Garth George: Politics changes for the better

Is there a sea change happening in politics, both here and in the United States? I think there is, and if it continues and expands, nothing but good can come of it.

American writer Henry Brooks Adams once observed that "politics, as a practice, whatever its professions, has always been the systematic organisation of hatreds".

And anyone who has observed both American politics and ours over most of a lifetime would have to agree that antipathy has always played a huge part in our governance, in which political parties of different stripes strive and contrive for power.

Everything the party in power does is good and right and beneficial, and everything any other party recommends is automatically bad, wrong and not worth considering.

But suddenly that has changed, both here and in the US. In New Zealand it is changing the face of domestic politics; in the US it is heralding a new era in domestic and foreign affairs.

The new politics is being generated by two relatively young leaders, Prime Minister John Key and President Barack Obama, both of whom overcame less than desirable childhoods to succeed in business.

For want of a better word, the new domestic politics is one of "inclusion", to a degree never seen either here or in the US.

Here it manifests itself in National's decision to include outsider political parties in the Government it leads, including once natural enemies such as the Maori Party; and, lately, even accepting suggestions from the far-left Greens.

In the US, Mr Obama has either retained or appointed long-standing members of the Republican Party in top posts in his Democrat Administration. This is unheard of and, surely, has taken a lot of courage, but already in both countries it is having a signal effect on how we are governed. In foreign policy, he has created almost a revolution. He obviously understands that sabre-rattling, finger-wagging, sanctions and embargoes simply reinforce hatreds, while opening communication channels with such places as Cuba, Iran and North Korea give him at least a chance of reducing the enmity.

It is a lesson Mr Key could well learn, particularly in regard to Fiji. Instead of cutting Fiji off and demanding its leaders do what they're told, which serves only to entrench their recalcitrance, could we not open communication with Commodore Frank Bainimarama and his officials, lift all embargoes and offer our help in resolving that nation's difficulties?

Who are we to say that what Mr Bainimarama is trying to achieve for his country is all wrong? Fijian friends of mine say he is a good man with his nation's interest firmly at heart. They insist he is trying to establish good governance in a nation still shrugging off its history of colonialism, and his main aim is to ensure equality for all Fijians, irrespective of ethnicity.

But New Zealand and Australia seem to have embraced the principles and practices of "Western democracy" to such an extent that it has become a rigid, narrow dogma that begs no questions and brooks no argument.

It is time we started thinking outside the square and looking for answers to the problems of Fiji and other South Pacific nations other than the imposition or reimposition of failed Western democracy.

But back to the domestic scene and the inclusive nature of the National-led Government, particularly the giving of executive posts to the Maori Party, which has languished since it was founded in the shadow of a politically old-fashioned and insecure Labour Party.

If the inclusion of Maori in the upper echelons of power continues, it will do wonders for racial harmony. Nevertheless, it will take generations before it filters down to "ordinary" New Zealanders, both Pakeha and Maori, among whom there is a pool of racial resentment and bitterness far wider and deeper than we would like to admit.

As evidenced by the outcry lately over the naming of various bits of our country, particularly Wanganui and the North and South Islands. Who cares if it's Wanganui or Whanganui, except people such as inveterate Maori stirrer Ken Mair and right-wing mayor Michael Laws?

And what on Earth is wrong with having Pakeha and Maori names for the North and South Islands? Te Ika a Maui and Te Wai Pounamu have a much better ring to them than the pedestrian North and South, and if they are given as alternatives what is there to argue about?

As Shakespeare wrote: "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." So, be it Wanganui or Whanganui, it will still be a pleasant little provincial city nestled between a river and the Tasman Sea.