A modest proposal

Written By: - Date published: 9:53 am, May 30th, 2012 - 149 comments
Categories: corruption, humour - Tags:

Winston Peters is on the attack over Tariana Turia’s slush fund again. This time, Turia and John Key find themselves defending a $60,000 grant to a rugby club to investigate “undertake whanau development research” on “whanau connectedness” and “resilience” (which sounds like code for a  hell of a piss-up to me), on the spurious grounds that ‘the old way doesn’t work, this is something new, so let’s try it’. In that spirit, I have a proposition for Mr Key.

You see, there is a lot of evidence that the government’s old model of running the economy isn’t working – at least, far more evidence than there is that current social welfare agencies are failing the families that will supposedly somehow benefit from a rugby club carrying out vague socio-economic research. Treasury clearly can’t model its way out of a paperbag, for starters.

And me and my girlfriend have this dream of cycling across Eurasia but we can’t afford to go.

Two birds with one stone time.

I propose that me and my girlfriend get a grant from Treasury for ‘immersive research into alternative economic models”. Our programme of research would involve travelling and living among the people and economies of Europe, the Middle East, the Indian sub-continent, South-East Asia and China. We experience, investigate, and report upon different economic systems from Greece to China, the Netherlands to Nepal.

We estimate that, to do a proper job, we would need funding for at least two years – say $500,000 (Our actual budget is half that time and a tenth of the cost but when you’re doing important work with public money, you don’t want to do this kind of thing by halves).

If $100,000 in additional funding can be secured, we’ll present our findings in the form of an app.

Now, you may very well ask what expertise me and my girlfriend would bring to such a role. Well, I’ve read an awful lot of Chomsky and she did Anthropology 101. So, that makes us at least as qualified for this work as, say, a rural rugby club is to investigate socio-economics.

149 comments on “A modest proposal ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. BernyD 1
    30 May 2012 at 10:11 am

    Add some photo opps for Mr Key and you’re onto a winner 🙂

  2. Rupert the Beer 2
    30 May 2012 at 10:19 am

    You’re talking about the crowd that – for a brief moment – were about to set the anti-PC brigade on Jeremy Well’s Anal Mana. I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if Jack’s proposal is being considered by someone in Joyce’s office as I type…

  3. William Joyce 3
    30 May 2012 at 10:43 am

    You forgot the green energy angle. Obviously, someone has to exhaustively test this new fangled bicycle technology that you speak of.
    You know that whatever your research eventually produces the government will not accept it. Not until industry wide, multi-disciplary,  draft guidelines have been prepared, distributed and considered by a panel of experts in the field of cross-cultural and anthropological studies – made up of such notable experts such as Jenny Shipley, Ruth Richardson, Max Bradford, Doug Graham.
     
     

  4. weka 4
    30 May 2012 at 10:51 am

    This post is Maori bashing and The Standard should be ashamed (as much as a website can be).
     
    James, what is the source of your information about Whanau Ora and the project that was funded? I do hope you are using something intelligent in addition to anything Peters says.
     
    There is nothing in your post that shows what the project was and why or why not the funding was inappropriate apart from Peters politically-motivated hyperbole and what appears to be your own limited understandings.
     
    If you are unable to get how a Maori community group might have the skills to research it’s own cultural needs, then maybe you should ask people within those communities. Or if you are already within those communities, why not put this particular project into context?
     
    I have no idea if the project was a useful one or not. But reading this post, or anything Peters is saying about it is not enlightening me either.

    • ianmac 4.1
      30 May 2012 at 10:58 am

      Fair enough Weka. So, since Winston has raised the question all it would need is for Key to answer the question (fat chance) or get Turia to answer.

    • William Joyce 4.2
      30 May 2012 at 11:10 am

      James was not criticizing Maori as a race and you are far too quick to read into it things that are not there. I for one am tired of people being called racist because they raise pertinent issues that need to be answered. 
      It is a poor debate when you start a response with accusations of Maori-bashing or racism. Especially when it is blatantly not there.
      There are questions to be answered. A rugby club is not an organisation that is established to conduct sociological research and most rugby clubs do not have the skills within them to do so. So, naturally it has nothing to do with race but appropriateness. It is like funding the local creche to do research into the biological implication of anthrax infested corn.
       

      • Te Reo Putake 4.2.1
        30 May 2012 at 11:19 am

        And, if I remember the Hone Principle correctly, maori cannot be racist, so the fact that this question was raised by the maori MP Winston Peters renders waka’s charge moot.

      • weka 4.2.2
        30 May 2012 at 11:37 am

        “There are questions to be answered. ” I completely agree

        • weka 4.2.2.1
          30 May 2012 at 3:12 pm

          slow broadband ate the rest of my post…
           
          “There are questions to be answered. ”

          I completely agree. Unfortunately James’ post doesn’t ask any questions or even hint at the useful ones.

          Calling Whanau Ora ‘Turia’s slush fund’ *is* Maori bashing, because in this country the discourse, even here on TS, is inept around issues of Maori culture. So even though there are valid criticisms to be made about Whanau Ora and what it does, maligning it in this way in a world where 95% of the public political conversation about Maori is negative just adds to that negative.

          The media, including mainstream blogs like this one, is rife with superficial judgements about Maori, what their needs are, and how those needs might be met and rarely bothers to look outside its own white privilege way of seeing things.

          All James had to do was point his joke at the actual project, once he had found out that the project was in fact a waste of money. Instead he takes a cheap shot at Whanau Ora. He compares useful concepts like resilience and whanau with drunkenness, and then implies that only academics are capable of producing useful knowledge.

          Maybe James knows more about this project and what level of expertise was needed and whether the people involved had that expertise. Perhaps he could share that with us. Or maybe he’s just going off Peters’ rantings and the usual MSM bullshit in its reporting.

          • terryg 4.2.2.1.1
            30 May 2012 at 11:40 pm

            interesting points. I re-read the first 2 paragraphs, and couldn’t see it. but I’m not Maori, so have privilege issues here. so I read it again, and again, and again. Thanks Weka, you’ve made me think harder.

            I (think I) understand you re. the disparaging reference to Whanau Ora. [meta: I started “pakehasplaining” how given the political power balance, WO could be viewed as blah blah but recognised it as such and deleted it all] and likewise wrt the boozing. my question to you is this**:

            would deleting the “slush fund” slur, and linking the boozing to the rugby club rather than “resilience” help turn it from Maori-bashing into Sleazy-Politician-Bashing (which was how I read it at first, albeit thru the lens of pakeha privilege)?

            **I am assuming, entirely without evidence, that there is something sleazy here, so as to learn more about the privilege aspect. IOW somewhat meta.

            • weka 4.2.2.1.1.1
              31 May 2012 at 6:14 pm

              How about this terry?
               
               

              Winston Peters is on the attack over Tariana Turia’s Whanau Ora fund again. This time, Turia and John Key find themselves defending a $60,000 grant to a rugby club to investigate “undertake whanau development research” on “whanau connectedness” and “resilience”, on the grounds that ‘the old way doesn’t work, this is something new, so let’s try it’. In that spirit, I have a proposition for Mr Key.
               

              I’ve taken out the slush fund reference, the piss up comparison, and the word spurious. It does read quite differently, and for me at least I probably would still have wondered what the hell Peters was on about, and I might still have wondered why a community group coudn’t receive funding for projects, but at least James’ post wouldn’t have been aimed at denigrating Maori, and instead would have been a little bit of satire about govt department funding strategies.
               
              (I wouldn’t go with the rugby club = sleazy/drunk thing, because it’s still a Maori community group, and enough with the drunk Maori thing).
               
              Of course, maybe what James wanted to do WAS have a serious go at Turia, Whanau Ora and everything they fund. If so, I would at least expect him to use examples that have some meaning in the real world. You know, like a proven case of corruption.
               
              I’m sure that there will be some people who will want to jump up and down now about how they can’t criticise Turia, or Whanau Ora without being called racist. On the contrary. It’s all about HOW you do it. And if we don’t know HOW to do it yet, maybe we need to learn.

              • terryg …
                3 June 2012 at 12:58 pm

                Thanks Weka, that does help a lot. you are dead right, how something is said is important. the nasty thing about privilege is that it often creeps in “subconsciously” (not quite what I mean but cant think of a better term) and hides in full view. because it is (alas) the norm, people just dont see it.

                Although I associate rugby with alcohol & violence (wow, a Rugby player turns out to be a violent drunken asshole, what a surprise).

          • jack 4.2.2.1.2
            31 May 2012 at 8:43 pm

            Is is a slush fund, maori family reunions?? That’s rediculous.. Whanau Ora is orwelian and that makes it a racist policy. Peter Sharples is off to China because corporate iwi have a combined wealth of 38 billion.. why not use that money isntead of ripping off the taxpayer. Whanau Ora is there for one reason, for the Parliamentary Maori votes.. Key is just using trading taxpayer’s money for votes. I blame Key for all this bullshit. We’re suppose to be cutting back on government spending and Winston Peters brings up some very good questions in Parliament. Am I a racist?? No, I voted for a Maori, Winston Peters.

            • rosy 4.2.2.1.2.1
              31 May 2012 at 9:10 pm

              …. corporate iwi have a combined wealth of 38 billion.. why not use that money
              I’m sure they will … when all corporates are required to provide health, education and social welfare for ‘their people’. People across the globe have been waiting centuries for that to happen with a few notable exceptions

              A living wage might be a start.

      • bbfloyd 4.2.3
        30 May 2012 at 12:09 pm

        well said William…. maori being bribed by vested interests is still bribery and corruption no matter how you look at it….

        i have friends who spent last week up north for a weekend gathering to do the same thing… i asked them if it was something they would have been interested in doing even if there weren’t money… the answer was ” yes, we already were doing it, but they were offering us money, so we decided to take advantage and get the whole whanau together…. it was a great weekend, saw cousins i hadn’t seen for years..” they paid for airfares from australia, so they were rapt with the “family reunion” that ensued….

        i couldn’t get an answer on how much actual research was done over and above what had already been completed though…..no-one seemed too concerned with that….

    • Deano 4.3
      30 May 2012 at 12:01 pm

      it’s not Maori bashing. Don’t be a dick.

      Peters is pointing out yet another example of public money being funneled through Tariana Turia’s pet project to a use that, prima facie, looks like bullshit – a rugby club investigating whanau connectedness, what the fuck? What does that deliver? It looks like a waste of money.

      It’s up to Turia to show it’s not. And she hasn’t in fact, she’s said ‘isn’t it great?’

      • Pete George 4.3.1
        30 May 2012 at 12:34 pm

        No, you have it round the wrong way.

        Ministers don’t have a responsibility to prove every allegation made against them wrong – if they had to do that they would have to deal with a barrage of allegations and would have no time to do anything else.

        Peters has made an allegation, he should produce reasonable proof to back that up – as soon as he makes the allegation, not spinning it out as long as he can get attention – or he should be dismissed as a baseless shit stirrer.

        • Deano 4.3.1.1
          30 May 2012 at 12:55 pm

          when a prima facie case is presented (and Peters has provided evidence of it to the media, clearly, they quote from teh documents), a wise minister will refute it if they can. Otherwise, the prima facie case will stand unanswered.

          • Pete George 4.3.1.1.1
            30 May 2012 at 1:21 pm

            I don’t know of any “prima facie case” documents. The Stuff article quotes Winston:

            But Mr Peters said the grant was absurd, as a rugby club would not have the experience or expertise to carry out proper social and economic research.

            “Whatever their sporting expertise would be, which one of them is qualified to do the research we are talking about here? There is a lot of money involved.”

            That sounds like an accsation based on a guess.

            Rahui club president Rex Kerr said the research was carried out last year by Te Puni Kokiri into how the rugby club acted as a “hub” for the Maori community in the Otaki area.

            A plausible response, if factual it has much more merit than Peters’ stab in the dark.

            The project, which was completed during the Rugby World Cup, included funding a community club day, with Maori health services and advocacy groups available to offer advice and support.

            Trying to connect Maori better with health services and advocacy groups seems like it has potential to do some good, I have been at similar events here (eg a father’s day event).

            I have no idea if in this case the money was well spent or not, but from what I read of the article the Peters accusation can’t be taken seriously. I repeat, it’s up to him to produce clear supporting facts.

            • Draco T Bastard 4.3.1.1.1.1
              30 May 2012 at 3:03 pm

              That sounds like an accsation based on a guess.

              No it doesn’t, it sounds like serious questions. A rugby club really isn’t set up to do research.

              Rahui club president Rex Kerr said the research was carried out last year by Te Puni Kokiri into how the rugby club acted as a “hub” for the Maori community in the Otaki area.

              If the money was given to the club and then Te Puni Kokiri did the research then what we’re actually seeing here is ticket clipping by the club?

              The project, which was completed during the Rugby World Cup, included funding a community club day, with Maori health services and advocacy groups available to offer advice and support.

              You show your ignorance yet again. You don’t do research by funding a get together day you do it by watching what’s actually happening.

              Trying to connect Maori better with health services and advocacy groups seems like it has potential to do some good

              Yes it does but you don’t call it research you it connecting Maori better with health services and advocacy groups and it’s what you do after the research is done.

              Now, where’s the same program for Pakeha? I’m sure that there’s quite a lot of them that would benefit from the same program.

              • weka …
                30 May 2012 at 3:21 pm

                “Now, where’s the same program for Pakeha? I’m sure that there’s quite a lot of them that would benefit from the same program.”
                 
                You know what that reminds me of? When men start complaining about all the services women have. Where’s our prostate screening programme? Where are our Refuges? Where are our [insert whine of choice]. (seriously, I have heard men complain like this).
                 
                AFAIK Whanau Ora is for all NZers, whatever their ethnicity. If you feel like one ethnicity isn’t being catered for, why not lobby to get that changed?
                 
                btw, when Labour got shit for funding Maori only programmes, and because of the MSM pressure pulled that funding, many good and useful things going on in the community foundered. Actual, hands on, doing the real work at the coal face kind of stuff. Why don’t we know about this? Because the MSM doesn’t give a shit, and because places like TS that should know better have no real connection into Te Ao Maori.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  30 May 2012 at 4:18 pm

                  AFAIK Whanau Ora is for all NZers, whatever their ethnicity.

                  Doesn’t come across that way though, does it?

                  If you feel like one ethnicity isn’t being catered for, why not lobby to get that changed?

                  Why are we even catering to ethnicities? It’s a waste of resources. Now, before you go round getting all upset, all of our people’s health needs need to be met but that can most efficiently be achieved through a single organisation. Sure, have the local outlet for that organisation working to the local conditions (bottom up response rather than top down) but still only one organisation.

                  • Vicky32 …
                    1 June 2012 at 5:10 pm

                     

                    Doesn’t come across that way though, does it?

                    No, it absolutely does not! 🙁

                • terryg …
                  30 May 2012 at 11:48 pm

                  thats “Mansplaining”

              • weka …
                30 May 2012 at 3:29 pm

                “A rugby club really isn’t set up to do research.”

                This is an important question. I have no idea if the sports club in question had the necessary skills to make good use of that funding. I would really like to know. Maybe they took the money and had a piss up like James suggests. Or maybe they took the money and hired some qualified people to do the RS. Is that really so hard to imagine?

                Why are so many people so quick to assume the worst here?

                But more than that. Who does have the right skills? Which organisations in NZ with the expertise to do sociological RS (assuming that that is what the funding was for), also have the skills to understand things Maori and meet the needs of Maori in doing the RS (as distinct from meeting the needs to the dominant culture)?

                • Pete George …
                  30 May 2012 at 3:37 pm

                  Or maybe they took the money and hired some qualified people to do the RS. Is that really so hard to imagine?

                  No, if Te Puni Kokiri are qualified (or have suitable expertise).

                  “Rahui club president Rex Kerr said the research was carried out last year by Te Puni Kokiri into how the rugby club acted as a “hub” for the Maori community in the Otaki area. “

                  • weka …
                    30 May 2012 at 10:04 pm

                    Right. So no organisation in NZ is allowed to use govt funding to conduct any kind of research unless they are a govt dept, a university or similar, or a “research organisation” (whatever that is). No-one is allowed to hire said RS organisations either, because that wastes money.
                     
                    You still haven’t answered my question about what “research organisations” have the necesssary skills to conduct research that Maori need.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  30 May 2012 at 4:07 pm

                  I have no idea if the sports club in question had the necessary skills to make good use of that funding.

                  We can assume that a sports club doesn’t.

                  Or maybe they took the money and hired some qualified people to do the RS.

                  And they would have clipped the ticket on the way past causing unnecessary waste. The people who did the research should have been hired directly.

                  But more than that. Who does have the right skills?

                  Well, I’d look to the ministries and universities which are organisations dedicated to such research.

                  • weka …
                    30 May 2012 at 4:22 pm

                    You seem to have missed a bit of my post there Draco, here I will fix it for you:
                     

                    But more than that. Who does have the right skills? Which organisations in NZ with the expertise to do sociological RS (assuming that that is what the funding was for), also have the skills to understand things Maori and meet the needs of Maori in doing the RS (as distinct from meeting the needs to the dominant culture)?
                     

                    Care to answer the actual question? Be specific. Or are you just guessing?
                     
                    Do you really believe that the only people in NZ qualified to do research, of any kind, are academics and Ministry employees? 
                     

                    And they would have clipped the ticket on the way past causing unnecessary waste. The people who did the research should have been hired directly.
                     

                    Sorry, but you seem to be just making this shit up. At least I acknowledge I don’t have enough information to judge the situation. Maybe there isn’t even a research project that needs an academic level of involvement. Maybe the sports club has the connections and cultural know how that is important to the project that an academic or ministry bod doesn’t have. Maybe the ticket clipping is better done by the community group, so at least the economics there improve, rather than staying within already well paid parts of society (that’s my assumption I guess, that the community that the Rahui sports club exists in needs the money more than people on substantial salaries). Or maybe the Rahui sports club has some sociologists as its members. We know fuck all about this, yet some of us are willing to jump to some mighty conclusions. Why is that?

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      30 May 2012 at 6:33 pm

                      Do you really believe that the only people in NZ qualified to do research, of any kind, are academics and Ministry employees?

                      I said that they were the only organisations set up to do socilogical research whereas a sports club manifestly is not.

                      Or maybe the Rahui sports club has some sociologists as its members.

                      So? The sports club still isn’t a research organisation.

                • Pete George …
                  30 May 2012 at 4:11 pm

                  Te Puni Kōkiri, the Ministry for Māori Development, leads Māori Public Policy and advises on policy affecting Māori wellbeing.

                  We are the only government department solely focused on Māori, and the principal advisor on Government-Māori relationships. We monitor policy and legislation, and we provide government with high quality policy advice.

                  Is that sufficient expertise?

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    30 May 2012 at 4:20 pm

                    Nope as we’re looking specifically at health aspects and not political. And you still haven’t answered why the sports club was getting money.

        • Tiger Mountain 4.3.1.2
          30 May 2012 at 12:57 pm

          …just when you think a PFD (for new readers, Pete free day) is on…

          Winston is making a fair enough point here about Tari’s cronyism and largesse.

    • Kevin 4.4
      30 May 2012 at 12:48 pm

      @Weka
      Winston’s criticism of this grant is well founded because on face value it appears to be bull. In my community it is still not possible to witness “trickle down”, there is a lot of money going to assorted agencies, whanau groups and NGO’s, but the statistics still keep piling up.
      A lot of this money is burned off in wages with negligible results at the coal face, and it is fair enough for Winston to hold Whanau Ora to account because the public at large are looking for accountability and results for the funding provided.

      • weka 4.4.1
        30 May 2012 at 4:10 pm

        I agree Kevin, and I have concerns myself and I hear Maori talking about those problems. I disagree about Peters though. Unless he can give us, in the public, the necessary information to understand the funding (see my post 11.1), he is just using Whanau Ora and the Rahui sports club to beat the govt and further his own political agenda (elect Winston). Actually it’s probably even fine that Peters brings the issues up, as long as something else happens beyond that ie someone finds out the real story (because we certainly don’t have it yet). Unfortunately I doubt that anyone will.
         
        I’m just appalled that somewhere like TS* would take his word and interpretation without examining them critically.
         
        *James and some of the regular commenters here.

    • Murray Olsen 4.5
      30 May 2012 at 5:34 pm

      There could well be members of the rugby club with all sorts of expertise. At the very least, they’d have to more skilled than the muppets in Treasury or the consultants the government spends hundreds of million on just to say what they want to hear anyway. This doesn’t stop me seeing the Maori Party as a bunch of sellouts, just like Peter Dunne, but let’s focus on the bucketloads NAct spends for dubious purposes rather than a few crumbs going to Maori.

    • Fascist-anti-fascist 4.6
      31 May 2012 at 1:16 pm

      Criticizing the government for corruption is not Maori bashing, Weka. It’s called good journalism. If non-Maori are corrupt they get criticized, just like every equal citizen should, and Turia is one of the most corrupt politicians we have, as this evidence clearly shows.

      People have had enough of people like you, screaming racism whenever Maori get caught for corruption (or terrorism for that matter). Why should the whole nation foot the bill for ineffective projects like solving Maori family problems by giving funds to a rugby club? Blatant corruption like this is indefensible and you tarnish the efforts by those sincere Maori, who are actually trying to improve the massive social problems in their community, when you claim otherwise.

      [The word “facist” is probably one of our spam triggers, so I suspect every time you comment it will be held in moderation. I suggest a new handle that doesn’t use the word. — r0b]

      • weka 4.6.1
        31 May 2012 at 5:31 pm

        I would agree with you except for one thing. There is no evidence of corruption in this project. None. If there was I would be asking a different set of questions. As I have said, I have no idea about the credibility of this specific project. I want to find out the truth, and I don’t see anything yet that suggests this project is likely to be corrupt. Why are so many people willing to assume corruption when there is no evidence?
        btw, the idea that anything approaching good journalism has happened here is laughable. Peters says maybe 3 or 4 four sentences, that don’t tell us anything really, and the MSM parrot that. Shit, forget good journalism, I don’t think that counts as journalism at all. Good journalism would be following the story up before reporting on it. Putting the accusations in context. Interviewing the parties involved. And doing all that with a good understanding of tikanga Maori. Where is the report on the project itself, what its purpose was, what it achieved? Why haven’t we had that journalism? (that’s not a rhetorical question, see if you can answer it).
         
         

      • Vicky32 4.6.2
        1 June 2012 at 5:16 pm

        People have had enough of people like you, screaming racism whenever Maori get caught for corruption (or terrorism for that matter). Why should the whole nation foot the bill for ineffective projects like solving Maori family problems by giving funds to a rugby club? Blatant corruption like this is indefensible and you tarnish the efforts by those sincere Maori, who are actually trying to improve the massive social problems in their community, when you claim otherwise.

        Agreed 100%!

    • Vicky32 4.7
      1 June 2012 at 4:17 pm

      This post is Maori bashing and The Standard should be ashamed (as much as a website can be).

      Lolwut? Are you serious? Maori-bashing? No it’s not, it’s actually clever and funny. Are Maori so high on the sacredness scale that no questioning of what some of them do is ever allowed?

  5. Uturn 5
    30 May 2012 at 11:50 am

    (The time it has taken to write this, I see weka has caught the ball Good for you, weka!)

    There is a line, that in my opinion, this posting is travelling right close up against.

    There is a way of being racist, or insulting, without being openly so. The example, given in the comments above, of Anal Mana and Eating Media Lunch is perfect. And “undertake whanau development research” , “whanau connectedness” with inverted commas used ambiguously, is another. Challenge the author, and he says they are punctuation for direct quotes. How convenient. They couldn’t possibly be punctuation for the suggestion of euphemisms? Nope. No way to prove it. Even when it is said it is code. It’s code, but not the code I’m thinking of. Nope. It must be me who is in the wrong. But what is the overall tone of the piece? Does it link to an article that talks about “bro-ocrasy” from a famously anti-asian, anti-immigrant politician? Yes, yes it does. Winston can’t be racist against maori, he is maori! But he can uphold a system that oppresses maori and judges people by race. And he does. What is Winston’s point? Waste of funds and no qualified people. Well why didn’t you say so. What was all the racial slurring about, then?

    Hone Harawira insulted maori to score a political point against the government on Q&A this last weekend. He implied maori were interested only in money, that they’d sell their culture, their roots for money, and go work in Aussie mines. Giving up the culture, the land, the community of people and the language – breaking the triangle central to life, for money. Good for you Hone. Hope that got you what you wanted. You aren’t racist against moari, you are moari! You must just be self interested and happy to step on your people to please ol’ whitey and his systems.

    In the episode pointed out in comments above, Eating Media Lunch hid their racism inside a pakeha satire of Country Calendar. That way they could say that the concept of farming maori wasn’t insulting, because they also implied white farmers were wife beaters and racists. Nice distract. Two wrongs make a right, huh?

    Getting maori actors to insult their own culture with Anal Mana was another manipulative trick. Implying all moari will prostitute their culture (or at least refraining from specifically saying who) is not true, even if a few individuals do try. The suggestion attacks moari as whole, with it;s ambiguity, degrades the culture as a whole. Now who would benefit from that. If maori call maori savages, it isn’t insulting, it isn’t oppressive? If one moari with a grudge says all maori are con artists, it’s not playing into a wider environment that is prone to loathing? Lets forget the huge behind-the-scenes pakeha culture and influence that got the show on screen and just concentrate on the material. Don’t scratch the surface. Everything will be fine and difficult to prove. So nothing really happened. No one can prove it.

    In the same episode, EML insulted people with speech impediments, to try to prove a personality flaw in their influencial targets. An act of cruelty to expose flaws doesn’t negate the cruelty, neither is it intelligent. These TV producers aren’t Generals on the battlefield, preserving the sovereignty of nations. Their pawns aren’t conscripted or volunteers. They have no right to utilise them for personal gain. Nothing so great is at stake. If Matt McCarten makes a frustrated joke about how he speaks to close friend, does that give any interviewer in earshot the right to insult him at will?

    In the same episode there was a short about Art introduced by Darth Varder. Now that was funny. You see, I have a sense of humour, but I also know racism and cruelty when I see it and while that may sell, it doesn’t change what it is. EML is as funny as Paul Henry’s efforts. Same coin, different side.

    If you have something to say, just come out and say it. Fuck entertainment value. Fuck effect. Fuck dogwhistles. Racism is only a laughing matter to those who never experience it. And two oppressed people chuckling over their oppression, when the alternative is emotional collapse, doesn’t mean the overlord’s offspring should consider themsleves vindicated, and laugh, too.

    Just like the inverted commas in the original post, and the implied suggestion that maori like to have big piss ups and hide it behind cultural names, making sweeping generalisations was the thing that Paul Homes got caught on just recently. It’s not some maori that are implicated by pointing to cultural phrasing. It’s all maori. Hence the condoned racism that no one should challenge, because that wouldn’t be sport, in a pakeha world. Our racism is just cultural ribbing. Yeah. Right.

    Leaving a huge gap of ambiguity doesn’t remove the subtle root of racism. Allowing the ambiguity to further distract by concentrating, finally, on the free-trips-for-anyone concept doesn’t change the intial potential for double meaning. It’s not an unintended grammatical mistake; like the poster who yesterday unintentionally implied his family ate his bike, by leaving out a comma. Travelling way up close against the line, for effect, is wrong. If you can’t see it, just come out and say your opinion piece straight. More awareness is required.

    [i don’t have time to read all this rant but your main complaint seems to be that I put quotes in quotemarks and suggested that a rugby club might spend money on a piss-up. The article I’ve linked to has the quotes in quote marks because they’re, wait for it, quotes. We’ve suggested that bureaucrat-speak had been used as code for piss-ups in the past. In fact, Zet’s new post calls the RWC VIP budget booze money. There’s no slurring on the basis of race; there’s criticism because Turia is an incompetent guardian of public money I’m not going to resile from calling a rort a rort just because Turia is Maori. In short, go fuck yourself. JH]

    • Deano 5.1
      30 May 2012 at 12:04 pm

      Is it OK to demand that public money is spent responsibly?

      Yes?

      Is it not OK to demand responsibility when the money is being spent by a Maori Minister’s pet project?

      “undertake whanau development research” , “whanau connectedness” are in quotes because they’re quoted in the source article. Presumably, they’re phrases from the contract for the $60,000.

      • Uturn 5.1.1
        30 May 2012 at 12:08 pm

        I have addressed those points above. No racial slurring was required for either Winston or the author of this article to say their point.

      • Ant 5.1.2
        30 May 2012 at 5:11 pm

        I hope they got some good research because 60K can get you a PhD thesis.

        Wonder if they will release it anytime soon?

    • Fran 5.2
      30 May 2012 at 1:19 pm

      Well said Uturn. You are dead right.

    • vto 5.3
      30 May 2012 at 1:28 pm

      I think some guidelines should be published which outline the rules around how to discuss maori issues, because it is quite impossible to EVER bring up any such related subject without the silly charge of ‘racist’ being made.

      Or perhaps as an alternative we all just be quiet and never discuss anything maori at all. Just pretend the issues don’t exist. That we are all just one and the same people.

      • higherstandard 5.3.1
        30 May 2012 at 2:01 pm

        Rule as below

        Anything said that could be construed by any person as negative towards Maori is racist unless it is said by a Maori.

        • Vicky32 5.3.1.1
          1 June 2012 at 5:23 pm

          Anything said that could be construed by any person as negative towards Maori is racist unless it is said by a Maori.

          But by the looks, even selected Maori (such as Winnie) get it in the neck. For me as a Pakeha, it’s very confusing. I refuse to feel guilty for my ‘luck’ in being born Pakeha, and I refuse to feel guilty for my belief that class is paramount – and as a friend of mine once said in a magazine column (she’s never been forgiven for it) – “Who is more likely to have the interests of working women at heart, a Maori doctor earning $60 000 pa (it was a decade or so back that she wrote it) or a white woman making minimum wage? ”
           
          (IMO she was referring to a specific news item, but the point stands.)

      • weka 5.3.2
        30 May 2012 at 3:07 pm

        “I think some guidelines should be published which outline the rules around how to discuss maori issues,”
         
        It’s pretty simple vto: don’t use Winston Peters or the MSM as your sole primary source of information about things Maori. Make an effort to look at what a range of Maori have to say on the issue. I think it also helps to critique how the MSM (mis)represents Maori, there’s been some good stuff written and said about this if you want to look for it. If I have time later I’ll see if I can link to something.

        • Pete George 5.3.2.1
          30 May 2012 at 3:19 pm

          Don’t use Winston Peters or the MSM as your sole primary source of information about anything. Neither have a high accuracy quotient.

        • vto 5.3.2.2
          30 May 2012 at 6:00 pm

          But weka how does the quality of the information relied upon for a point relate to whether the point is racist or not?

          And even if your suggestion is right it is far from complete. People can have perfect information and still be racist, or be accused of it.

          It may sound a flippant point I made around rules but it is genuinely difficult to raise these issues without the charge of racism being made.

          • weka 5.3.2.2.1
            30 May 2012 at 9:54 pm

            vto, I think we have a misunderstanding. You asked for some rules on discussing things Maori. I think understanding Maori on their own terms is crucial, out of respect to them and for pakeha to have some credibility and honour, and I gave some ideas about how to do that.

            Don’t worry about being called racist. That whole line in this discussion is a straw man. If you genuinely want to talk about Maori issues then inform yourself from sources of information that have some truth and realness to them. Somewhere along the line someone will call you racist and you will have to decide for yourself based on the situation whether that is important or not and what if anything to do about it.
             
            I don’t know what your ethnicity is, but pakeha just need to get over the fear of being called racist. Sometimes we *are* racist, so why do we have this idea that we will never ever be racist ever? It’s such a ridiculously high bar to be set given we’ve all been raised and socialised in a racist society. It’s that bar that stops us being able to be genuine and real in our talking about important issues, not accusations of racism.
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             

    • Adele 5.4
      30 May 2012 at 6:58 pm

      James Henderson

      This Māori applauds Uturn’s rant. Pākehā say Māori are so thin-skinned yet you resort to telling Uturn to go fuck himself because he / she relates a perspective that many Māori would share about your post. He / she doesn’t deserve to be spoken to in such a fashion as by all accounts his comments are respectful and without ill-will.

      Perhaps you should apply for whānau ora funding to explore the efficacy of fucking oneself while riding a bicycle. I am not sure how the girl-friend will contribute to the methodology – maybe she can hold the bicycle. Or, why not read Uturn’s comments and learn something.

      • Fascist-anti-fascist 5.4.1
        31 May 2012 at 1:26 pm

        No, this has nothing to do with race. This is a.bout a corrupt politician who should be held to account for wasteful spending that harms all New Zealanders.

        However, what is about race is the socially destructive racial dichotomy of Maori-Pakeha, which is starting to look like the cause of most of the racism in NZ. Especially the racist rant from Margaret Mutu about race-based immigration policies and other products of racist Maori nationalism.

        It’s ridiculous and dishonest to suggest Asians, Europeans, non-Maori Polynesians, Africans, Arabs and all the other ethnicities in the world should be called “Pakeha” with all their variety of cultures that are thousands of years old, while this tiny population of Maori with a history that at most is a few hundred years old claims racial supremacy.

        Perhaps it’s time to go fully multicultural, removing these dated ethnic terms from the 70s and 80s, for the sake of a harmonious and equal society.

        [The word “facist” is probably one of our spam triggers, so I suspect every time you comment it will be held in moderation. I suggest a new handle that doesn’t use the word. — r0b]

        • Hateatea 5.4.1.1
          31 May 2012 at 2:14 pm

          Given that Fascist Anti Fascist seems loathe to change their nick, maybe they should just stay in moderation, r0b 😉

          • r0b 5.4.1.1.1
            31 May 2012 at 2:26 pm

            I might not be quite so prompt in future!

            • Teach this 5.4.1.1.1.1
              31 May 2012 at 3:10 pm

              Thanks for the clarification, Rob. The name (fascist-anti-fascist) stems from a quote by Winston Churchill and it seems apt for a person like you, Hateatea, as you seem a bit trigger happy with the censorship.

              Churchill warned that when fascism returned it would be disguised as anti-fascism, and some of the ranting hatred from the so-called “oppressed” on this page is very revealing. It’s also revealing that as well as shouting down any disagreement, or demanding censorship of dissent, that many of these raving reverse-racists always support Maori, regardless of how blatantly wrong their actions are.

              So, anyone else tired of a code of conduct dictated by privileged academics like Margaret Mutu who claims that “Maori can’t be racist”?

              How about the rapidly increasing number of immigrants from around the world, including other ethnic groups who were oppressed by the British through colonialism, who dislike being branded “Pakeha” as if they were some kind of 19th Century Englishman?

              • Hateatea …
                31 May 2012 at 5:19 pm

                @ Teach this, <b> I </b> didn’t censor you, nor wish you to be censored. I was just having a jest with r0b as you seemed to be a little slow getting his message, thus requiring more moderator time to be used ‘liberating’ you.

        • Hateatea 5.4.1.2
          31 May 2012 at 5:31 pm

          I prefer the term tauiwi to pākeha, however, most people recognise that the term applies to people other than Māori, whatever their ethnicity as a long standing default term. As for the words used within a particular language to ‘label’ things / groups / activities – surely that is not something that another language has the right to proscribe just as it is not the right of another language to redefine meanings of words because they have become the majority where they once were the minority.
          Margaret Mutu is not the subject of this particular debate, however, assuming that all tāngata whenua agree with her position is as false as assuming all New Zealanders support everything said or done in our name by John Key!

          • Teach This 5.4.1.2.1
            3 June 2012 at 3:41 pm

            Hateatea, referencing the complaint laid by significant Ngapuhi leader David Rankin shows that I wasn’t “assuming that all tāngata whenua agree with [Mutu]”. Please don’t straw-man me.

            As for linguistics, I am far less concerned with the “rights” and efficacy of languages that I don’t have to fund out of my taxes.

        • Adele 5.4.1.3
          1 June 2012 at 8:38 am

          Fascist

          This has everything to do with race although I agree that Peters is a corrupting politician who deserves to be held to account – in terms of wasteful spending are you referring to his salary?

          I also agree that the racial dichotomy of Māori-Pākehā is destructive but until Pākehā get to grips with Treaty matters it will remain so. How ridiculous your assumption that under multi-culturalism – race relations will be harmonious. Pākehā New Zealanders cannot even deal with one culture let alone many. While we may allow diverse peoples into this country there is a veiled expectation that ‘others’ will conform and blend into the beige.

          ‘don’t cook your smelly foods; don’t litter the atmosphere with your language; don’t graffiti the landscape with your foreign words.

          Pākehā like Māori is an all encompassing term to describe one aspect of the ideological divide. The divide is a multifaceted escarpment – indigenous/non indigenous, non-Māori/Māori, Pākehā/Māori, White/non-White, Colonised/Coloniser, Western Tradition/Te Ao Māori. The escarpment defines a fault line of cavernous proportions.

          Māori, generally, are deferential when referring to others. Whakawhānaungatanga is a ritual of encounter where the question never is ‘what country’ but always ‘who are your people.’ Asians, Europeans, non-Maori Polynesians, Africans, Arabs are unacceptable terms to describe the peoples labelled such – much like Pākehā and Māori. These terms herd people into ghettos of indistinction – with the expectation that they will eventually be homogenised into a ‘New Zealander.’

          In terms of our cultural longevity – mātauranga (our sciences) says our way of being has existed mai rānō and you can now argue the supremacy of your sciences over ours. However, get this is your fascist / non-fascist ignorant head, Māori do not claim racial supremacy – our arguments have always been and will continue to be rights based and morally driven. Spit and spew as much as you like – but we’re not going away.

          • Vicky32 5.4.1.3.1
            1 June 2012 at 5:29 pm

            Māori, generally, are deferential when referring to others. Whakawhānaungatanga is a ritual of encounter where the question never is ‘what country’ but always ‘who are your people.’ Asians, Europeans, non-Maori Polynesians, Africans, Arabs are unacceptable terms to describe the peoples labelled such –

            Yeah. Try talking to Arabs in New Zealand! And my Chinese students while you’re at it. Oh, and a few Pacific Islanders. All of the above have caught hell from Maori for simply being here..

          • Foreign Waka 5.4.1.3.2
            1 June 2012 at 7:30 pm

            Agree with you Vicki. I have seen this too many times, not a pretty sight. Worst thing – try to defend these poor people who are being bullied, oops educated..

            • Adele 5.4.1.3.2.1
              2 June 2012 at 12:57 am

              Vicky and Boatperson

              Did you both arrive on the same leaky boat?

              You really have to stop using personal experience and anecdotal evidence to justify your inherent biases as factual statements. ‘My one Chinese student got beaten up by a Māori therefore all Māori hate the Chinese’ is simply stupidity in charge of two brains.

              If you read my statement correctly, I said “generally” because even I recognise that there are fuckwits rampant in every race.

              It is pointless using anecdote to justify your position as it can easily be challenged with contrary anecdote (amplified, of course) – and we are left none the wiser or better informed.

              I can easily say that I have witnessed Pākehā racism towards ethncities other than Māori. I can readily provide examples of Māori and the Chinese forming alliances against Pākehā discrimination. I can furnish countless examples of hospitality extended towards the peoples of China by Māori and vice versa.

              But it is such a tit for tat form of argument – worthy only of playground drama.

              • Foreign Waka …
                2 June 2012 at 10:15 am

                Adele, you are taken in with yourself and what you belief the world has to accept as gospel that you are the one being ignorant here. It makes me wonder whether you had any experience outside NZ at all. Your aggressive tone especially towards Pakeha – which I belief is a derogatory expression – is telling. You are the one needing a good dose of education not political propaganda. No wonder so many especially well educated leave NZ with people like you around blasting these propaganda no hope slogans that divide a nation and furnish a concept of the 1970 South African environment. But you revel in it I can tell. So don’t worry, soon the rest of the people who want to move on with their lives without being constantly badgered and told to say 3x mea culpa every morning for something we did not do will leave for sunnier shores.

                • Adele …
                  2 June 2012 at 2:51 pm

                  Toodle Pip.

                  Gosh, you’re still here.

                  You obviously are not one of the especially well educated in a position to leave New Zealand. Most people come to New Zealand for lifestyle reasons. We need more environmentalists and eco-survivalists, who have a sophisticated sense of place, in this country to help preserve its uniqueness and bio-diversity.

                  What we don’t need are immigrants that whine, whinny, and whinge their way through life here and want to maintain the status quo that says New Zealand is a fiefdom of beige-dom. Aotearoa is in the midst of Pasifika – its Polynesia in location, and Polynesia in character – it’s not a mini England.

                  I suspect that whatever sunnier shores you eventually float to the locals may also find your presence a barnacle on the butt.

                  The last word is yours – if you’re still in the country that is.

                  • Foreign Waka …
                    2 June 2012 at 3:41 pm

                    You are so full of yourself that you wont see what is so obvious. Inwards looking and consequently imploding in a world that has not found a way forward. Angst and ridicule you revert to as a sign of last resort to defend the indefensible.
                    Two wrongs do not make one right and the fact remains that funds that have been diverted from taxpayer moneys which is meant for the needy whoever they are and has been used for all sorts of strange purposes. To bring up the fact that NZ is a pacific nation in that context conveys to me that you are saying that this shaming is none elses business.
                    This is not whinging this is just telling as it is without using political correctness to ones own end. To revert to political propaganda by mentioning environmentalist notes is the height of arrogant behavior if I ever saw it. As for a fiefdom, I belief this is the very road this country is on as we get more and more accepting of these little bribes and fees or what ever you want to call it.

          • Teach This 5.4.1.3.3
            3 June 2012 at 2:09 pm

            It seems the “fascist anti-fascist” accusation really touched a nerve with you, Adele. All Maori have some European ancestors and many are more European than they are Maori. The idea of “not going away” is, therefore, really a matter of semantics and funding.

            The majority of NZers pay hundreds of millions of dollars in tax to fund Te Reo and to make social policies aimed at helping Maori possible. When we see people like you justifying the misuse of those funds, and even being publicly racist against innocent immigrants, we question your intentions.

  6. Tiger Mountain 6
    30 May 2012 at 12:18 pm

    Tari’s Whanau Ora while worthy in vision has always seemed dodgy to me. Incremental privatisation.

    There are a whole bunch of iwi organisations doing their own thing anyway with projects not needing to brown nose ShonKey to get going.

  7. Matthew Whitehead 7
    30 May 2012 at 12:59 pm

    This post is far too modest to be called “A Modest Proposal”. 😉

  8. tc 8
    30 May 2012 at 1:28 pm

    Didn’t Whanau Ora funding come from Health so everything they fund should have a measurable outcome that is comparable to the Health sector ? ya know that transparent govimint Key’s operating.

    If family get togethers and connectedness have to do with health outcomes fine then lets’ see some proof or it’s just another misuse of what were health funds.

    Keep it simple and the house of cards will burn.

  9. Draco T Bastard 9
    30 May 2012 at 1:58 pm

    So, that makes us at least as qualified for this work as, say, a rural rugby club is to investigate socio-economics.

    Probably more so.

  10. AustralAsian 10
    30 May 2012 at 2:14 pm

    Re. cycling through “Europe, the Middle East, the Indian sub-continent, South-East Asia and China.”

    .. I pretty much did that for about (then) NZ$1,000 in 1974 ..

  11. ordinary_bloke 11
    30 May 2012 at 2:51 pm

    My problem with the rhetoric of ‘connectedness’ is that it contradicts research on the strength of weak ties, in other words it has been found people are more likely to find work in *loose* networks rather then when enmeshed in a tight grid which can inhibit personal development.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Granovetter

    has a link to a downloadable PDF of Granovetter’s influential publication, based on his doctoral work.

    • weka 11.1
      30 May 2012 at 3:58 pm

      I phoned Whanau Ora before. They said that they aren’t able to give much detail because of privacy reasons, and there isn’t much in the public domain about this specific project. They did say it is not unusual for sports groups to be given govt funding like this eg MSD and ALAC do give out money for projects where people meet (churches are another example).
       
      Which begs the question of what source Peters is using. I’ve had a look at most of the media hits on google, and they are all saying the same basic thing. Which is bugger all. RNZ is being more circumspect and reporting that funding was given but they’re not calling it a research project.
       
      Here are my questions then:
       
      What was the primary purpose of the funding and project and how was the project to be carried out?
       
      Was the funded project a ‘research’ project, or was it broader than that?
       
      If it was for research, what kind of research?
       
      Until we have answers to those questions I don’t see how we can form judgements about the validity of the funding.
       
       

  12. Bill 12
    30 May 2012 at 4:00 pm

    Whereas a degree of skepticism with regards Whanau Ora is entirely justified in my mind – given that it’s a top down managerial model and therefore subject to all manner of abuses – extending that skepticism to suggest that to “undertake whanau development research” on “whanau connectedness” and “resilience” are tropes for “let’s have a piss-up” is just so obviously racist that I don’t know why it warrants much in the way of discussion or debate.

  13. Foreign Waka 13
    30 May 2012 at 6:24 pm

    It is utterly superfluous to even contemplate what is right or wrong with this bottomless bucket of funds paid for by you me and everybody else who dares to pay taxes. What would convince me of the sincerity of the undertaking is an attempt to make a difference. How about lunches for those high deciles school kids? No? Higher wages for car givers for the elderly? No? Keeping just the current teachers in those schools with the greatest cultural mix of children (this means of all cultures as this would need more assistance) No? And the list could grow. Whanau Ora is for all? No, definitely not.

  14. Observer 14
    30 May 2012 at 7:33 pm

    Weka – I was born and raised in NZ, but have spent most of my life in Australia.

    You will not be surprised to know that many Maori people have eimgrated to Australia, where they are treated just like any other member of the community.

    No special treatment whatsoever. Yet they do well. As many Australians also do.

    My question is: why do Maori in New Zealand need all sorts of support?

    I have enjoyed reading your posts here, but I am a bit concerned that you may see my question as racist.

    • weka 14.1
      30 May 2012 at 9:39 pm

      Observer,
      I can’t answer your questions, but I can say this. My brother and his partner and her children were all born and raised in NZ and lived here until five years ago. Now they live in Australia. They are all doing very well in socio-economic terms. Were I to go to Australia I would probably starve because I am unable to work enough to earn enough money to live. So I don’t go to Australia to live. Perhaps the Maori that go to Australia have the necessary resources to live there (apart from the ones that go and find they can’t make a go of it and come home) whereas some of the ones that stay here are in a different situation.

      Plus what Adele said.
       
      btw, what does it matter if I see your question as racist or not? What are you afraid of? If you can stand by your views then does it matter what I think of them?

      • Teach this 14.1.1
        31 May 2012 at 3:22 pm

        People are afraid of prison sentences and violent beatings that may result from “anti-racists” taking offence at their comments.

        The violence may come from such organized criminal groups as Antifa (innumerable examples of mob beatings). The recent case where a British woman was sentenced to a 4 month prison term for making racist comments while drunk on the train shows good evidence of why white people with ‘racist’ views (which usually means they are too poor to be educated) are now systemically discriminated against.

        On the other hand, the fact that Margaret Mutu can be openly racist against white people and still retain a state-funded position of power and prestige shows why it is so easy for Maori to not know (or care) about what their cultural partners are forced to deal with.

        Does that answer your question?

        • weka 14.1.1.1
          31 May 2012 at 5:48 pm

          No it doesn’t Teach this. The UK has substantially different racism issues than NZ. In this at least we are fortunate, that we don’t have to deal with such a strong white supremacist uprising here. And anti-facism work is not exactly the same as anti-racism.
           
          Are you saying that in NZ people are beaten by anti-racism groups? Or sent to jail unfairly?
           
          And please provide a link to the case of the woman you refer to who was jailed for racist comments. I’d like to see the detail.

          • Hateatea 14.1.1.1.1
            31 May 2012 at 5:58 pm

            I would like to see that link too, please. Thanks for asking, weka

          • Adele 14.1.1.1.2
            31 May 2012 at 7:50 pm

            Teachis

            Your response to Weka doesn’t answer a single thing but raises serious questions about where your head is at. Antifa is an anti-fascist brigade that as far as I am aware has no permanent roots in this country whereas the National Front does. From where I sit, we are fairly tolerant of white people openly expressing racism in this country. Louis Crimp remains free and at large and the South Island is riddled with red-necks.

            The woman recently jailed in the UK for her racist rant was caught on camera and I suspect was made an example of especially as her rant was so in your face and viral..

            But I would think that the UK would need to take a hard-line on overt displays of racism especially as the country is a powder keg of multi ethnicities easily ignited by any spark of racist abuse. Perhaps it’s not surprising, therefore, that the main region for migrants to this country is the UK /Irish republic – we are so much more beige looking and acting.

            As for Dr Margaret Mutu – she does have a point – I see it here and now.

            • Adele 14.1.1.1.2.1
              31 May 2012 at 8:07 pm

              I so hate linking as I frequently get it wrong but lets try again she does have a point

            • Teach This 14.1.1.1.2.2
              3 June 2012 at 1:17 pm

              Tena koe,

              Adele, if you think Margaret Mutu has a point, then you are also a reverse-racist, providing further evidence of a destructive anti-white prejudice that has taken hold within the Maori community. This delusional sense of racial self-entitlement for Maori and ‘beige looking’ people, combined with your endorsement of Mutu’s confirmed race-hate towards those with white skin, is socially destructive.

              NZ’s courageous UK pioneers arrived to share literacy, prosperity, technology and many other ‘gifts’ with the people who they encountered in NZ. Those Polynesians were made up of waves of immigrants too, and didn’t come from some mystical racial entitlement creation story granting certain hues “whenua”.

              Regardless, UK genes are a massive majority here: almost everyone in NZ has some UK genetic material in their cells – even if they prefer the contemporary Maori nationalist identity to a more honest view of their genetic history.

              NZ’s European community deserves better than the current anti-White racism Maori are dishing up; in fact, the reverse-racism of privileged Maori and rich, so-called ‘liberal’ NZers makes us all look bad.

              Ka kite.

              • Hateatea …
                3 June 2012 at 1:37 pm

                NZ’s courageous UK pioneers arrived to share literacy, prosperity, technology and many other ‘gifts’ with the people who they encountered in NZ
                 
                Gee, thanks a whole lot for that. Those pioneers brought tobacco, alcohol, measles, whooping cough, diptheria, tuberculosis, syphilis, gonorrhea, guns, politics and Christianity. They also brought rabbits, ferrets, stoats, pigs, goats, deer and various other flora and fauna that have wreacked havoc on the environment.
                 
                Most of all, they brought racist attitudes and a view that white people were superior in every way, that white lifestyle and language should dominate even while their numbers were fewer. Thanks a whole bunch!
                 

                • Teach This …
                  3 June 2012 at 2:26 pm

                  The early immigrants that would come to call themselves Maori when European settlers arrived had decimated the indigenous bird population before they were joined by their European and Asian cultural partners.

                  Why should NZ Europeans be seen as guilty of bringing those bad things you focus on in your racially biased way, but not thanked for the good things we brought?

                  Besides, we probably share the same great uncle you ideological zealot. We’re all blood here. It’s only racists like the National Front and Maori Nationalists that choose to divide us Kiwis.

                  Ka kite.

                  • Hateatea …
                    3 June 2012 at 2:54 pm

                    Ki a koe, Teach this
                    Ā te wā, ka haere mai ngā tauiwi tuatahi kei konei, kahore te waipiro, te tupeka, te taru kino, ngā pū, kahore ano ngā mauiui o te ao Pākehā kei konei. Ehara ērā he koha pai. Kahore ahau e tuku mihi aroha ki ngā tipuna tauiwi mō ērā.
                     
                    Ka tū ahau he mokopuna o ngā ao e rua, nātemea, he wahine māori ahau, he hākui, he tāua, he tuakana, he tēina ki runga i te whenua o oku tīpuna mai rā ano. Ā te wā, ka kōrerō koe i roto i te reo rangatira o tēnei whenua o tātou, ka kōrerō mai ano i a koe

                    (aroha mai mo ētahi hē i roto i te takotoranga o te reo)

                    • Teach This …
                      4 June 2012 at 6:59 pm

                      Ki a koe

                      I’m just going to assume that was an extended version of, “hi”, Hateatea. My Te Reo is a little limited. Feel free to translate it to English if it was anything important.

                      It’s great to share a country with you and the rest of the majority of the global Maori-speaking population.

                      How do you say, “anti-white racist” in Maori?

                      Ka kite

              • weka …
                3 June 2012 at 2:06 pm

                NZ’s courageous UK pioneers arrived to share literacy, prosperity, technology and many other ‘gifts’ with the people who they encountered in NZ.
                 

                They then proceeded to systematically destroy the literacy, prosperity, technology and many other gifts of the people who they encountered in NZ. Still haven’t stopped or redressed that really, although some attempts have been made.
                 
                Teach This, it’s pretty obvious from your posts that you don’t understand Mutu’s argument (it’s equally obvious that she didn’t aim her comments at all white people, whoever they are). I would have more respect for your words if you disagreed with her from a place of understanding. But all I’m seeing is you name calling without any real explanation of your view other than that you see racism when someone speaks out against things that affect Maori negatively.
                 
                 

                • Teach This …
                  3 June 2012 at 2:39 pm

                  Weka, you shouldn’t be so racist towards European NZers that you forget that it was the European settler professor Samuel Lee who wrote the first Maori dictionary. Before then, you had no written language.

                  I want the best for Maori, but I don’t see you explaining away Mutu’s comment. She is a state-sponsored racist who declares herself exempt from racism because of her ethnicity. If she didn’t aim her comment at all white people then she shouldn’t have used the expression “white people” to indicate who she was aiming her comment at. That’s why 30 people have laid complaints against her to the Race Relations Commissioner. Why are we all wrong, Weka?

              • Adele …
                3 June 2012 at 11:52 pm

                Teachis

                I hope to god you are not actually a teacher or involved in education, otherwise rock on Parata.

                The original settlers to these isles were not “courageous UK pioneers” they were:

                “…of runaway sailors, of runaway convicts, of convicts who have served out their term of bondage in one or other of the two penal colonies, of fraudulent debtors, who have escaped from their creditors in Sydney or Hobart Town, of needy adventurers from the two colonies, almost equally unprincipled. In conjunction with the whalers that occasionally visit the coast, the influence of these individuals on the natives is demoralizing in the extreme. Their usual articles of barter are either muskets and gunpowder, or tobacco and rum. Most of them live in open concubinage or adultery with native women, and the scenes of outrageous licentiousness and debauchery that are ever and anon occurring on their premises, are often sufficiently revolting to excite the reprobation and disgust of the natives themselves.” (Dr Lang, 1838)

                The lawlessness of these early settlers and their rapacious grab for land precipitated the Treaty of Waitangi, two years later.

                Before literacy arrived into this country Māori had an extensive and sophisticated oral tradition. Orality continues to be practised today, especially in the high art forms, as it involves recitation and a prodigious memory. As an example of traditional skill, Māori and Polynesian navigational techniques involved memorising the positions of all visible stars in the night sky, at any particular point in time and location. The recitation of whakapapa also involved prodigious displays of memory as generations upon generations of names, connections, and interconnections were related during rituals of encounter.

                Yep, no denying, bird and other species including flora did become extinct under the influence of Māori pre-colonisation. But guess what? We eventually learnt from those mistakes and got our shit together. Kaitiakitanga is a concept that predates the arrival of Pākehā.

                Since the arrival of Pākehā, bio-diversity loss has accelerated through the proverbial whare roof. When last surveyed (2007) about 5000 native species were listed as threatened, approximately 600 acutely threatened (verging on extinction) and roughly 200 chronically threatened (heading towards extinction). The main causes are habitat loss and degradation driven by urban development and intensification of farming. Introduced animals and plants have also massively contributed through either out-competing or predating on native flora and fauna.

                The gifts that were bestowed on Māori, much like Peters ‘baubles of office’ came at a high price – for the gifts of blankets, muskets, gunpowder, tobacco, rum, tuberculosis, influenza, chicken-pox syphilis and gonorrhoea we lost lives, land, connectedness, and the ability to sustain ourselves economically.

                No Māori really gives a fuck about Pākehā guilt or non guilt, its Pākehā ignorance that we challenge. The year is 2012 yet your comments could easily have been written 150 years ago. .

                • seeker …
                  4 June 2012 at 1:13 am

                  Very well said Adele.

                • Teach this …
                  4 June 2012 at 4:46 pm

                  Adele, you have a serious problem with racism and it has biased your entire worldview. If I were your teacher, I would try to help you to gain greater objectivity and tolerance for those who are different to you. However, I would also need to isolate you from other students to prevent a contagion effect from your anti-white hate speech.

                  While I can’t believe that someone as prejudiced as you could qualify as a teacher – even Maori teacher – I hope you are not in any position of power over other human beings at all, as they would inevitably become victims of your anti-white prejudice. It’s little wonder the Maori community have started to produce racial terrorists with the rhetoric you are vomiting up here.

                  Racism is a disgusting affliction, regardless of the skin tone of the bigot. With your whimsical penchant for referencing 19th Century texts to support your racial hatred theory, you could really justify some sick and twisted actions (eugenics appeal much?). I guess your over-privileged upbringing, coupled with your racial entitlement philosophy has made you into this potential terrorist you have become. Still, racists like you tend to destroy themselves before they harm too many others.

                  Regardless, I am very glad that our courageous teachers in NZ are sharing the facts about the epidemic of Maori anti-white racism, even at the risk of losing their jobs to the Maori Gestapo. Without heroic teachers those kids could have their minds polluted and destroyed with race hate, just like yours has been.

                  Aroha nui.

                  • Adele …
                    4 June 2012 at 8:09 pm

                    Teach nothing whatsoever

                    Having read your reply to myself and to observer (below) I question your grasp of reality, if not sanity.

                    Your inner demons certainly react viciously when cornered. How quickly the descent into feral. Snarling words and rabid thoughts. I suspect you have hairy knuckles too……..and a tail.

                    Kia kaha.

                    • Teach This …
                      4 June 2012 at 8:30 pm

                      Adele, I agree with Foreign Waka above when he says that racist people like yourself are driving the most talented people out of NZ. What do you offer the country?

                      Besides, like many racists, you have attributed animalistic tendencies to the human object of your irrational hatred, even if you did so as a kind of humour. Racism is an interesting topic. Can you be racist? I think so. Here is some research you may not be aware of:

                      http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton%20sommers.pdf

                      Note the fact that these are two very prestigious and international universities who are starting to produce research about anti-white racism. Then, think about what you write on your Facebook page and other similar sites which may store information that may incriminate you in the future.

                      [lprent: There is nothing in your previous 13 comments under any name that makes me want to retain you here as you add nothing to the debate, but merely criticize others. However I have been told that I shouldn’t ban people for being idiots who use a supercilious tone as a debating ‘technique’ and because I suspect they are too stupid to understand the policy.

                      Banned for a month to allow you to read it. Besides letting you back on the 4th of July would probably suit as you read like an idiot redneck from the south of the US in the 1950’s. ]

                    • Adele …
                      4 June 2012 at 9:29 pm

                      Teach yourself how to read properly

                      The only people leaving this country because of Māori are probably much like you. They are not necessarily talented or even well-educated but in any event their departure is likely to raise the IQ level of this country.

                      If you read the link properly it is a study of the perceptions of White people as follows:

                      “…these trends epitomize a more general mindset gaining traction among Whites in contemporary America: the notion that Whites have replaced Blacks as the primary victims of discrimination. This emerging perspective is particularly notable because by nearly any metric – from employment to police treatment, loan rates to education – statistics continue to indicate drastically poorer outcomes for Blacks than White Americans…” (my emphasis)

                      I suppose you will now say something to the effect of ‘..with your whimsical penchant for referencing the text of the study that I provided to support your racial hatred theory…’

          • Vicky32 14.1.1.1.3
            1 June 2012 at 5:38 pm

            No it doesn’t Teach this. The UK has substantially different racism issues than NZ.

            “Different than” – American Maori, like Tariana are you?

            And please provide a link to the case of the woman you refer to who was jailed for racist comments. I’d like to see the detail.
             

            Are you kidding? It was all over the news about 6 weeks ago, with 3 News playing the woman’s ‘racist rant’ every 5 minutes. How could oyu have missed it?

            • Hateatea 14.1.1.1.3.1
              1 June 2012 at 7:47 pm

              I missed it, Vicky, I see very little television and never TV3. Someone provided a link so now I have seen it. Awful

          • Teach This 14.1.1.1.4
            3 June 2012 at 2:18 pm

            Weka, surely you heard about a high profile case where a significant Maori representative was imprisoned on firearms charges after people discovered he was plotting to undertake racist murders against “white farmers”.

            While I agree that the UK does not have to worry about Maori Nationalism and its plague of racial hatred against white people, I don’t think this makes us “fortunate”. The woman who was jailed for racism can be seen here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/may/29/tube-passenger-jailed-race-rant (if that is chopped when posted google search “uk woman jailed for racism”.

            So, while you are happy to agree with me that the racism of Jacqueline Woodhouse is unacceptable, any comment on Maori like Mutu who want to create racist immigration laws based on their hatred of white people?

  15. Adele 15
    30 May 2012 at 7:59 pm

    Observer

    How well are the indigenous peoples of Australia treated in Australia?

  16. fender 16
    30 May 2012 at 8:57 pm

    Perhaps it is the NZRFU that needs a bollocking for not looking after the game at grassroots level, forcing clubs to go cap-in-hand wherever they can for funding.

  17. Observer 17
    30 May 2012 at 11:21 pm

    Hi Adele

    I notice that you have not addressed the question I put to Weka. Why do Maori have no special support in Australia, and yet do well?

    The teatment of Aboriginals in Australia was unspeakably bad. Officially they didn’t even exist, as the British from the time of Captain Cook, regarded the continent they took over as “”Terra Nullius” – literally an unowned land, but commonly a land without inhabittants.

    The estimated number of Aboriginals at the time of take over in 1788, varies, but it was at least a million. maybe double that. They had arrived there certainly 40,000 years before the English and possibly some of them 60,000 years prior. At the time of settlement, their were some 300 aboriginal “nations” using over 250 distinct languages – and numerous dialects.

    They died by British massacre, and a lack of immunity to European disease – even the common cold. Displacement also took its toll.

    Not until 1967 did they achieve Citizenship in their own land, giving them the right vote, and to be counted in Census takes. Citizenship includes such things as the right to pensions. In other words, it took nearly 200 years before Australians reluctantly conceded they even existed.

    Meanwhile, in somes States the appalling capture of babies and children continued well into the 1980s.

    Today there are approximately 450,000 with verifiable aboriginal lineage and blood. The numbers reflect the fact that Aborigenes tend to have a higher birth rate than the general population.

    What the numbers don’t say is that there was a lot of sexual congress and partnership between the British settlers and Aboriginal women, which led to many people having mixed blood. Often their children in turn married into the white population.

    These persons over the generations have made careers in the professions, the trades and the arts, and are indistinguishable from the general population. They may not have sufficient Aboriginal blood in their veins to qualify today as an Aboriginal. Also, apart from exceptional circumstances, there is no compulsion to declare ethnicity in Australia.

    Although TV beams every failing within Aboriginal fringe settlements, which tend to be socially isolated and lacking sure footed leadership, TV does not show the exquiste art of the people, often beautifully delicate and optimistic. Their dance is amazing too and like their art, constantly nods to Nature and not to statement, power or violence. Much of their art is deliciously abstract too.

    Refused any Treaty of any kind by the British Crown, battling constant extermination by Australian and European settlers, the Aborigines eventually saw the repeal of Terra Nullius in 1992. Just yesterday really.

    A lot of Aborigines went to fight on behalf of Australia in the European wars. They were paid very low rates compared with white soldiers. Actually, Queensland confiscated their meagre pay! They are currently seeking the right to be included in Anzac day Parades.

    These people in my opinion, will come to be the most celebrated aborignal people in the world. Their survival skills in a difficult land are enormous; their intelligence high; their Art substantial; there tolerance and perspectives simply stunning.

    …. and I think I get it tough Adele?

    • risildo 17.1
      31 May 2012 at 8:34 am

      I can give answer for the question
      The salary and payment for the work is greater than here 🙂

    • Adele 17.2
      31 May 2012 at 11:57 am

      Tēnā koe, Observer

      The question was directed at Weka, who is an articulate advocate on behalf of Māori.

      However, your attempt to articulate the state of the Aborigine condition reads as facile and condescending.

      The Aborigine shares a similar trajectory of colonisation and forced assimilation with Māori. Actually, most, if not all, colonised indigenous peoples speak the same language when talking colonisation – the depersonalisation of lands, waterways and resources, and the desecration of spirit. Replaced by a commodified worldview where everything has a price except the peoples themselves – in the case of the Aborigine, rendered terra nullius.

      The indigenous dialogue continues in recounting how indigenous populations were decimated by genocide, germs, and grog. Plentiful populations reduced to scraps foraging in an increasingly hostile and alien terra. In the case of the Aborigine, 60,000 years of homeostasis obliterated by 300 years of colonisation. Assimilation continues to be the dominating threat to indigenous peoples wishing to remain indigenous. It is a loss to diversity when a distinct people are made extinct; it is a loss to humanity when that loss is celebrated as progress.

      An expression of glibness is to utter “….what the numbers don’t say is that there was a lot of sexual congress and partnership between the British settlers and Aboriginal women…” The depth is to say “…many Aboriginal women were disempowered, denigrated, and deprecated by white men, who felt it their legitimate right to possess, rape, and abuse Aboriginal women. Used and discarded, Aboriginal women were further subjected to the advances and abuses of any and every white man, who desired a piece of ‘black velvet…”

      Most immigrants do well within their host countries, Māori and the Aborigine are no exception. Presumably, immigrants emigrate for that very reason – to get ahead. Perhaps immigration also highlights a hostile political and social-scape being left behind. I can only imagine the element of freedom felt on flying economy without the excess baggage of a social view that sees you more as a bludger, basher, and criminal (and to arrive into Australia, where the Aborigine is labelled such).

      One final point, the exquisite and deliciously abstract art that you refer to probably has a meaning that is invisible to your gaze. Indigenous artforms are generally of the spirit and deeply rooted in the peoples themselves. To have an awareness of the people is to have an awareness of the artforms of their creation.

  18. Observer 18
    30 May 2012 at 11:53 pm

    Hi Weka

    I liked reading your reply to me. Thankyou for taking the time to do it, and mentioning the experience of your own family. Beaut.

    Certainly I don’t have your ease with language and writing! Left plenty of typos in my reply to Adele too.

    I am uncertain about the epithet “racist” and uncertain in my views, particularly in relation to complex pluralist societies. Too often I fall back on generalisations – such as all pulling our oar as well as we can, for the good of the boat. Inclusive rather than exclusive.

    Regards.

  19. Hateatea 19
    31 May 2012 at 12:09 am

    Another Winston Peters dog whistle eagerly seized upon by those with an anti Maori agenda.

    First, from the scant information available to us, it is clear that
    a) Winston Peters doesn’t think that there are any people in rugby clubs with the skills to undertake research
    b) Research proposals commissioned as part of Whanau Ora funding need to be undertaken by organisations with the appropriate credentials
    c) The rugby club in Otaki investigated its role in the wider Otaki community and as part of that proposal under Whanau Ora, held a community day with a specific focus on mens health

    From some of the comments here it would seem that there are many who agree with point (a) despite the fact that Otaki is the home of Te Wananga o Raukawa, an educational facility that is producing some very good research papers, particularly on Maori and community health.

    There are people here who don’t seem to rate the ability of Te Puni Kokiri to carry out sociological research despite the fact that they do it all the time in order to give appropriate advice to Ministers.

    Reaching out to the community through the rugby club can only be construed as a ‘piss up’ although the empirical evidence for the day having been like that is not obvious.

    For goodness sake people, Winston Peters ‘Maori bashing’ is not new. He has been doing it as long as he has been in politics. The fact that he has a whakapapa does not mean that he is more credible when he goes on one of his rants. He is a politician who happens to be Maori but his constituency is elderly, middle class white people who are always worried about what those ‘dirty, lazy horis who don’t know their place’ are up to. He does it to seem relevant. He does it to try and position himself for a place in Cabinet at the first available moment, he certainly doesn’t have the well being of Maori, be they children or adults, at the top of his agenda. It is all about ‘him. him. him’!

    The population of Otaki in the 2006 census was 34% Maori where the wider Wellington percentile is 12. The male population aged between 15 and 65 is approximately 55% making a rugby club a very good means of outreach. On a population of less than 6000, it is unlikely to be competing against another Whanau Ora providor.

    I see it as a positive that people are thinking laterally in their efforts to make positive changes in health and well being in their communities. Eg, well health checks around diabetes, hypertension, smoking cessation, prostate, cholesterol etc delivered at flax roots have great buy in from small communities and, at least where I lived in a small rural community, were much appreciated by all the locals no matter their ethnicity, although always provided under kaupapa Maori.

    I don’t see most of the commentary as being racist, I see it as being ignorant. Sweeping assertions about the ability of rugby clubs or whanau Maori to identify concerns, apply for funding, commission research, follow up on that research and hold pro active activities that reach out to people in a non threatening environment is based on ignorance. Flax roots are where the people are so that is where service delivery needs to be.

    By the way and just for the record – Whanau = family, but not just Mum, Dad and the children, the whole family, right out to fifth cousins once removed (or further), provided that they want to be involved. Ora = well being, health, life. Broaden your thoughts on what Whanau Ora might mean to someone who is looking at life from a different lens than yours

    Now, I need to go read the research paper I have been given to comment on

    • Teach This 19.1
      4 June 2012 at 9:20 pm

      [deleted]

      [lprent: Another of the same type of superlicous comment with no actual content apart from sneering that got you a ban already. It is a simple technique used by those ill-equipped to develop an actual argument. ]

      • Hateatea 19.1.1
        4 June 2012 at 10:31 pm

        What’s with the ‘professor’ crack, Teach This and ‘providor’ is what I meant, but thank you for your patronising ‘correction’
        Definition of Providor
        1. purveyor [n -S] – See also: purveyor @lexic.us
         
        It is interesting that you see Whanau Ora as social engineering when the intention is to find effective ways of redressing some of the deficits in the uptake of service by an identified at risk group. Does that mean that you would prefer that the rates of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, prostate cancer, hyper tension, high cholesterol, smoking alcohol and drug abuse, lack of effective parenting information and, in some areas, poor immunisation uptake should go unaddressed?
         
        There is a massive amount of empirical evidence that programmes designed by a community to meet that communities needs are more effective. Kohanga reo, kura kaupapa, whare wananga, kura reo are all programmes that have been flaxroots based from the beginning. The need was identified, the programmes designed and delivered in environments conducive to positive outcomes and so the outcomes among the target group are superior to those achieved by mainstream.
         
        Whanau Ora, whatever its teething problems, has the potential to make positive advances in cohesive, multi disciplinary service delivery. It would be helpful if people like Winston Peters would resist grandstanding and, instead, work alongside the responsible Ministers to assess what is working and what isn’t. Of course, that isn’t his style.
         
        As for your slurs against Hone Harawira and Margaret Mutu – I feel that you need to substantiate your assertions that: “There is little evidence to suggest any of this funding is doing anything positive, but it is clear that anti-white racism has increased dramatically as a result of misallocated funds going to racist politicians and professors like Hone Harawira and Margaret Mutu.”
         
        As I now see that you are on a month long holiday, perhaps you might use some of your spare time researching your obviously deeply entrenched prejudices.
        Ā taua wā

  20. weka 20
    31 May 2012 at 9:32 am

    Kiaora Hateatea, good to hear from someone who actually knows something.
     

    I don’t see most of the commentary as being racist, I see it as being ignorant. Sweeping assertions about the ability of rugby clubs or whanau Maori to identify concerns, apply for funding, commission research, follow up on that research and hold pro active activities that reach out to people in a non threatening environment is based on ignorance.
     

    Maybe, but the inability of some people here to engage with an open mind and ask the right questions to overcome their ignorance seems to come from somewhere more than just lack of knowledge. I will be interested to see how people respond to your post.

  21. Observer 21
    1 June 2012 at 3:32 pm

    Hello Adele

    Thanks for your reply to my brief, but hopefully considered outline of Aboriginal suffering in Australia.

    As I see it, the horrific shadow of the wrongs of the past will always be there. The wrongs of the present however can be realistically dealt with, and should be.

    It seems to me better for the people themselves and for the world as a whole, if every race is given the opportunity to do well. I think that people of goodwill around the world really want that.

    But doing well, depends heavily on the internal dynamics, the interactions and constant honest assessment within the race itself. That is so, whether you are talking of Greeks, Icelanders or Australian Aboriginals.

    In countries that pursue a relentless class system, the Uk and India for example, it is not colonisation that is destructive, but the heavy grinding boots of wealthy groups that regard themselves as superior and justifed in the exclusive ownership of the great bulk of resources.

    The doctors, lawyers and teachers in Britain are overwhelmingly drawn from the upper and aristocratic classes. The great majority of the population is not proportionately represented in those career sectors. But this is just one illustration of a pattern that pervades everything.

    That status quo will remain until the non wealthy, the jobless and the lowlypaid decide enough is enough. But their resolve will need to include education, strong morality and clear sightedness. Mere words and rallies won’t do it. Neither can they count reliably on politics or philanthropy to assist them.

    I concede that this just my view. I do not see my view as condescending Adele, but I respect firstly, that you replied and that you furthered the discussion. Thanks.

    • Adele 21.1
      1 June 2012 at 8:51 pm

      Tēnā koe, Observer

      Thank you for your well constructed response.

      Everything that exists today has been built on the wrongs of the past. The social dysfunction experienced today is a consequence of past wrongs.

      Our present reality is deformed by past wrongs and unless we confront those wrongs with solutions our future too will be malformed. The analogy I use is a new house (the future) built over a toxic dump (the past). Eventually, the house will become hazardous as toxic effluent leeches into the foundation footings and load bearing walls. Eventually, health will turn into disease as toxic exudates ooze from every mouthful of home-grown food.

      A Te Ao Māori perspective says that to move forward, look to the past. The implications are clear, learn from history, the past dictates the future, and the future does not exist in a vacuum. To correct the wrongs of the past is to correct the present tense. But this solution is anathema to the present majority as it would entail an admission, an acknowledgement, and a reversal.

      • weka 21.1.1
        1 June 2012 at 9:14 pm

        I have to wonder why it is so hard for pakeha NZ to turn around and look behind themselves. Maybe it is because so many of our people came here specifically because they needed and wanted to leave the past behind.

        • Draco T Bastard 21.1.1.1
          1 June 2012 at 9:41 pm

          It’s kinda funny (or sick) but NZ was once described as more British than the British. A lot of people may have come here to leave the past behind but they then recreated that past.

      • Draco T Bastard 21.1.2
        1 June 2012 at 9:38 pm

        Everything that exists today has been built on the wrongs of the past. The social dysfunction experienced today is a consequence of past wrongs.

        Yep, but it’s not exclusive. All of our peoples have been so wronged.

        But this solution is anathema to the present majority as it would entail an admission, an acknowledgement, and a reversal

        Agreed but I think you don't realise the full extend of that admittance because full openness would admit that more than just Maori had been royally* screwed.

        * Aristocracy has it's stealing fingers everywhere.

  22. prism 22
    1 June 2012 at 8:57 pm

    I thought Adele that there had been admissions of wrongdoing. But don’t let that spoil the fine stream of recrimination that you are probably passing onto younger audiences.

    • Adele 22.1
      2 June 2012 at 9:43 am

      Tēnā koe, prism

      I was thinking more to an admission that ‘kāwanatanga’ doesn’t mean ‘sovereignty’ and that the Treaty, even in its more reduced version, has yet to be fully realised.

  23. weka 23
    1 June 2012 at 9:06 pm

    What about acknowledgements and reversals, prism?
     
    Not that I think we’ve really got the admissions thing sorted yet either. There are still too many kiwis who either deny what happened, or react by saying ‘it’s not my fault, I refuse to feel guilty’ and then get stuck there. I think there are others too who would want to do something but are confused and not sure what it’s all about (too hard basket).

    • Draco T Bastard 23.1
      1 June 2012 at 10:01 pm

      ‘it’s not my fault, I refuse to feel guilty’

      Which, if you think about it, is reasonable. Most of them, nor their families, were here when the legalised theft took place. The point is that you shouldn’t be accusing them of these crimes (accusing people of crimes that they didn’t commit is contraindicated) but pointing out that they did happen and that reparations need to occur is.

      • weka 23.1.1
        1 June 2012 at 10:22 pm

        I’m not accusing them of those crimes. Neither are Maori as far as I can see. We do of course have a responsibility for what happens now.
         
        My point was, that people just stop at the point (“I refuse to feel guilty”) and use that as an excuse to not do anything. You refuse to feel guilty? Great! Now what are you going to do next?
         
        Some people use refusal of guilt as a way of denying that there have been any wrongs committed.

  24. prism 24
    3 June 2012 at 11:55 am

    Adele Tena koe Adele
    I was thinking more to an admission that ‘kāwanatanga’ doesn’t mean ‘sovereignty’ and that the Treaty, even in its more reduced version, has yet to be fully realised.
    This is a thorny isue for pakeha and Maori indeed. But to both keep working for this and to encourage positive attitudes among pakeha is a good thing. I think at the same time, reference about change already achieved is referred to so some positives get heard at the same time as referencing the unfinished business.

    Weka – I agree we shouldn’t be on the tack of pakeha feeling guilty, I think we should talk about being honourable and fair and not just dodgy colonial land speculators’ children or building our private domain on past misjustice.

    Some good stuff to read so we know more about what the concerns are and what is being done about settling these issues:
    I remembered the book I have not read and think I must – Struggle Without End by Professor Ranginui Walker, Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou: Struggle Without End rev. ed A review –
    http://www.otago.ac.nz/DeepSouth/vol2no1/review.html

    Another hard working devoted Maori working for his people was Dr Maharaia Winiata.
    http://teaohou.natlib.govt.nz/journals/teaohou/issue/Mao31TeA/c7.html This gives a background to – Dr Maharaia Winiata, New Zealand’s foremost Maori scholar, possibly the most outstanding of contemporary Maori leaders, died in Tauranga Hospital on April 6th, aged 48.

    Some other thoughts. It is hard to discuss what qualities Maori have as pakeha to pakeha, I have noticed Maori being affronted at being discussed positively and regarding it as patronising. Then it is hard to break through this fog of misunderstanding and negativeity that lingers over pakeha and Maori too.

  25. Observer 25
    3 June 2012 at 12:10 pm

    Hi Weka and Hi Adele

    I value your thoughts.

    Pakeha should acknowlege the underserved displacement, the unimaginable stress, and the humiliation brought to the Maori – and Aotearoa.

    If Pakeha comfortably forget what they did in the past, they will be more likely to repeat their imperialist crimes in the future.

    The English speaking natives are incredibly greedy and self seeking. They mastered the art of slave taking and succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. Queen Elizabeth I herself invested considerable money in the abominable trade. She did it for her own personal wealth. She closed her eyes (a trait the English have) to the appalling treatment given to fellow human beings.

    Take a quick look at how difficult it has been for Afro-American slaves to get even reluctant acceptance as humans.

    But the English, having earned super wealth through the slave trade, went on to imperialise 64 nations. The largest Empire in the history of the world. The English have not paid a cent of compensation for that outrage.

    Neither have they ever even apologised for the slave trade they so efficiently and devastatingly managed and milked. Look at the mess they left poor Africa in! Look at India, whose resources they raped. A list 64 nations long.

    Oh, but all that was in the past?

    I don’t think so. The present destruction of the world’s money system, and the huge stress and strain put on people around the globe, was engineered by whom? By the American Banks. Americans as you know, are English – to the core.

    To be English, whether in the UK or in the United States, is to feel within your bones the right to have the world’s wealth …. and to crush opposition. All supported by an expensive and whimful Military.

    That is why Pakeha must never forget the crimes and devastation they have caused and continue to cause – all around the world. My surname is Hobbs – which will tell you which blood I carry in my veins.

    As mentioned in my earlier post, English aristocracy, moguls and politicians, whether in Uk or United States, cause as much stress as they can to their own very numerous under privilged classes. They do it by making sure the wealthy get wealthier. It’s a slick technique.

    The only thing I can see stopping all of this needless (english caused) strife – is for the underprivileged to say enough is enough. The wealth of the world should not be confined to a finely tuned race of excessively greedy, and war loving people – no matter how many pretty royals they have, or how many cute film stars.

    Greed is a Killer.

    Regards and Esteem

    • Vicky32 25.1
      3 June 2012 at 2:42 pm

      To be English, whether in the UK or in the United States, is to feel within your bones the right to have the world’s wealth …. and to crush opposition. All supported by an expensive and whimful Military.

      What a load of bigoted racist shite! I am English, (not just a 4th generation Scottish New Zealander, with maybe one English ancestor) – kindly explain why I have no desire to have the ‘world’s wealth’, and in fact, am at the bottom of our present society?
      You ought to be ashamed of yourself, but all I see in your insane post, is a kind of crazy pride in your ability to hate.

    • Teach This 25.2
      3 June 2012 at 2:50 pm

      Observer, if you substituted “English speaking natives” or “Pakeha” with “Jews” in your disgusting racist hate speech, you would sound like a Nazi. Comments like yours are the root of all racism.

    • prism 25.3
      3 June 2012 at 7:00 pm

      Observer
      I think you are talking generally about English speaking nations but people are not taking the objective view and receiving it personally. I haven’t read all your points because I can’t spend too much time blogging – must get on with other life! But on English speakers, I do notice that the English speaking lands, dominated by teh USA, watch and follow each other. And we speak English mostly, and then follow those other countries that follow the USA.. Lack of other language means we are at a disadvantage in learning about or making economic contacts with other countries, though it has become imperative that we learn Japanese or Chinese for business and cultural purposes.

      If we understood more of what is going on in other countries we would be able to compare better their level of behaviour with the English speaking countries. I am drawn to Scandinavian countries myself as exemplars but I realise I’m probably taking a too idealistic view.

  26. prism 26
    3 June 2012 at 1:13 pm

    Observer
    The only thing I can see stopping all of this needless (english caused) strife – is for the underprivileged to say enough is enough. The wealth of the world should not be confined to a finely tuned race of excessively greedy, and war loving people – no matter how many pretty royals they have, or how many cute film stars.
    You are making the mistake of thinking that restoring rights etc to a person or people with grievances will stop bad things happening because they will be enobled by their previous difficulties and everything will be sweet. That is not how humans work. We all do things that are unjust and have to keep that greed for various things that tend to obssess us under control.

  27. red blooded 27
    3 June 2012 at 3:52 pm

    “The English speaking natives are incredibly greedy and self seeking.”

    Excuse me? What is the present tense verb doing in this (already sweeping, insulting and frankly racist) assertion?

    I have been interested (and at times challenged) by the to and fro of comment going on here, but some comments (on both sides) are extreme and ridiculous, undermining the viewpoint being espoused and causing more layers of offence. We’ve got to get past the habit of labelling people and assigning them character traits based on their racial (or linguistic) heritage. All countries/races/cultures have things in their pasts that our generation would see as admirable and things that we might see as revolting or despicable. These negative things include slavery, power struggles and wars fought for spurious reasons, oppression of women, damage caused to the environment, exploitation of other animals and threats to the viability of certain species…

    Who are we talking about here? The English? Maori? Yes, on both counts. That doesn’t make either racial group inherently bad, “greedy and self-seeking”.

    I think it’s fine to look for creative ways to address embedded issues of inequality in our society, and I’m all for settling Treaty claims with the hope that this can help us to heal any remaining hurts and share resources more fairly. I’m giving Whanau Ora time to bed in and to see if it can work in communities who have faced decades of social deprivation. My own viewpoint, though, is that we need to tackle poverty and provide equity of opportunity for all, rather than to target individuals on the basis of race; some of whom will be in need and some of whom won’t be. For example, scholarships that are targeted towards Maori frequently go to privileged young people who would be going on to further study anyway; those who have plenty of family support and are not in financial hardship.

    And as for why people are afraid to be called racist – surely that’s not so hard to understand. It’s a dreadfully hurtful word. Having said that, I think some comments in this line HAVE been racist, on both sides of the divide. Let’s try to stop accusing each other and seeing the world in such black and white terms (and yes, that was a pun; and yes, I am aware of the irony – but it’s only there if you attach racist connotations to the words black and white).

  28. Observer 28
    3 June 2012 at 5:14 pm

    Hi Prism

    Thanks for your words.

    I do not expect that the people of my races (English ancestry) will ever acknowledge that they have done massive wrong in the past and that they continue to do it.

    Lord knows, they were capturing babies and children by decree of the State as recently as the 1980s in Australia. That may have been before you were born. I take it you were not stolen as a child. So are we saying that the baby, unlike you, let itself be captured and is therefore the one that should shoulder the blame and the consequences?

    But also Prism, are you suggesting that the financial melt down, massively destructive and powered along by English speaking natives, was caused by the underprivileged and those on low incomes? Do you think it is just that they should be made to suffer for the greed of a relatively few identifiable bankers, corporates and smug shareholders?

    At the risk of offending you, it is simply not true that “we all do things that are unjust” . Throughout the world the great majority of people are both just and moral, as well as caring. That does not mean they are perfect. It simply means they do not carry out large scale predatory action on other humans.

    I am not sure that peoples do hang on to their grievances – for that would be mental quicksand Prism. But my God, I hope they hang on to their awareness of their terrible pasts and through that awareness restore inner harmony and sense of worth.

    I totally agree with you that each of us has to avoid greed – for it is a killer. Whenever we fail, then we need to make reparation.

    If we accept that most people think and behave morally (check crime statistics around the world), then is it too much to ask that our Bankers, Corporates and Politicians (Rulers) do the same?

    Is it a such a huge scandal if I suggest that all money-making transactions; resource acquisitioning; and land holdings should reflect the accepted norms of justice, fairness and equability?

    Is it frightening if I suggest that all children should get the same food and education resources as the wealthy? Do you feed and provide education to only one child in your family Prism, and let the others get very little? If so, why?

    Is it wrong for me to say to the State, your first obligation is to make sure your people have work and proper payment?

    The amount of welfare being handed out is one measure of the bastard determination of the few to hang on to the enormous wealth that should be shared with the many. A balanced State should only need to offer assistance on occasion to the long term sick.

    No, I am not a utopian, a socialist, a communist or a fascist. I will admit to being confused by people who happily label themselves as Left or Right, Repulican or Democrat. The labels they wear blindfold them, so that they cannot see the issues in clear light. I wouldn’t provide State money to those who refused to work*. I would not allow a wealthy person to evade or minimise their taxes. Additionally, I would levy them in times of national hardship, and when developing essential services.

    All I am suggesting is, that the morality of normal people be carried through and be demanded of resource holders and the wealthy. Is it a difficult concept? Is it wrong that wealthy persons be brought up to accept that they should contribute to the citizens? Or should it be, that the citizens struggle and starve themselves for the wealthy? Just because the English race(s) say they should.

    My words above are not just about the New Zealand situation, but about the many people (including the millions in the UK and The United State) getting it too hard not though their own fault, but all because of the centuries old English disease – which encourages massive ursurpation and greed for the benefit of the very few.

    Thankyou for the opportunity to chat with you Prism.

    *They would need the care of non judgemental Charities … not the State.

  29. prism 29
    3 June 2012 at 6:33 pm

    Observer
    I have to cook dinner so will have to be shorter than you. I said that people are not necessarily ennobled by having rights restored or being advantaged after a period of loss. Restoring rights – making improvements in conditions is not going to immediately make everything peaceful and harmonious and cut out crime and violence. It’s only moving along the road towards that goal. If you are interested in finding out examples you will have to find for yourself as I don’t have time. That’s the first comment I make – don’t get too optimistic about great results when the country or anyone repairs grievances, improves conditions, it won’t happen overnight or perhaps even for years, but improvement there will be, in time.

    The second comment is that although it is a hard road, it’s the right thing to do to behave as honestly and fairly as possible to other people who have been disadvantaged, especially so when the country is advancing by using their assets.

    You mention babies. I’ve forgotten where they enter the discussion, they are welcome to crawl in or toddle if they can, but I think we would agree that hey need large amounts of care and attention. My thinking is that society should support parents so that they can give that to their children who can become valued members of society when they grow up. And parents have to decide the appropriate size for their family in this modern world. I hope you approve my thinking.

  30. Observer 30
    3 June 2012 at 7:21 pm

    Hiya RedBlooded

    I understand you smarting at my words. But I think in the context of my conversation with Adele and in consideration of the fact that the Financial System is causing huge difficulties (perhaps not to you and me), you may forgive me for deliberately using the present tense.

    You see, the greed of the bankers and shareholders in the USA spawned an immoral tsunami that broke loose in 2007. In its sweep, it rivals the usurpation by my ancestors of 64 nations and their resources, in the 17th – 19th centuries.

    The USA, having been conquered by England, was settled by English people. The English had a track record in wealth created by slavery. It is a specific evil because it places master above slave and for several hundred years it flourished. Usurpation of nations is closely related to Master / slave relationship.

    The excessive acquistion of wealth (greed) does exactly the same.

    It is not surprising that the Americans placed a very high priority on the acquisition of wealth. So did the wealthy back home in England. Like father like son.

    During the late 1970’s – 80s, Wall St adopted the slogan “Greed is good”. It was not simply another marketing catchline. It became for many the only belief they possessed. The concept was adopted by Greenspan, Thatcher and numerous other leading lights. Their heroine was the strange lady – Ayn Rand. We are witnessing the result of this distortion in human thinking – Now!.

    So much for the present tense.

    I think I may have shocked you by regarding the English speakers as a race. It is convenient for English to speak of Maori, Papuans, Greeks, French as races, and in the process point out their faults.

    However, the English are a race too, wherever they may dwell. They should be examined in the same we critique other races. I know this has probably has never been done. But when you do it, you will find that much of the world dislikes Americans (English background) and does not fully trust the English (UK). Whole swathes of countries have little to thank America or Britain. Millions if not billions of people will hate what our American cousins did to their, families and goals.

    At no stage in my writing have I blamed the ordinary wonderful Englishman, or wonderful American. You need power and wealth to conquer nations and resources, and to control the world’s financial life blood.

    My admiration for Wilberforce(UK) and Lincoln (USA) is deep. They were ordinary men, who became giants because of their principles. They remind us that the stunted pygmies of wealth are not where we should look for our leaders.

    The ordinary person does not have the power or wealth to bring about the dissolution of nations or destroy whole economies. Lucky in fact to have a rented shelter and a garden hose.

    Regards

    • Teach This 30.1
      4 June 2012 at 6:42 pm

      Many psychotic people fail to see fault in their own actions and words, Observer. Then, one day, they slip up and act on their psychotic thoughts – be they racist, misogynist, or more uniquely deranged – only to find themselves in prison with their face on the front page of the paper for a hideous crime.

      That is you, Observer, waiting to get picked up by the mental health system or the police – hopefully before your mental illness brings harm to you or someone else. If you really cared about “ordinary people” you would turn yourself in to the authorities immediately.

  31. Hateatea 31
    4 June 2012 at 10:42 pm

    @ Teach This re your of 6.59

     
    I’m just going to assume that was an extended version of, “hi”, Hateatea. My Te Reo is a little limited. Feel free to translate it to English if it was anything important.
    You assume incorrectly and I will translate nothing. If you want to know what I said, you need to address me with more respect. I have not been disrespectful to you, even when using Te Reo
    It’s great to share a country with you and the rest of the majority of the global Maori-speaking population.
    I share MY home with you and this is where Te Reo Rangatira is the first and legal language
    How do you say, “anti-white racist” in Maori?
    Just as Te Reo has no obscenities, it also never needed such definitions prior to the arrival of tauiwi.
     
    Nātemea, kā tū ahau i raro i te korowai atawhai o ngā tīpuna o nēhē