Comments on: Sell-outs

By: James Barber

James Barber — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:09:50 +0000

Eddie
The maori party voted against the auckland supercity legislation.
Infact they’ve voted against pretty much all Nat amendments and legislation apart from the confidence and supply ones.

By: James Barber

James Barber — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:07:33 +0000

I didn’t realise Labour was the bastion of the left?????

By: James Barber

James Barber — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:06:22 +0000

I think forming a confidence and supply agreement with the National party was a very good move for the Maori party.

Atleast this way they can have some say on important issues.
Unlike the labour party where the most they can do to impact on legislation is to filibuster and waste parliament’s time. 58+5=a majority.

It’s better to have the Maori party in an arrangement with National and the Greens working with the Government on some areas than just National and ACT in government for the next three years.

By: travellerev

travellerev — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:08:40 +0000

Well let’s just call her a Tory then, shall we?
She is a sell out and firmly stuck up John Key’s arsehole. Money indeed trumps colour in the Maori Party leadership.

By: lprent

lprent — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:56:19 +0000

You forgot “technically incompetent”

By: Anita

Anita — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:52:02 +0000

marty mars,

You cannot fix any class issue until the race issue is sorted and that won’t be sorted while you are still working everything from the class angle.

That’s a bit absolutist One could equally argue that one can’t fix any race issue unless the class issues are resolved.

I would argue they have to be resolved in parallel, while we allow oppression and exploitation of any group by any other group it legitimises all other oppression and exploitation.

By: Kiwipolitico » Blog Archive » Identity is more than class

Kiwipolitico » Blog Archive » Identity is more than class — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:49:25 +0000

[...] is more than class Posted on 17:49, June 24th, 2009 by Lew Marty mars, commenting at The Standard, nails down the problem with Eddie’s and IrishBill’s latest bit of anti-mÄori party [...]

By: Anita

Anita — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:48:20 +0000

Why/how/when would you reference class? You also didn’t say you would reference class, you said it was a class issue, and I’m curious as to how you construct the gender pay gap to make it a class issue.

If I was going to do a quick analysis of a the gender pay gap I wouldn’t mention it. If I was doing a medium-length one I might mention that that gender gap exists across all classes. If I was doing a longer one I might right about the fact that it shows that working class men are part of the oppression of working class women (and middle class men of middle class women) and that should be as challenging for a purely class based analysis of oppression as it is when a purely feminist analysis of oppression has to address the fact that middle class women are part of the oppression of working class women.

As you can see I can build a link, but the link is never that the gender pay gap is a class issue.

By: Eddie

Eddie — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:32:47 +0000

I’m no expert on the gender pay gap, it’s never really been an area of interest for me. But I find it hard to see how gender discrimination in pay rates within the context of an employment relationship in a capitalist economy could be analysed without reference to class.

By: Tom Semmens

Tom Semmens — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:28:19 +0000

Tim Ellis, from your previous posts I’ve assumed you are either a shared login used for pushing National party talking points or, less generously, a complete idiot. However, I shall suffer the fool this one time. Attaching a descriptor to something which is unusual is not racist. For example, “a white rapper”.

Thnx.

By: Anita

Anita — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:14:15 +0000

How are you analysing it as a class issue?

By: Eddie

Eddie — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 04:53:39 +0000

Another martyr from Whaleoil. You’ve got to wonder about people who’ll take the word of an emotionally troubled man-child with a perm.

By: Eddie

Eddie — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 04:48:07 +0000

It’s both.

By: lprent

lprent — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 04:16:56 +0000

So? I disagree with their policy as well.

I suspect that in a few years it will become a moot point anyway. The type of ‘commercial’ model used by the iwi is potentially one of the most effective for accretion of assets long term. At the rate they are going it is likely that Bastion point will over the next 40-50 years wind up owning a significant part of Auckland.

Just as a side issue, I have never read anyone’s policies since I was a teenager. I also seldom bother to go to political meetings (frankly they’re boring) apart from drinking liberally and organizational meetings with less than 10 people. These days I do read labour and green press releases because they wind up on the mail on my iphone.

You can assume that if I say something should be… Then any coincidence with someones policy is accidental. Much of my ‘policy’ comes from arguing with people who are having fun tearing my ideas apart. I like arguing…

By: AbsoluteGenius » Blog Archive » Statesmanly Sellout Smackdown

AbsoluteGenius » Blog Archive » Statesmanly Sellout Smackdown — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 04:06:52 +0000

[...] over at The Standard reiterates the claim that the Maori Party are sellouts for being in a Government with National. [...]