "The Matter With Things" - if you have the time.
Thanks Sheryl - the stack of "to be reads" is pretty high. So much to read - so little time....
My comment was meant to be a reply to the previous commenter, in response to his remarks about the fading empire. I wasn't urging the books on you David, as I imagine you are well and truly busy. Darned good books though :-)
Not to worry Sheryl. Any recommendation is good and very much appreciated. Yes - rather busy and returning to familiar and much loved ground which hopefully will see the morning light on Thursday.
Thanks Sheryl.
I'm reading Master and his Emmissary now actually!! I've heard Gilchrist speak quite a lot and his views are very compelling.
We do seem to live in a world ruled by spreadsheet rather than intuition reductionism is rampant (it's behind all the ridiculous economic / climate / epdemiological modelling nonsense), and we haven't figured what to do with our God shaped holes.
As an economist I have read Robert MacCulloch's blog for several years. One standout feature of his writing was the size of his ego - immense self regard evident in most posts and no sensible filter on his opinions. I persisted in reading his stuff, notwithstanding his readiness to infer and attribute bad motives to people he didn't know, because one had to give him credit for trying to comment on public policy. A feature of NZ academic life is the paucity of public input they make - 1000s of them and very little engagement with the public. There are a few standout exceptions - who write more measured and believable words than MacCulloch did. He may be a good uni prof, but as a commentator on public policy he has very often put about unsubstantiated inferences of others' motivations and behaviour that did not seem to me to be adult. I challenge you to read a year of his output and still decide that this is a person you think might be well-suited to working with a few others on some board or other, in order to produce a helpful report or guide actions.
Thanks Clive - although your response is to another contributor my own view, for what it is worth, is that MacCulloch added to the debate and made hism points in an easily understood way. I should like to see him continue to contribute to the debate which is why I suggested a spot for him at the Herald - if the renewed Board and Editorial people will have him.
I can't comment on his Board suitability but it does seem unusual that he should be sidelined in the way that he describes and the way that Bryce Edwards set out in another article today (Wednesday)
David, I'm intrigued that as a former District Court Judge and Listener columnist (but not an economist), you have read MacCulloch's blog for years and not recognised any of the 'non-economist' traits of his writing that I would have thought would immediately have made you wary of his posts. He used ad hominen invective; he attacked assumed motives he had no way of substantiating, he struggled sometimes to make a coherent point and most of all, he liked to talk about his own abilities. No need to be an economist to see faults. And if like me you were an economist you would perhaps have been frustrated that you could not question many of his assertions via his blog - I could see no way to do so, unlike here. Other commenters might be surprised to know there is a large community of engaged, often semi-retired, economists with public policy experience who like me do not agree with many Government policies, debate alternatives where we can and try to get change any way we can. MacCulloch was saying nothing original, and doing so counterproductively. When this was pointed out (I don't believe his spin on the message he says he got, but it does buttress my earlier view that his ego is outsized) he has tossed his toys.
You are right he tossed his toys. Thanks for your observations and comments. Your critique of MacCulloch is welcomed. If as you say there are a number of economists who have something to say, Substack provides an opportunity.
I have been reading Prof McCullough's blog for some years and he has taught me a lot and always makes a lot of sense. It's clear he is a cut above some of the tame economists regularly trotted out by the media etc.
He will be a major loss but I must admit about six months ago, I remember thinking I wonder if he knows he is shouting in an empty room? He often garnered many likes on various platforms but neither the Labour or National Govt seemed to respond to what he was saying.
So for his sake, I hope he can more richly live his life with more localised or selfish endeavours but I for one will miss him. NZ becomes more impoverished as a result both intellectually and financially.
Rob MacCullogh's "Down to Earth Kiwi" blog is a sad loss to those of us here in the heartland who rely(ed) on it and others like it for alternatives to the main Wellington political narrative.
Oh good! I've listened to him lots too and am quite a fan