The ‘Yes, And’ Politics Game
January 13, 2022
By NZB3
Improvisational Comedy has been a mainstream part of Western Culture for many decades now: An impromptu spontaneous, un-scripted, comedic performance based on no plan just a set of rules. Back in high school we called it ‘Theater Sports’ but since then Improv’ Comedy has become more widely known along with its basic formula. This comedy form relies on quick wits and talent on the part of the players which was in more abundant supply in the first decade of the new millennium. Out of that time one of the stand-out performers was Tina Fey (image, left) who issued an Improv’ Comedy manifesto in the form of 4 simple rules. From the moment I first read those comedy rules I decided to always consider them the rules of politics as well.
Politics in New Zealand is nothing more than Improvisational Comedy. It’s show business for ugly people. A joke or series of jokes are being told. Someone is being made a fool of. There is a stage, a performance, props, and someone is laughing at someone. If you don’t find your government funny then you’re certainly one of the taxpayers in the audience and the one who is being laughed at by politicians.
At the time I read Fey’s rules I had also been studying Transactional Analysis. For anyone who knows about that therapy modality, especially the Yes, But Game it’s an easy step to apply the Yes, And Game and to recognise that it is the game played by our politicians. They are not being their authentic selves, they are all playing a role…
Rules of the ‘Yes, And’ Game
Rule 1: The Rule of Agreement
Never deny the premise, whatever is pitched at you in the theater by a fellow player. This may be another politician, a member of the press corps, or a nominated member of the audience. When you deny you are going against The Game itself which means either it dies or you die. A comedian or thespian would bomb on stage and ruin the entire production. However politics is bigger than any player so The Game will refuse to end because the other players and the audience will it to go on no matter what. Nobody in politics ever denies the premise and survives.
“When you’re improvising, this means you are required to agree with whatever your partner has created. So if we’re improvising and I say, “Freeze, I have a gun,” and you say, “That’s not a gun. It’s your finger. You’re pointing your finger at me,” our improvised scene has ground to a halt.” – Bossypants, Fey (2011)
“Inside the Beehive if you insist something is true when it’s not, then it will become so.”- Janet Wilson, National Party Press Secretary
Consider, for example, the case of disgraced ex-National MP Jami-Lee Ross who never forgot how to play the ‘Yes, And’ Game. When his opponents had him sectioned to a mental health facility in 2018 he said “Yes” to the premise he was mentally ill. When the attack became a sex scandal with another MP, Ross said “Yes” to that too. He played the game so well that he was unable to be ousted and remained a MHR and kept his seat in parliament until the General Election of October 2020. The fact that his successor in that Blue electorate, Christopher Luxon, is now the National Party leader is a reminder of the high standing once attributed to Ross because of his command of the rules.
Another great example came in 2020 when Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s Office dictated the premise that National MP Andrew Falloon had sent rude pictures to a woman. Falloon instantly agreed, knowing Janet Wilson’s edict (see above.) Falloon’s leader, Judith Collins, also instantly accepted the premise and proceeded to apply Rule 2 to the situation.
Rule 2: Yes, And
Having said “yes” to a premise it’s now a player’s responsibility to advance the scene and show everyone that they are part of it as a fellow creator. If a politician does not do this they risk becoming a prop that is acted upon rather than an actor who makes things happen.
Jamie-Lee Ross accepted the premise that he was mentally ill (“Yes,”) then elaborated a bit about his pain and suffering. It didn’t matter if it was true what mattered was that it had been Said in The Game and that he now owned it as a fellow-author.
Andrew Falloon did the same as his senior but couldn’t stick the landing. His “Yes” was to apologise for what Ardern said he had done and his “And” reached the audience as ravings about the people he had lost to suicide and how much that hurt or some damn thing. Andrew didn’t make it to Rule 3.
Rule 3: Make Statements
A player thrives in the Yes, And Game if they are positive, imaginative and quick-witted. Rule 3 is the time to optimistically explore possibilities, to spin a new angle, to put out feelers for ways that the premise could benefit you. This attitude is what Edward de Bono wrote about using the term ‘Yellow Hat Thinking’.
Jamie-Lee Ross’ Yellow Hat Thinking was to say “Yes,” “And,” then the statement: ‘I have sought counselling for my problem and now I’m all better again and back on deck!’
Judith Collins’ Yellow Hat Thinking was to say ‘Yes, Andrew did that, And, Andrew is retiring from politics because he is mentally ill.” Then Collins Made a Statement of her own: ‘While I’m on camera, and quite incidentally, word has reached me that one of Ardern’s Ministers has behaved inappropriately.”
Collins’ Statement became a new premise which, according to Rule 1, Ardern had no choice but to say “Yes” to. The Prime Minister owned it with an “And” then the obligatory Statement about which Minister’s career now had to be scarified to pay for what had been done to a rookie Opposition back-bencher (Falloon.) In terms of scalps, Collins won this match on points but also on cruelty. Collins did not specify who she was talking about. Ardern is the one who choose Iain Lees-Galloway to be the one for the chop. It could have been anyone because, remember, this is Improv’ Comedy not the truth. Ardern was the one who picked which of her soldiers to sacrifice in obedience to Collins’ play. And, if Ardern didn’t give up someone satisfactory then Collins could have said “Yes, and rightly so” but then used Rule 3 to say “But that wasn’t the inappropriate Minister I was referring to.” Ardern could have lost another Minister if she had not conceded the match.
“Not since Iain Lees-Galloway and Andrew Falloon were fed into the person-shredder 12 months ago has anyone been so commercially murdered” – Eagle Brewing Brouhaha, NZB3 (2021)
“He said he had begun receiving counselling. He apologised for the disruption to his colleagues and to his constituents in Canterbury. In a statement, National Party leader Judith Collins said Falloon told her he would not be standing for re-election.” – National MP Andrew Falloon quits politics, alleged to have sent indecent image to young woman, Stuff (2020)
The termination of Falloon and Lees-Galloway was practically out of their hands. Their Leaders said they had quit politics so they had quit politics (Rule 1.) This wanton death-dealing mutual blood sacrifice on the part of the Leaders must have sent a chill up the spine of every Member of Parliament. They could see that at any time their political career could be ended in disgrace too. In the Westminster System a parliamentarian is in The Game when they are referred to as their constituency seat or as their Ministerial portfolio; They are out of The Game when they are Named by having their regular human name spoken. In the above ‘Yes, And’ Game matches the Member for Rangitata was turned back into Andrew Falloon. A mere taxpayer and voter. An outsider. An audience member like the rest of us. The Minister of Immigration was Named and transmuted into his mortal form of Iain Lees-Galloway.
To be Named is to be kicked out of The Game and it is always for failing to apply the rules. Ross was given a very difficult premise to say “yes” to but managed to survive to apply Rule 4. Falloon and Lees-Galloway were unable or unwilling to be creative enough at using the rules to stay in The Game. The greatest failure to apply the rules is to attack The Game itself and to expose its superstructure (“rules of conduct”) and pretenses. In The House this is literally called “Naming” and unless that Member withdraws and apologises, preserving The Game, they are Suspended. Being suspended from The Game means being a non-player and therefore as vulnerable as anyone else who cannot employ the 4 Rules. It is to be reduced to a common citizen with no political power and a position no politician ever returns to willingly without a secure exit strategy.
“Naming is a procedure in some Westminster parliaments that provides for the speaker to temporarily remove a member of parliament who is breaking the rules of conduct of the legislature. Historically, “naming” refers to the speaker’s invocation of the process by calling out the actual name of the member, breaking the convention of calling on members by the name of their constituency.”
Richard Prebble was named for “Refusing to leave the chamber when asked, and repeating a statement that he had previously withdrawn, in which he stated that Phil Goff was lying when he said that he did not know that the Chief of Air Staff was opposed to the scrapping of the Royal New Zealand Air Force combat wing.” – Wiki
Players undermine our phoney baloney political system if they tell the truth too much by saying what is really going on. In particular they undermine The Game by stating that players are playing. In other words, saying that liars are liars or Speakers are partisans of their own party or that The Game is not truth-based or democratic or just or otherwise exposing it for the sham it truly is. A player who does this is sawing at the branch all politicians sit upon and is only doing it for a bit of leverage before being brought to heel. Even this is part of The Game though: A deliberate mistake to create an opportunity…
Rule 4: There are no mistakes, only opportunities
Finally, in the Yes, And Game players always keep to the rule that nothing is too preposterous. There is no such thing as a mistaken “Yes” or a wrong “And.” The show must go on. There is no “take five” or “cut” in Improv’ Comedy or politics. There is only leveraging whatever happens into new opportunities. Whatever anybody says or does the audience/voter will accept it no matter how impossible or absurd so all anyone ever needs to do is play the ball where it lands.
“If I start a scene as what I think is very clearly a cop riding a bicycle, but you think I am a hamster in a hamster wheel, guess what? Now I’m a hamster in a hamster wheel.” – Fey
This part of the game is why Governments keep on promising unworkable or dangerous policies, even the same ones over and over. And we keep on letting them even though we know the truth. The Comedy we are enchanted by is more important than facts. A performer can’t go wrong by saying black is white or dead is alive or water isn’t wet; Nobody cares. They can only go wrong by making bad comedy as determined by the above rules. Always the politician performer may rely on our Suspension of Disbelief towards the facts of reality. It doesn’t matter a damn if there is a team of qualified doctors and scientists with The Truth written on a stone tablet by Christ himself because they are not performers in The Game. It doesn’t matter if NASA satellites or forensic evidence or economists or mathematicians prove something didn’t happen or can’t be done. If a politician is in good with the Yes, And Game then they can say “inflation is good now” or “freedom is slavery” or “sea levels are rising” or “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” in defiance of anything.
Politicians in our system never do what’s right or good or logical according to reality. They only work according to the Yes, And Game to extract opportunity for their own power and wealth according to the prescriptions of our incredulity. They don’t write the rules of this game and nor are they bound by anything other than our boundary setting (which is pretty weak.) We get the government we deserve. If stories and themes about Maoris or orphans or nationalism or Feminism or Environmentalism or Belgians or nuclear-free zones are what we need to hear to short-circuit our wits then those are the jokes politicians solemnly tell.
The elderly and frail Prime Minister Joseph Ward won election in 1928 even after he misread his speech notes and accidentally promised New Zealand he would borrow £70,000,000 in a single year. This was mad. But Ward knew to apply Rule 4 and that if he didn’t do so he would look a fool. He was right. The crazy country accepted their crippling new debt as prosperity because it was all part of The Game. Politicians have been ignoring sense and bankrupting the country for all our history and why wouldn’t they?
Look no further than the Yes, And Game to explain why non-players are never listened to. They are only brought in as highly paid hired mercenaries to mouth lines generated by the players in the Yes, And Game. If they have non-game approved ideas then they are marginalised, de-platformed, un-printed, suspended.
Nobody can be elected and gain or keep power who does not play the Yes, And Game. Every opposition party says “Yes, And” to anything the Prime Minister says. They will never reject a premise, only agree that, “Yes,” the outcome is to be desired and never a “Mistake” and they will “Make Statements” as to why it should have been done better and sooner and harder and more efficiently. Nobody within The Game, the Cathedral, ever attacks it from within. If anyone got anywhere near doing so they would be, and are, crushed for impossible and trite reasons that everyone immediately accepts and approves of. Likewise, the most insane injustices and criminal misjudgments are performed and put up with provided they are performed within the bounds of the Yes, And Game.
—
Ref. Bossypants: Tina Fey’s Rules of Improvisation, BulletProof Presentations
Ref. “Bein’ is belivin’ for Labour, turns out, so they don’t need to obey laws to make it happen, just need to let their passion show and they can dance right through illegality!”- A Star Chamber Star Chart, NZB3
Like Comment Share
