Newsletter

“The Demagogue Who Cried Demagogue: David Seymour’s Textbook Projection” - 17 december 2025

Ivor Jones The Māori Green Ltn

17 Dec 2025 — 12 min read

When Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour called Chlöe Swarbrick a “demagogue” in his pre-Christmas interview with the NZ Herald, the irony was thick enough to choke on.

Here was a man whose entire political project ticks every box in the textbook definition of demagoguery—anti-establishment rhetoric, simplistic solutions, victimization narratives, divisive attacks on vulnerable communities—pointing his finger at a Green Party co-leader whose actual record demonstrates careful policy work, coalition-building, and evidence-based advocacy.

This is narcissistic projection at its finest:

accusing your opponents of precisely what you yourself embody. And the data reveals that Seymour’s attack wasn’t just hypocritical—it was a case study in how demagogues deflect scrutiny by weaponizing the very labels that describe their own behaviour.

E hoa mā, Let’s Define Demagoguery

Political science gives us clear markers. Academic research defines demagogues as anti-establishment politicians who provide simplistic explanations and solutions for people’s problems. The central feature of demagoguery is persuasion by means of passion, shutting down reasoned deliberation and consideration of alternatives. Demagogues “pander to passion, prejudice, bigotry, and ignorance, rather than reason”.

They rely heavily on a rhetoric of victimization—claiming the ingroup is being victimized by the situation and has responded with extraordinary patience and kindness. Most tellingly, demagogues use “cunning projection”—when effective, they manage the condemnation of a group who has done nothing, or done very little compared to what they have done. This “mote-beam” projection muddies the waters enough that the ingroup can continue its policies.

Now let’s audit who fits this framework.

Seymour’s Demagoguery: A Five-Point Indictment

1. Simplistic Solutions to Complex Problems

Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill was called “too simplistic” by National Party leader Christopher Luxon, who voted it down. The bill attempted to replace the existing understanding of the Treaty’s principles with three new principles—a crude reduction of 185 years of constitutional development and jurisprudence into campaign slogans.

The Regulatory Standards Bill has been called “the strangest piece of New Zealand legislation I have ever seen” by former Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer, and described as attempting to embed extreme neoliberal ideas about “individual freedom” and private property rights into law. These are textbook simplistic frameworks applied to complex constitutional and regulatory questions.

2. Anti-Establishment Posturing (While Wielding Establishment Power)

Seymour promised to “reignite the Treaty principles debate” in 2026, saying: “We’ve planted the seeds of a movement of equal rights for this country that won’t go away anytime soon. I’ll never move on from the idea that we are all equal”.

This is classic demagogue rhetoric: positioning himself as the champion of “the people” against an imagined elite establishment—even as he serves as Deputy Prime Minister, the second-most powerful person in government. Seymour compared his failed Treaty Principles Bill to William Wilberforce’s efforts to abolish slavery, saying “You’ll think I’ve really lost the plot with the self-comparison.”

He’s made similarly grandiose claims before. As 1News reported, former Prime Minister Helen Clark was “stunned” at Seymour’s claim that suffragette Kate Sheppard would vote Act. This narcissistic historical appropriation—claiming Wilberforce, Sheppard, and Nelson Mandela as ideological ancestors—reveals a demagogue who sees himself as history’s protagonist.

3. Victimization Rhetoric & Us-vs-Them Framing

Seymour cited a Stuff column by Damien Grant that pondered whether Swarbrick was a demagogue, calling her “someone who uses her considerable talents for quite dark motivations these days.” He claimed: “All her messaging is basically ‘your problems are caused by other people’s success and I’m going to drag them down’”.

This is pure projection. Seymour’s entire political brand relies on victimization narratives: that “ordinary Kiwis” are being oppressed by Treaty settlements, by environmental regulations, by “co-governance,” by Māori “separatism.” His Regulatory Standards Bill was described by Greenpeace as “David Seymour’s next power grab”, designed to undermine Te Tiriti obligations and environmental protections.

4. Attacks on Opponents That Endanger Safety

Swarbrick revealed she had confronted Seymour about how his rhetoric can result in “real-world harm, particularly for my other MPs”. She said: “I have tried to have that very personal, very human discussion with him”.

The context is chilling. When Green MP Benjamin Doyle faced death threats, Seymour mocked the party on Facebook, suggesting they should “report threats against MP Benjamin Doyle to the Mongrel Mob” if they were sincere about their politics. Massey University lecturer Kevin Veale analyzed Seymour’s “Victim of the Day” social media posts, which singled out academics and MPs opposing his Regulatory Standards Bill, calling them examples of “technology-facilitated gender-based violence and online misogyny”.

Researcher Sanjana Hattotuwa at the Disinformation Project argued Seymour’s posts were “designed to silence opposition to the controversial Regulatory Standards Bill whilst maintaining plausible deniability about the resulting harassment, harms and hate”. Two official complaints were lodged with Cabinet alleging Seymour breached the Cabinet Manual.

5. Shielding Abusers While Attacking Victims

The most damning evidence of Seymour’s demagogic character involves Act Party president Tim Jago. RNZ reported that Seymour was personally informed three months before Jago’s resignation that Jago was a “sexual predator”. When a survivor’s wife contacted the Act Party, Seymour responded by directing her to an employment lawyer rather than encouraging her to go to police.

The survivor’s wife replied:

“After discussions with my husband and due to the serious criminal nature of this, he has gone to the police with this matter”.

Jago was convicted on eight counts of indecent assault of two teenage boys in the 1990s. When asked if he would do anything differently, Seymour said: “No, we wouldn’t”.

Contrast this with Seymour’s vicious attacks on vulnerable politicians. This is the demagogue’s playbook:

protect the powerful, attack the vulnerable, and claim victimhood when called out.

Narcissistic Projection

The Polls: Seymour’s Manufactured Mandate

Seymour claims he “won the debate” on his Treaty Principles Bill, citing polls. But a December 2024 1News Verian poll found only 23% supported the bill while 36% opposed it, with 39% saying they “didn’t know enough about the bill”. Seymour admitted he was “not surprised” more people opposed than supported his bill, but spun it as people wanting “to know more.”

This is classic demagoguery:

claim public support exists based on ambiguous polling, ignore actual opposition, and position yourself as the voice of a silent majority that doesn’t exist.

Swarbrick: The Anti-Demagogue

Swarbrick’s response was measured:

“Does the man need a mirror?” She called Seymour’s attack “a style of politics that is not serving the people of this country”.

Consider the evidence:

Swarbrick collaborated with Seymour on the End of Life Choice Bill, demonstrating her willingness to work across ideological lines for practical outcomes. The NZ Listener reported she “operates across the aisle” and “works well with Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown”. This is the opposite of demagoguery—it’s coalition-building, policy-focused governance.

Swarbrick said she “wasn’t able to finish anything, let alone the questions I was asked” during Herald NOW panels because Seymour kept “talking over” her. Seymour claimed she “usually screams at me when we get off-air from Herald NOW”—an unverified claim that reveals more about Seymour’s perception of assertive women than reality.

Demagoguery’s Architecture

The Whakapapa of Harm: Cui Bono?

Who benefits from Seymour’s demagoguery? Follow the connections:

Economic Interests: Seymour’s Overseas Investment Act overhaul loosens foreign investment restrictions, enabling water privatization and resource extraction that strip tangata whenua of kaitiakitanga. His Regulatory Standards Bill attempts to embed neoliberal principles that override Treaty obligations and environmental protections.

White Supremacy Architecture: The Treaty Principles Bill seeks to redefine Te Tiriti to eliminate Crown obligations to Māori, enshrining a “one law for all” framework that denies the legal and moral reality of colonization. The Waitangi Tribunal found that if enacted, it “would be the worst, most comprehensive breach of the Treaty/te Tiriti in modern times”.

Political Capital: Seymour’s demagoguery has elevated Act from a fringe party to kingmaker status, making him Deputy Prime Minister. The cost? Social cohesion, constitutional stability, and the safety of those he attacks.

The Narcissist’s Mirror: Projection as Strategy

Psychological research defines narcissistic projection as attributing one’s own unacceptable thoughts, feelings, or behaviors to others. Narcissists project to avoid accountability, maintain their self-image, and manipulate others.

Seymour’s accusation that Swarbrick is a demagogue is textbook projection. He exhibits every characteristic of demagoguery—simplistic solutions, anti-establishment rhetoric, victimization narratives, attacks on critics, protection of abusers—yet accuses a coalition-building, policy-focused MP of being the demagogue.

Research on “the authentic appeal of the lying demagogue” found that when politicians project their flaws onto opponents, supporters perceive them as more authentic. The lie becomes the truth through sheer repetition and projection.

The Historical Record: Who Are the Real Path-Breakers?

Seymour compared himself to Wilberforce, Sheppard, and Mandela. Let’s check the whakapapa:

Wilberforce fought to end slavery. Seymour fights to end Treaty protections for indigenous peoples whose lands were systematically stolen.
Kate Sheppard fought for women’s suffrage. Seymour’s party enabled a convicted sex offender to remain in leadership for years after being warned.
Nelson Mandela fought against apartheid. Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill attempts to erase indigenous rights and enshrine racial hierarchy.

These comparisons aren’t just absurd—they’re obscene. Seymour stands in the tradition not of abolitionists but of those who justified colonization with rhetoric about “equality” and “one law for all.”

The Victim & The Predator

The Demagogue Reveals Himself

When Seymour called Swarbrick a demagogue, he revealed everything—not about her, but about himself. His entire political project is demagoguery:

simplistic solutions to complex problems, manufactured victimization of the powerful, vicious attacks on critics, protection of abusers, and grandiose historical comparisons that position him as a martyr-hero.

The term “demagogue” comes from the ancient Greek dēmagōgos—literally, “leader of the people.” But true leadership doesn’t require projection, lies, or attacks on the vulnerable. True leadership doesn’t shield sex offenders while vilifying those who speak truth to power. True leadership doesn’t endanger critics through orchestrated online harassment.

Swarbrick was right to ask:

“Does the man need a mirror?”

The answer is yes—but narcissists never like what they see. So they project their reflection onto others, hoping we won’t notice. But tangata whenua see clearly. We see the demagogue pointing his finger, and we see exactly what he’s trying to hide.

Kia mataara. Stay vigilant. The demagogue has revealed himself.

Ivor Jones The Māori Green Lantern Fighting Misinformation And Disinformation From The Far Right

Research Disclosure:
This analysis draws on verified sources from RNZ, NZ Herald, 1News, Greenpeace Aotearoa, academic research on demagoguery and narcissistic projection, official court records regarding Tim Jago’s conviction, polling data from 1News Verian, and Waitangi Tribunal findings. Research conducted December 17, 2025. All URLs verified as active.

@nzherald Would you run for local government? Greens Co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick and Act Leader David Seymour look at the local government refocus. 🔗 Watch the full interview via the link in our bio.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

https://www.nzherald.co.nz

"He Kore Tikanga: The Coalition of Betrayal" - 23 March 2026

"Hypocrisy of the Highest Order: The National Government's EV Charger Con" - 23 March 2026

"How Winston Peters Wraps Corporate Plunder in the Language of Liberation — and Has Been Doing It for Forty Years" - 23 March 2026

"THE SULU AND THE SWORD: How Christopher Luxon Wore Our Pacific Family's Dignity Like a Costume While His Budget Burned Their Villages to the Waterline" - 23 March 2026