Flag

taniwharugby

Can we vote to have no flag? Now that'd be better, do away with that worthless flag picker cult from our society!

jegga

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="514171" data-time="1441664444">
I know some of you are reading the nutjobs on Stuff as an indication of where opposition lies but my experince from those around me or friends or family is that it is overwhemingly those of a conservative bent that don't want change and were against it from the start. 
It seems almost like the right wing nutjobs are keeping quiet and letting the left wing nutjobs do their arguing for them</blockquote>
As BSG says though this was something labour wanted, now the left have made it all about Key. Talking of stuff I haven't seen any reporting on how red peak polled before the final four were picked. This is not surprising because it polled very badly but that doesn't fit the narrative . 
The only upside to this is seeing people finally showing some passion about it, shame it took so long. 
Here's how the red peak originally polled <a class="bbc_url" href="http://www.radiolive.co.nz/DUNCAN-GARNER-The-unpopular-truth-about-Red-Peak/tabid/615/articleID/97289/Default.aspx">http://www.radiolive.co.nz/DUNCAN-GARNER-The-unpopular-truth-about-Red-Peak/tabid/615/articleID/97289/Default.aspx</a>

jegga

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="514174" data-time="1441664981">Can we vote to have no flag? Now that'd be better, do away with that worthless flag picker cult from our society!</blockquote>
 
First they came for the flag pickers then thry came for the banner fans then it was the armband wearers......

Rancid Schnitzel

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="514168" data-time="1441664089">
I'm not sure that it was. 
Looking back on it I think we would have a better result of choices if the panel included designers that had studied flagology and had gathered public ideas then tweaked them as needed to correct proportions, colours, definitions etc before then just presenting the public with a few ideas to debate. The results of that public debate could then go back for any further tweaking or change. 
The way it was done was that the debate was done before people saw the options. The decisions were made by a well meaning committee and the designs were as presented and without peer review on the finished product. 
Lets say the panel presented a black fern on a white background then the public feedback was overwhelming that people not only preffered but would vote for a white fern on black. The debate could be held about 'black flags' and whether we were happy to stand by any criticism and support it no matter what. That option could then be presented back to us in a referendum.... 
Forget issues of ISIS. It has nothing to do with them. Traditionally black flags are a sign of aggression just as white flags are a sign of surrender. However, the counter argument is that lots of countries have white based flags and aren't surrendering. we can buck the 'tradition' and show that a black flag does not have to mean aggression. 
I came into this process as someone that would like a change of flag and always said I would be happy to vote for one that I thought was good. However, the more I look at the options the less I like them and am now pissed off that through this whole process we couldn't present a decent option. I like the story behind red peak, I like the fact that it is well proportioned and looks like a flag not a logo, but for some reason it just doesn't grab me or give me a feeling of 'that's our flag'. If it was already our flag I wouldn't be bothered changing it though. 
I still believe we should change our flag as part of our country 'growing up'. We aren't a British Colony any more and the Union Jack has no relevance to me (it has historical relevance but so does whaling or beating schoolkids for speaking Maori). The Southern Cross may show how we were colonised initially by people navigating here and I have nothing against it but it doesn't really work on it's own</blockquote>
 
Are you really equating the union jack with whaling and beating kids for speaking Maori? I mean what have the British given us. Well apart from the nation and institutions we hold so dear. 
If growing up is about replacing the flag that covered my grandfather's casket while the last post was played with a fucking triangle, then call me Peter Pan. 
Every Nordic country has a cross in its flag. The percentage of them who even believe in God let alone go to church is miniscule. Perhaps they should "grow up" and change their flags as well.

Smudge

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Winger" data-cid="514088" data-time="1441621985">
<div>
Whats your preference Smudge
</div>
</blockquote>
 
A blue background with a stylised drawing of a Pakeha-Maori toddler smiling as they receive a MMR vaccine.

jegga

Rancid and a Smudge , my apologies I have run out of likes .

Baron Silas Greenback

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="514171" data-time="1441664444">
<div>
I know some of you are reading the nutjobs on Stuff as an indication of where opposition lies but my experince from those around me or friends or family is that it is overwhemingly those of a conservative bent that don't want change and were against it from the start.
It seems almost like the right wing nutjobs are keeping quiet and letting the left wing nutjobs do their arguing for them
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
I thin you gave misunderstood. I agree 100% that many who are against change are conservatives. But they have been joined a significant element from the left who were pro change, but anti Key. The hatred of Key won over. Now they have realised they are shooting themselves int eh foot, so to save face.. they want a change... but to stick to the 'establishment' at the same time. It is pathetic.
 
Of course there some who just like red peak. But not many,

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="514175" data-time="1441665235">
<div>
As BSG says though this was something labour wanted, now the left have made it all about Key. Talking of stuff I haven't seen any reporting on how red peak polled before the final four were picked. This is not surprising because it polled very badly but that doesn't fit the narrative . 
The only upside to this is seeing people finally showing some passion about it, shame it took so long. 
Here's how the red peak originally polled <a class="bbc_url" href="http://www.radiolive.co.nz/DUNCAN-GARNER-The-unpopular-truth-about-Red-Peak/tabid/615/articleID/97289/Default.aspx">http://www.radiolive.co.nz/DUNCAN-GARNER-The-unpopular-truth-about-Red-Peak/tabid/615/articleID/97289/Default.aspx</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
 
All I am pointing out is that from people I come in contact with, those that are strong supporters of not changing are actually also strong supporters of Key.
 
I don't read the comments on Stuff for the obvious reason that it is just a soapbox for idiots irrespective of political persuasion.

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="514184" data-time="1441667708">
<div>
I thin you gave misunderstood. I agree 100% that many who are against change are conservatives. But they have been joined a significant element from the left who were pro change, but anti Key. The hatred of Key won over. Now they have realised they are shooting themselves int eh foot, so to save face.. they want a change... but to stick to the 'establishment' at the same time. It is pathetic.
 
Of course there some who just like red peak. But not many,
</div>
</blockquote>
 
OK, I get where you are coming from.

Baron Silas Greenback

The left have just been flapping around trying to find a way to change the flag at the same time as criticise Key and try and give him a blood nose.
 
And... the result was this inane PR job with 'Red Peak'

Baron Silas Greenback

I would love to the genesis for this 'Red Peak' campaign. I bet dollars to donuts it wasn't simply.. 'hey this is a cool flag'.... it would have been 'hey this is a cool flag, why did Key and his puppets not allow this is an option?'
 
Then the Key haters in social media jumped on it.. and away we go.

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rancid Schnitzel" data-cid="514180" data-time="1441666917">
<div>
Are you really equating the union jack with whaling and beating kids for speaking Maori? I mean what have the British given us. Well apart from the nation and institutions we hold so dear. 
If growing up is about replacing the flag that covered my grandfather's casket while the last post was played with a fucking triangle, then call me Peter Pan. 
Every Nordic country has a cross in its flag. The percentage of them who even believe in God let alone go to church is miniscule. Perhaps they should "grow up" and change their flags as well.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
I'm not 'equating' the examples just saying that there is nothing that says we must hold onto the past. The Union Jack is in the past in saying we shouldn't abandon it for historical reasons is a weak argument. Any new flag would be flown in the future not the past.
 
You seem to be taking the term 'growing up' in the wrong light. We are still (in comparison) a young country. We have grown quickly and cut the apron strings to our 'parents' some time ago. We have also grown to acknowledge that we, as a people, come from backgrounds or ancestry other than just the one represented on our current flag.
 
I don't think we have to change our flag but I do think we have been presented with an opportunity to do so if we wish and that if we could find something more representative of who we are now and where we hope to go, instead of looking at the past, then that would be a good thing.

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="514189" data-time="1441668200">
<div>
I would love to the genesis for this 'Red Peak' campaign. I bet dollars to donuts it wasn't simply.. 'hey this is a cool flag'.... it would have been 'hey this is a cool flag, why did Key and his puppets not allow this is an option?'
 
Then the Key haters in social media jumped on it.. and away we go.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
I think there is an aspect of that but the initial impetus was simply that there is a large number of people really disappointed in the options presented. This other option was thrown out there as an example of a flag rather than a logo and as you say, the idiots latched onto it in an attempt to have a crack.

red terror

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Winger" data-cid="514095" data-time="1441623466">
<div>
<img src="https://41.media.tumblr.com/f048c3c350c4efa626716d4b36feff52/tumblr_nubzaf6JhY1rkoi7zo1_1280.jpg" alt="tumblr_nubzaf6JhY1rkoi7zo1_1280.jpg">
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
Dude didn't love it at first; then when the meaning was explained, "can't see it any other way."
 
Not a comment so much on "red peak," but reading this only made me think of Tom Wolfe's "The Painted Word." The book is an easy read, probably less than a hundred pages ( -- a google search for "fuliginous flatness" will likely get you the book online for free download.)
 
<img src="http://www.yankeemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Wolfe.jpg" alt="Wolfe.jpg">
 
Wolfe's thesis (reviled in the modern art world!) is basically that modern art should be displayed the size of postage stamps in museums, and immediately next to them should hang huge wall-paper-sized essays and reviews by critics in exquisite frames explaining the meaning behind the line, shapes and "fuliginous flatness" of these important paintings. You may not agree with his summaries, but it's bloody hilarious and anybody with small interest in design and modern art should definitely put it on their reading list. Anyway, rightly-or-wrongly, that's what the highlighted above reminded me.

MajorRage

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="514128" data-time="1441650898">
<div>
This sums up the people like Manhire behind the red peak and their sad behaviour recently quite nicely, the part about the abs is true. I've seen leftards saying theres a rift in the team because McCaw is close to Key and Kaino and Mealamu are staunch labour men and Key commercialised the beehive allowing adidas to use it to promote their brand. Get a life ffs.
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/71791596/tiny-minority-has-its-say-far-too-late-in-flag-debate'>http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/71791596/tiny-minority-has-its-say-far-too-late-in-flag-debate</a>
 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
That article is the best non-sport related article I've ever read on an NZ website. Sums up my thoughts exactly.

Rancid Schnitzel

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="514191" data-time="1441668617">
I'm not 'equating' the examples just saying that there is nothing that says we must hold onto the past. The Union Jack is in the past in saying we shouldn't abandon it for historical reasons is a weak argument. Any new flag would be flown in the future not the past. 
You seem to be taking the term 'growing up' in the wrong light. We are still (in comparison) a young country. We have grown quickly and cut the apron strings to our 'parents' some time ago. We have also grown to acknowledge that we, as a people, come from backgrounds or ancestry other than just the one represented on our current flag. 
I don't think we have to change our flag but I do think we have been presented with an opportunity to do so if we wish and that if we could find something more representative of who we are now and where we hope to go, instead of looking at the past, then that would be a good thing.</blockquote>
 
How on earth is acknowledging our past and our heritage a weak argument? To me its a weak argument to say we need a new flag to "grow up" or "evolve" as a nation. As if changing the flag is going to make any difference to the development of the nation. 
Personally I'm no great fan of the design of the flag. But it has been our flag for more than 100 years. That means something. IMHO any new flag would have to include a fern which HISTORICALLY has been our national symbol.

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rancid Schnitzel" data-cid="514200" data-time="1441670356">
<div>
How on earth is acknowledging our past and our heritage a weak argument? To me its a weak argument to say we need a new flag to "grow up" or "evolve" as a nation. As if changing the flag is going to make any difference to the development of the nation. 

</div>
</blockquote>
 
Acknowledging our past and heritage isn't the weak argument, Saying we should keep our current flag because it acknowledges the past is. There's a difference.
 
How do you know that changing our flag won't make change to our development? It can be funny how perceptions of a national sybol can affect how people think. Do potential new migrants look at our flag and think we are inexorably bound to the UK? Does this put them off or make them hesitant? Would showing that we are forging our own identity encourage investment?
 
I don't know how much these possible intangibles affect our development but I also don't dismiss the possibility.
 
I just wish we had a decent option.

red terror

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rancid Schnitzel" data-cid="514200" data-time="1441670356">
<div>
Personally I'm no great fan of the design of the flag. But it has been our flag for more than 100 years. That means something. IMHO any new flag would have to include a fern which HISTORICALLY has been our national symbol.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
That's why the Canadian flag works. Canadian public overwhelmingly demanded that a maple leaf was going to be on it, they didn't invent new symbology. And those demands were for good reason. When those boys went marching off to the trenches and meat-grinders in WW1 and WW2 -- generations before a flag referendum was even imagined -- they were marching with maple leafs on their shoulders and rucksacks, and Canadian hockey teams and Olympic teams went out to the world wearing a maple leaf. The symbology didn't have to be explained to anybody.
 
(There is mystical symbolism behind the red panels ("sea-to-sea"), but really Canadians just wanted a maple leaf on a red flag, and they wanted the maple leaf to be red, so you can't really do a red-on-red, and they came up with a functionally simple design that gives them both, and centrally carries the symbol that every Canadian most identifies. The "red peak" flag is a bold design, I just don't see where Kiwis are going to feel more connected to triangles than they are a silver fern, but I have been mistaken before.)

Rancid Schnitzel

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="514204" data-time="1441670901">
Acknowledging our past and heritage isn't the weak argument, Saying we should keep our current flag because it acknowledges the past is. There's a difference. 
How do you know that changing our flag won't make change to our development? It can be funny how perceptions of a national sybol can affect how people think. Do potential new migrants look at our flag and think we are inexorably bound to the UK? Does this put them off or make them hesitant? Would showing that we are forging our own identity encourage investment? 
I don't know how much these possible intangibles affect our development but I also don't dismiss the possibility. 
I just wish we had a decent option.</blockquote>
 
Now that is a very weak argument.

taniwharugby

I think this debate has certainly stirred some patriotism and emotion from some that probably never showed much before, which is a great thing IMO!

The Silver Fern

Flag