Written By: - Date published: 10:06 am, October 23rd, 2008 - 116 comments
Categories: racism, same old national -
Tags: arthur anae, lockwood smith, nz herald
In the heat of the Lockwood Smith controversy yesterday, some of our right-wing readers had a go at John A for posting a link to National’s racist 1975 election ad with the comment that “underneath they haven’t changed”.
In light of this, I thought the comments in the Herald today from National’s first Pacific Island MP, Arthur Anae, were rather interesting:
Arthur Anae, who is Samoan but was born in Fiji, said it was a ploy by Dr Smith to win votes from the “white community”.
“It’s bloody insulting that he said that. Some people have been here over 60 years. How dare he say that? Now people understand why I am no longer part of that party. It’s a clear indication of what the underbelly is over there towards Pacific people.
“You do have an element of redneck that’s in there and that surfaces when you read between the lines. I feel sorry for John Key and Bill English, who I believe firmly do believe in the Pacific community.
“This is what happens when people want power, they become immigration spokesman so they want to hit the lowest they can with what they say to win some votes from the white community, shall I put it that way. That sucks.”
Says it all, really.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Not implying thay are actual *****
Ok, perhaps we should be more selective in our use of that particular political phenomenon when trying to get descriptive about the Nats then? It does us (by us I mean the political ‘left’ in general) no good service to be bandying about such crude comparisons.
Lampie: “Not implying thay are actual *****.”
But you did. Do you now resile from it? If so, why should we take your utterances seriously in future?
L
DeeDub,
Great point, Dont stoop to the whaleoil level of calling us Commies by shouting back ‘your a (you know what)’
“And I’m not sure I see the irony your pointing out?”
The irony is that the well educated people who consider themselves morally superior on these issues tend to reveal different attitudes by where they chose to live, work & send their kids to school. You mentioned academia. Again, wouldn’t academics tend to live in a middle class environment? They’re not likely to be found living, or teaching in South Auckland or sending their kids to a low decile school. The Liberal Democrat leader in the UK recently confessed he might send his kids to a private school. He said “I am a father before a politician”, and fair enough. It’s one example, but I think it reflects the way a lot of people operate.
“Ive heard of research (infact a guy who’d written a book on it was on Jon Stewarts Daily Show a couple weeks ago) that as population density increases, the more liberal and left-wing the people get. ”
That’s interesting. I imagine that people in cities also tend to be better educated & more open minded in general.
Pascal’s bookie,
Don’t worry, Tim will deny he wrote it. Then he’ll deny that you called him on it. Then he’ll say grandstanding doesn’t mean what you think it does. Then he’ll say you’re too “anonymous” to have a proper discussion with. Then he’ll say it was never important anyway and you’re petty for bringing it up.
Hope that speeds things up for you, it can be so boring waiting for Tim to go through his functions himself.
Ben. People on the Left do not idealise poverty, it’s something we want to lift people out of by reforming the system that creates it. Assuming for a moment you’re making an honest argument, your mistake is to assume that because we recognise there is not equal opportunity in society and we want to address this, we therefore don’t want what’s best for our kids.
In any case, I know plenty of people with decent incomes who send their kids to low decile schools for a variety of reasons.
“The irony is that the well educated people who consider themselves morally superior on these issues tend to reveal different attitudes by where they chose to live, work & send their kids to school”
Thats not an irony. If someones more educated their probably gonna have more dough, you got more money your more than likely not going to buy a house in South Auckland, your gonna buy a more expensive house which stats will tell you are elsewhere. Is that reflective of them being hypocritical of their attitudes? or reflective of plain economics?
If someones more educated their probably not going to have to work on the floor in a manufacturing plant in South Auckland, they will more than likely be counting beans or typing at a computer in the CBD. Is that reflective of them being hypocritical of their attitudes or reflective of plain economics?
Schooling is very much linked to housing in that schools are ZONED in New Zealand, Im not going to run through the ins and outs of that but can you spot what I’ll end up saying regarding that?
Your pointing out an irony that doesnt exist. The one thats true is those unfortunates eg. Lockwood smiths of the world, who are educated and are in a position of power and/or privilege, yet become all the more bigotted or prejudiced!
Ben has nicely diverted the discussion off topic…..
You’re not a ‘Crosby kid’ are ya’ Ben?
…. and nicely steered back by Chris!
I Amen what Tane just said,
In the case of myself, and many other liberals, Because I live in a white wealthy suburb in Wellington and study at Uni in Otago, that doesnt mean I don’t want to, or am being hypocritical of, my desire to alleviate poverty by the means that I see as the most effective, eg. System reform.
Ok, perhaps we should be more selective in our use of that particular political phenomenon when trying to get descriptive about the Nats then? It does us (by us I mean the political ‘left’ in general) no good service to be bandying about such crude comparisons.
you mean sinking to the same levels as the right calling you a filthy communist bastard?
“Ben. People on the Left do not idealise poverty, it?s something we want to lift people out of by reforming the system that creates it.”
I’m sure that’s the case, I’m not saying that people on the left are wrong in their policies.
“your mistake is to assume that because we recognise there is not equal opportunity in society and we want to address this, we therefore don?t want what?s best for our kids.”
My point is that this can also reveal a persons real views. This doesn’t mean they don’t want equal opportunities in society. I’m saying that it shows they don’t want their kids getting bullied, or in a disruptive classroom & they suspect certain schools have more of this than others. They might say the higher decile school has better teachers or something along those lines which conceals any possible prejudice.
“In any case, I know plenty of people with decent incomes who send their kids to low decile schools for a variety of reasons.”
And that’s cool, I’m not saying everyone does.
ben that whole screed was justa load of dribble. are you crosby or textor?
Ben, they might believe that. Many low-income parents believe that too and want to send their kids to high-decile schools. Many well-off parents just send their kids to the local school, which due to their income is high-decile.
In short, it sounds like you’re talking crap.
Lampie: “Not implying thay are actual *****.’
But you did. Do you now resile from it? If so, why should we take your utterances seriously in future?
After reading and studying history in areas of early 20th Germany and United States, I think, feel angry that such comments are publically aired by those who should know better. I let you be the judge
lampie ben is just writing vapid nonsense that is barely literate and is designed to baffle people and put them off coming back to this site. I think it is a tactic devised by crosby textor to stifle real debate.
Lampie: Having read Arendt’s The Origins of Totalitarianism I am angered and insulted that people should bandy the term `Nazi’ about so flippantly. Show some respect.
So, come now: do you really think the Nats are like the Nazis? Or are you just employing foolish and ugly hyperbole because you’re unable to vent your anger in some rational way?
L
nazis are those who shout down all opposition, repeat the same arguments ad infinitum and have the criminals intent of getting what they want without working for it. sounds like the tories to me.
“Ben, they might believe that. Many low-income parents believe that too and want to send their kids to high-decile schools. Many well-off parents just send their kids to the local school, which due to their income is high-decile.
In short, it sounds like you’re talking crap.”
But people put enormous importance on school zones. Look at the difference in price between getting into grammar zone or not. It’s not just incidental to their having a high income, they actively seek those zones. And part of it is because they don’t want their kids mixing with the ‘wrong crowd’.
randal: No. Nazis were the ones who killed their opposition instead of trying to shout them down. If you can’t see the difference, there’s no hope for you.
L
Ben, in my experience the people who do that tend to be wealthy right-wingers. I’ve seen no evidence of liberal lefties doing that. But even if a minority of them did, which you haven’t provided any evidence of, I still can’t figure out what your point is. Care to elaborate? Or are you just trolling?
So, come now: do you really think the Nats are like the Nazis? Or are you just employing foolish and ugly hyperbole because you’re unable to vent your anger in some rational way?
Do you really think the Labour party are communists???
Lew I was talking about the initial stages of first gaining p[ower by using the democratic process and then denying it afterwards. and one of the other defining characteristics of N****s is using words that they wont define and you will remember Don Brash at the last election refusing to define the word ‘mainstream”.
Lampie: Of course not; in fact, I raised the ire of a wide swathe of the wingnut right by casting light on their particularly nasty attack campaign of this nature against Helen Clark. Which also, incidentally, asserted she was a Nazi.
So now, instead of running an uninformed line of misdirection, just answer the fucking question.
L
Lew: “Nazis were the ones who killed their opposition instead of trying to shout them down”
You can easily replace Nazis with ‘Stalin”,
My point, emphasised in example by you, is how ridiculous it is that right wingers call us Communists, say we’re living in Helengrad etc etc. when the comparison is so far fetched. I said we Could stoop to that level and call all Nats (Considering they share the same side of the political spectrum as the Nats) Nazis. OBVIOUSLY they are not Nazis, just as OBVIOUSLY that We are not Communists!
randal: As I said: if you can’t see the difference…
L
Maybe they’re not prejudiced though Ben. You’re just asserting that they are and accusing them of lying to cover it up. Have you got any evidence?
and again.
To make the obvious analogy, maybe you are only saying this about Liberals to make yourself feel that your prejudice is widely felt and natural, and that those who claim not to share it are liars.
FTR, I think the argument in that analogy is flawed. It’s an ad hominum argument for starters, depends on mind reading powers for evidence and merely serves to try and change the subject. But there you go.
Felix: re Tim. Pretty much.
lew..speak for yourself
Chris G: “You can easily replace Nazis with ‘Stalin’”
Yes, indeed you can. You rightly observe that idiots of any stripe tend to resort to reckless and historically illiterate hyperbole when they lack any arguments of merit. Gods know the right doesn’t have a monopoly on moronitude.
L
were the ones who killed their opposition (ohhh so did the communists)
Yeah and the German people didnt realise they were voting for that
“lampie ben is just writing vapid nonsense that is barely literate and is designed to baffle people and put them off coming back to this site. I think it is a tactic devised by crosby textor to stifle real debate.”
he lost me at ‘the’
“Ben, in my experience the people who do that tend to be wealthy right-wingers. I’ve seen no evidence of liberal lefties doing that. But even if a minority of them did, which you haven’t provided any evidence of, I still can’t figure out what your point is. Care to elaborate? Or are you just trolling?”
This thread is about a supposed ‘red neck’ element & an underbelly “towards pacific people”. Now that’s fair enough for Anae to say, but it amuses me a bit when some white’s take the moral highground despite the fact they’d never dream of living in South Akl or Porirua. I think some of them are slightly hypocritical.
So now, instead of running an uninformed line of misdirection, just answer the fucking question.
yipee a bite at last
So now, instead of running an uninformed line of misdirection, just answer the fucking question.
yipee a bite at last
Ben, I think you’re making things up to suit your own prejudices.
speak for yourself ben…
why do you think you can attribute motives to large sections of the population you have never met.
you are just making it up and casting slurs on whole groups of decent people
is this what crosby textor tells you what to do?