Flag?

[Tazz]

I haven't even seen an answer to what I asked a few pages back:

Why do our Olympic athletes have a silver fern on their chests?
Why do our commonwealth games athletes use the silver fern?
Why did our rugby team go as far as trademarking a silver fern logo?
Why do our fallen soldiers buried in Europe have their graves marked with a silver fern?
Why do NZers on their OEs use the fern & the kiwi and not the flag? (probably because they get sick of "what part of aussie are you from mate?")
Our netball team is the silver ferns, our women's rugby team are the black ferns.
Why are so many keen on keeping the flag that so few actually use?

I've seen sporting teams of other countries with their national flag on their chests, isn't it interesting that our sports teams don't do this. We just don't use our flag except where only a nations flag is acceptable, if we have any option we seem to just go to a kiwi or a fern (or sometimes a koru which is also the same fern).
Then people say that they like our current flag and we shouldn't change it. For my whole life I've seen evidence that New Zealanders DON'T like our flag and we don't want to use it.

When Canadians travel abroad it isn't unusual for them to put their flag on their baggage.
When people from the USA travel abroad they often put their flag on their baggage, at least until they realise that many people in the world hate Americans and then the smart ones switch to using the Canadian flag.
Many poms use the Union Jack to proudly say they are British!
New Zealanders traveling abroad very rarely use the NZ flag and any that start with that flag change to something else, you can only take so many times being asked if you are Australian!
So, New Zealanders proudly flying their nations flag - nah, not so much.

What if we changed to the proposed flag?
I think then there would be more New Zealanders traveling abroad that would be happy to display our flag. It would no longer be the embarrassing flag we currently have.

I've never understood the travelling with flags thing.
Why do you go to another country and try and rub peoples noses in where you're from? Who gives a fuck? If someone wants to know where you're from they'll ask I've always figured.

Also, almost all countries have symbols as well as flags.
Where is the Kangaroo on the Aussie flag?
The Rose on the Union Jack?
The Shamrock on the Irish?
Why isn't the French flag a plain white 'we surrender' flag?

Your argument for the fern being on sportsing teams uniforms, well, OK, then we'll be just like all the other sportsing nations with their flags on their uniforms, even Canada. Look at that glorious leaf on their rugger teams shirts.

Or not, because it's not even always on there (not sure which is which uniform but sometimes it's on the arm and sometimes it's not).

In fact I don't think you'll find a national flag on every rugby jersey? Or hockey? Or football? Might be the odd exception but on the whole your statement about flags on sportsing jerseys is a bit of a tall tale. Even Olympic uniforms don't always all have national flags on them and it doesn't get more nation vs nation than that.

At the end of the day comparing what is on some sports teams shirts and their names to a countries NATIONAL flag is a bit insulting anyway. That is a freakin tiny facet of what our country is about and shouldn't really have any bearing on a flag choice considering how fickle people are with that shit (it's only because we've been successful, in rugger particularly, that there is so much emotion attached. If we lost the next 100 games in a row the tune would change I absolutely guarantee you).

[Erelyes]

I am yet to be convinced by a coherent, considered, and well-reasoned argument that we need a new flag...

On the contrary, every case I've seen put forward for keeping the flag is emotive. And usually they're the ones that are at odds with reality.

Shit like "our soldiers died for it" when in actual fact the NZ units had silver ferns on their uniforms, silver ferns for their medals, and silver ferns on their graves.

Or "it's ugly" (such arguments are silent on the aesthetic of our current flag).

Or "it looks like a logo" (Name another native NZ motif that hasn't been used as a logo?).

Or "no-one cares whether it looks the same as Aussies" (if no-one cares then why do people keep bringing it up?).

I assume all those in favour, the 20% perhaps, will be putting their hands in their pockets to reimburse me and the apathetic 80% for our tax money that has been spent on this?

Which ignores the fact that the 20% pay tax too and this is the first time we've had a referendum on flag change in either of our lifetimes. If it was an annual cost perhaps your point would make sense.

But since we're making stupid assumptions, I assume you would prefer that they just voted on it in Parliament instead of actually spending the money so that the public has a say.

[scumdog]

I am yet to be convinced by a coherent, considered, and well-reasoned argument that we need a new flag...

True.

The zit on my chin has more significance to me than a 'need' for a new national flag.

If a new flag was a screaming necessity every prime minister since ages ago would have been clamouring for one eh.

[Moi]

True.

The zit on my chin has more significance to me than a 'need' for a new national flag.

If a new flag was a screaming necessity every prime minister since ages ago would have been clamouring for one eh.

Zit? Zit... well that's you not going to the ball tonight...

Seems that only the present incumbent is clamouring... does make one wonder what else is being hidden behind the smoke screen?

I can hear those KBers who are wanting a change rushing for their keyboards...

[bogan]

Seems that only the present incumbent is clamouring... does make one wonder what else is being hidden behind the smoke screen?

I can hear those KBers who are wanting a change rushing for their keyboards...

Have you considered the irony around creating an issue bitching about the democratic process, while also bitching about its subversion by smokescreen you are creating?

[Blackbird]

True.

The zit on my chin has more significance to me than a 'need' for a new national flag.

If a new flag was a screaming necessity every prime minister since ages ago would have been clamouring for one eh.

Hi Tom,
From a personal perspective (and from an ex-Pom to boot ), it's one of those things which is not on most people's immediate horizon so no-one gets too excited until there is a bit of debate to stir the grey matter. I'm not anti the current flag in the slightest but from a purely personal viewpoint, I'd support the new one. I've been in NZ since 1975 and reckon the NZ culture compared with the UK is something rather special. Ignoring the scenery, Kiwis have a wonderful optimism and "can do" attitude which a new flag could maybe help reinforce to both residents and the rest of the world. If the democratic process says the current flag stays, that's fine too.

That's my 5 cents worth - no big drama.

[Moi]

Have you considered the irony around creating an issue bitching about the democratic process, while also bitching about its subversion by smokescreen you are creating?

I am not bitching about the democratic process - I don't believe I have said anything of that sort...

I am not bitching about its subversion by smokescreen...

What I am doing is asking questions which is part of the democratic process, though I sense there are some on here who find that intimidating - to have their thinking questioned is an affront to them.

[bogan]

I am not bitching about the democratic process - I don't believe I have said anything of that sort...

I am not bitching about its subversion by smokescreen...

What I am doing is asking questions which is part of the democratic process, though I sense there are some on here who find that intimidating - to have their thinking questioned is an affront to them.

Things like saying the present incumbent is clamoring, and that he is hiding things behind the smokescreen certainly sounds like bitching about both the process, and the smokescreen to me.

I don't see the present flag as "broken"... You see I am not persuaded by the hype presented by the media, the commentators, the "personalities", the government and by anyone else who is swayed by what appears to me to be a logo... or the "smoke-screen" that the flag debate appears to have been... that's how I see it...

As I say, I'm still awaiting a reasoned argument to change the flag... not some knee jerk or mass hysteric reaction...

Also bitching.

Reasoned arguments have been provided, you don't have to agree with them, but to put them down as knee jerk or mass hysteria is just making a fool of yourself.

[Katman]

What I am doing is asking questions which is part of the democratic process, though I sense there are some on here who find that intimidating - to have their thinking questioned is an affront to them.

Yep, that sounds like bogan.

[MarkH]

Again, thank you for the personal attack...

Any time.

You have just reiterated the "fictitious" statement...

You could look here and here

What is wrong with you?
When did I say vexillology was fictitious?
When did I say I didn't know what vexillology was?
Why do I need links to vexillology?
Why don't you read what I typed and try to understand?
I know what vexillology is and that isn't what I'm calling fictitious.
I'm calling "the rules of vexillology that make the proposed flag unable to be used by NZ" a fiction made up by you.
You still haven't provided any link to any 'rules' that would suggest we couldn't use the proposed flag.

Wrong. If you are prepared to vote for something or against something then you need to have a reasoned argument for either supporting it or not. You may be happy with what has been presented so far as reasons to change the flag, but I am not, hence I am waiting for a reasoned argument...

Yes, but you are the only person on this planet that requires a reasoned argument that YOU are happy with.
I'm happy with my reasons for making my choice and every other voter for this referendum just needs to be happy with their own reasons for their choice.
Someone could vote for a flag just because they think it looks better, who are you to say that they MUST have deeper reasoning than that.

[Moi]

Things like saying the present incumbent is clamoring, and that he is hiding things behind the smokescreen certainly sounds like bitching about both the process, and the smokescreen to me.

Also bitching.

Reasoned arguments have been provided, you don't have to agree with them, but to put them down as knee jerk or mass hysteria is just making a fool of yourself.

If you consider what I have said to be "bitching" then so be it...

I consider that what has been presented so far as reasons to change the flag is not well-reasoned argument. You may consider them well-reasoned but I don't, hence I am not swayed to vote to change the flag. Arguing a well reasoned and coherent position to sway voters to support you is part of the democratic process - if you want me to vote for the proposed flag then you need to convince me that it is worthy of my support.

However, what I am seeing in this thread is the fall-back position of some: that is to attack the person rather than the argument.

[MarkH]

The Welsh have a dragon on their flag, and a national symbol is the daffodil.

And another national symbol is the dragon . . .
So the Welsh DO use a national symbol on their flag, you have accidentally supported the opposite of what you are trying to argue.

[Moi]

Any time.

What is wrong with you?
When did I say vexillology was fictitious?
When did I say I didn't know what vexillology was?
Why do I need links to vexillology?
Why don't you read what I typed and try to understand?
I know what vexillology is and that isn't what I'm calling fictitious.
I'm calling "the rules of vexillology that make the proposed flag unable to be used by NZ" a fiction made up by you.
You still haven't provided any link to any 'rules' that would suggest we couldn't use the proposed flag.


Yes, but you are the only person on this planet that requires a reasoned argument that YOU are happy with.
I'm happy with my reasons for making my choice and every other voter for this referendum just needs to be happy with their own reasons for their choice.
Someone could vote for a flag just because they think it looks better, who are you to say that they MUST have deeper reasoning than that.

You seem to not understand that so far I have not seen any reasons presented that convince me that I should vote to change the flag.

I have questioned whether the proposed flag will function as an ensign for the military. No, I'm just asking how it will do that function. If the voters decide to have the proposed flag as our new flag then that will happen, no one can stop us from having it.

So I want a reasoned argument that I am happy with... if you want me to support you then you need to provide that reasoned argument to convince me - that is what persuasive argument is about.

Voters can chose the flag because they like it - as long as they have made an informed decision.

[bogan]

If you consider what I have said to be "bitching" then so be it...

I consider that what has been presented so far as reasons to change the flag is not well-reasoned argument. You may consider them well-reasoned but I don't, hence I am not swayed to vote to change the flag. Arguing a well reasoned and coherent position to sway voters to support you is part of the democratic process - if you want me to vote for the proposed flag then you need to convince me that it is worthy of my support.

However, what I am seeing in this thread is the fall-back position of some: that is to attack the person rather than the argument.

I do.

You lost me there, being well reasoned doesn't mean you have to agree. Points like we wish to differentiate ourselves from Australia as our flags look too similar and often get confused is well reasoned; points like we wish to have something symbolic to NZ on our flag is well reasoned; points like we are not a british colony any more is well reasoned. Just as point like our soldiers fought under that flag is well reasoned; kiwi's know our flag and want continuity from that is well reasoned.

Which is the same as what we're seeing from you. Ie, just say 'the reasons put forward do not sway me to vote to change the flag', instead of things like 'I'm still awaiting a reasoned argument to change the flag... not some knee jerk or mass hysteric reaction' or that someone is clamouring and putting this up a smokescreen (which btw, is not well reasoned if you've seen the labor party lately).

[MarkH]

I have questioned whether the proposed flag will function as an ensign for the military. No, I'm just asking how it will do that function.

But why did you question that? What difference does that make in terms of NZers deciding what flag should be used to represent this country?

What you actually said was:

The other aspect that needs to be considered is does the proposed flag obey the rules of vexillology? It needs to perform numerous functions such as Ensigns of the different military.

You want to know if the proposed flag obeys the rules of vexillology, but you haven't shown what these rules are that you are referring to. It would have been helpful if you could have provided a link to these rules because I have absolutely no idea of any rules you could be referring to.

I think you are wrong about it needing to perform as Ensigns for the military, the military ensigns can be based on the nation's flag but don't need to be the same as it. I would think that surely it is up to our various branches of the military to worry about whether they will change their ensigns and which designs to change to. I have no idea of why any referendum voter needs to concern themselves about that.

If you are not going to be convinced by anyone that the flag should change then you can just choose to vote for keeping the current one, that is your democratic right.
Just be grateful that the people have a say here, fifty years ago the Canadian officials decided to change their nation's flag and it happened regardless of whether the public wanted it or not.

BTW:
The Canadians dropped the Union Jack (AKA Union Flag) from their national flag and yet remained a member of the commonwealth. Their military still had ensigns and the sky didn't fall.
This has happened for other countries as well, a change of flag happens and life continues.