Another Peters brain fart

Written By: - Date published: 8:02 am, May 25th, 2013 - 254 comments
Categories: im/migration, racism, scoundrels, winston peters - Tags: ,

Winston Peters is up to his old tricks again:

Peters: Immigrants, brothels and sin city

NZ First leader Winston Peters has launched an attack on immigration policy and questioned whether Auckland is becoming “the supercity of sin”, linking crime and other problems to immigration from China.

In the speech to a North Shore Grey Power meeting he denied his party was anti-immigrant, saying it was not against bringing in people with skills lacking in New Zealand. And he pointed to comments by the new premier of China that the biggest challenge facing China was the level of corruption. “It stands to reason that corruption can be exported and imported,” Peters said.

He said the Government was talking of a million more people in Auckland soon “and there is no prize for guessing where most will come from”. … He said when the rich tourists had finished at the blackjack tables or the poker machines at SkyCity casino there was another attraction nearby.

“The Hong Kong born Chow brothers are thoughtfully providing a 15-storey brothel, in what used to be an historic building, just across the road from the casino in the heart of Auckland,” Peters said.

“And thanks to our generous student and worker visa schemes the Chow brothers will be able to provide genuine home-grown sex workers for the visitors if that’s what they want.” …

The seven deadly sins were alive and well in Auckland and the city was being trashed economically, socially, physically and ethically, he said.

Peters has a long history of trotting out this sort of racism, and the sad fact of it is that it probably does his vote no harm at all. Speaking (as he always does) for the Tories, Guyon Espiner tweeted: “How do all the liberals in the Greens and Labour feel about working with Winston Peters and his facile, juvenile, anti-China hysteria?”.

I dunno Guyon, how do all the conservatives in National and ACT feel about working with Winston Peters and his facile, juvenile, anti-China hysteria?

My guess is that neither side feels any good about the prospect, and that neither side would turn away from it if it was the only way to form a government. Heaven help us all if Winston Peters holds the balance of power in 2014.

254 comments on “Another Peters brain fart ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Shona 1
    25 May 2013 at 8:33 am

    Peters criticisms of central Auckland aren’t inaccurate even if they are couched in old style moderately bigoted rhetoric. Such is his style , generation and constituency. Central Auckland is dirty, sleazy decrepit, run -down , unloved and full of legal and illegal migrants. Our immigration policies are a disaster and need scrutiny NOW!.Sky city is vile! The Chow brothers are pimps. Gambling and earning an income off women’s genitalia are not the types of business we need in our largest city’s window to the world. So good on Winston for raising the issues.
    When our children were young and we visited sin-city during school holidays we always told our offspring that the Skycity tower was the funnel that sucked the money out of the country!

  2. KJT 2
    25 May 2013 at 8:33 am

    Peters is only wrong in the anti-Chinese part.

    The huge wave of English immigrants in the 50’s and 60’s, who brought their dysfunctional adversarial industrial relations system and class system here, adversely affected New Zealand society and social cohesiveness, also.

    Personally I prefer Chinese. Their cuisine and their work ethic is much better.

    Past time that New Zealanders were actually asked if they wanted a second wave of colonialism.

    It is bad enough that we are economically colonised by the UK, the USA, Australia, and soon, China.

    Immigration policy is deliberately used to keep wages low and speculative prices high.

    Time we put a stop to immigration allowing employers to avoid paying for training and avoid paying competitive wages. And driving prices beyound New Zealander’s reach.

    No one asked us if we wanted all these immigrants.

    Peters is articulating an unease, many New Zealanders feel.

  3. Matthew Hooton 3
    25 May 2013 at 8:53 am

    To answer your question to the Guyon in your second-to-last par, polling I have seen suggests about two-thirds of those planning to vote National in 2014 would consider not voting or voting for someone else if they thought Key was going to do a deal with Peters. Of course, it wouldn’t be anything like two-thirds that actually didn’t vote or changed their vote, but even if it were only a percentage or two, then that would be significant in a close election.
    But I actually have a new theory, called “David Shearer’s Green-free Plan B” at http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/david-shearers-green-free-plan-b-ck-140617 It’s a theory that has Shearer dealing with Peters rather than the Greens. (BTW, I am in the any-government-is-better-than-one-with-Peters camp.)

    • vto 3.1
      25 May 2013 at 8:57 am

      mr hooton, how on earth are we supposed to untangle all of your conflicts and allegiances in order to find the truth in that?

      • David H 3.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 9:08 am

        More Hootens Horseshit!

        • KJT 3.1.1.1
          25 May 2013 at 10:22 am

          We have a Government of smarmy, lying, shonky, thieving used car salesmen, (though probably that is far to derogatory of used cars salesmen, I have met some honest ones), and Hooten thinks that Peters, IS WORSE!

      • paul andersen 3.1.2
        25 May 2013 at 10:40 am

        allegiances ,or allergies

    • Pascal's bookie 3.2
      25 May 2013 at 9:29 am

      Hi hooten.

      this is the internet, ‘polling I have seen’; dox or GTFU.

      cheers.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 3.3
      25 May 2013 at 9:31 am

      Was that the same poll that said Labour and National had taken a hit on marriage equality? That Roy Morgan didn’t notice?

      • Matthew Hooton 3.3.1
        25 May 2013 at 5:04 pm

        According to track polls, National has recovered since then. But Labour hasn’t.

        • McFlock 3.3.1.1
          25 May 2013 at 5:11 pm

          I’ll wait for the public ones to come out, thx.

          • Matthew Hooton 3.3.1.1.1
            25 May 2013 at 5:24 pm

            Expect National up and Labour/Green down.

            • One Anonymous Knucklehead 3.3.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 5:31 pm

              When are you going to stop telling lies for money?

              • Rhinocrates …
                25 May 2013 at 8:41 pm

                Is that a serious question? Hoots would find it incomprehensible because he simply cannot comprehend the fundamental concept of “truth”. Money, on the other hand…

                And Hoots, you aversion to Peters must be based on the ghost of a shadow of the outline of a remnant of a pretence to having a vague intimation of a memory of a conscience. You really must eradicate whatever infinitesimal trace remains if you are to be really good at your job. God knows your intellect won’t carry you through.

                Otherwise, if Key or Collins needs Peters to get the Treasury benches, you’ll have to pretend that you love Peters, greatly respect him, albeit begrudgingly, but with pragmatic realism, blah blah…

                I know you have the memory of a goldfish with Korsakov Syndrome, but you will look like a fool.

                Keep your options open old boy.

                But for God’s sake, don’t ever try to pretend that you have principles. That just makes us laugh.

            • McFlock 3.3.1.1.1.2
              30 May 2013 at 1:32 pm

              lol. So much for your political predictions.

    • Tigger 3.4
      25 May 2013 at 10:25 am

      I have a theory that Matthew H is a Tory apologist douchebag. There is no link because the evidence is in the post above where he tries to tie Shearer to Peters’ racist statements.

      • paul andersen 3.4.1
        25 May 2013 at 10:41 am

        you are being unfair to douchbags, they are useful.

      • Matthew Hooton 3.4.2
        25 May 2013 at 5:03 pm

        I do not link Shearer to Peters’ Friday speech at all. My NBR column was written on Wednesday night, sent at 8am Thursday and published in Friday’s paper, all before Peters gave his speech. You might be better addressing the content rather than making things up.

        • Pascal's bookie 3.4.2.1
          25 May 2013 at 5:12 pm

          Rightio, justify the claim about the Greens being communists then.

        • Pascal's bookie 3.4.2.2
          25 May 2013 at 5:12 pm

          Rightio, justify the claim about the Greens being communists then.

        • Murray Olsen 3.4.2.3
          25 May 2013 at 8:47 pm

          Did you write Winnie’s speech too?

        • Rhinocrates 3.4.2.4
          25 May 2013 at 8:54 pm

          Hooton trying to imply that someone else is a racist opportunist? Is that the pot saying that the carbonaceous chrondite has a low albedo?

          “As a general rule” Maori are “stupid” and “useless” Hoots says, and he’ll “stand by that”.

          Oh yeah, a great champion in the fight against racism is Hoots!

          • Matthew Hooton 3.4.2.4.1
            26 May 2013 at 7:37 am

            I am sure you know I have never said any such thing.

            • Rhinocrates 3.4.2.4.1.1
              26 May 2013 at 8:19 am

              You know perfectly well that you have explicitly linked the “uselessness” and “stupidity” of people with their race – specifically Maori race – on National radio. On this blog, you have said that is a “general rule” and you “stand by it”. You are a liar and a racist.

              • Matthew Hooton …
                26 May 2013 at 9:30 am

                No, what I said was that the Maori Party and to a lesser extent the Mana Party had attracted the talented, dynamic Maori activists leaving the losers in Labour. That’s not tying anyone’s competence to their race but to their party affiliation. It was unfair to Louisa Wall but hardly racist.

                As for the Kahui comment below, it’s you who says it links Labour to Maori and crime. It doesn’t, it just says that the party of Phillip Field, Chris Carter and the EFA doing “ethical training” was as oxymoronic as Chris Kahui running a parenting course. And that’s true.

                BTW, you seem to have an unhealthy obsession with me. There are people you can talk to about that sort of disorder.

                • Rhinocrates …
                  26 May 2013 at 10:04 am

                  Dog whistle, followed by weasel words, Hoots.

                  Do you lie so much that you’ve forgotten what species you are?

                  Oh a mental health joke right after a racial joke. Charming. Just the sort of slime I’d expect of course.

                  I think that racists an liars are a social poison and must be challenged at every point, especially when they try to repeat and justify their lies.

                  Ever hear of Martin Niemöller?

            • Rhinocrates 3.4.2.4.1.2
              26 May 2013 at 8:31 am

              …. and then there’s this, comedian:

              “Ethical counselling from the Labour Party is like a parenting course from the Kahui family”

              http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2006/07/quote_of_the_week_2.html

              The Penguin loved that dog whistle, linking Maori, criminality and Labour in one go.

        • Rhinocrates 3.4.2.5
          25 May 2013 at 9:32 pm

          might be better addressing the content rather than making things up

          Oh yeah, ’cause you never, ever, cross my heart and hope to die do that, do you Hoots?

          Are you offended?

      • Rhinocrates 3.4.3
        25 May 2013 at 9:12 pm

        It’s not a theory. Even Whalecum feels justified in calling Hoots a “corporate whore.” I’d say that for once he’s right, but that would be seriously denigrating to sex workers.

    • r0b 3.5
      25 May 2013 at 11:15 am

      I have seen suggests about two-thirds of those planning to vote National in 2014 would consider not voting or voting for someone else if they thought Key was going to do a deal with Peters.

      Interesting and difficult question to phrase for a poll.

      Of course, it wouldn’t be anything like two-thirds that actually didn’t vote or changed their vote, but even if it were only a percentage or two,

      Don’t worry, there would probably be a similar percentage of Labour voters doing the same, and it will all balance out in the wash.

    • ghostrider888 3.6
      25 May 2013 at 3:11 pm

      Peters cannot even string coherent sentences together without inserting unsuitable, disproportionate words.

      • Matthew Hooton 3.7.1
        26 May 2013 at 7:29 am

        Yes, especially after the big shift in support to National since the Budget, but it is extremely close, and I wouldn’t rule out Labour/NZ First either as I point out in the NBR article.

    • Olwyn 3.8
      26 May 2013 at 2:00 pm

      Matthew, when I read other people on this blog, I am usually confident that I am looking at what that person thinks. When I read you, I suspect I am looking at whatever you are currently running up the flag pole. Which is this case looks to be something like a grand coalition between National and Labour, made in the name of keeping the riff-raff out, or at least a political scenario that might just as well be one. Who are these “wise heads” in Labour that are so concerned about the loony excesses of the Greens? And if they are on the same page as you with regard to such matters what are they doing in the Labour Party in the first place?

  4. vto 4
    25 May 2013 at 8:53 am

    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

    This is so not a surprise in our land festooned with racism. What on earth do people expect? Our islands are riddled with racist people and policies all over and all through the land.

    It includes all parts of the political spectrum.

    It is the most goon-headed subject of all. There is no clarity, there is no consistency, there is only subjective and selfish evaluation and consideration.

    It is all fucked up.

  5. muzza 5
    25 May 2013 at 9:21 am

    The obvious facts are, that Central Auckland is being turned into a gambling whoring center, while the mayor is trying to hype *Worlds Most Livable City*, it just does not add up! – Note, the mayor has no actual influence to prevent what is going on, even if he cared to!

    One of the longest standing police units in AKL, is the Asian Crime Unit, its been in action for decades. As someone who has direct links into Auckland’s Asian communities, I can tell you first hand that its very much a mixed bag, not unlike any other community, you get all types, but with a heavy overhang of very smart, very connected organized *interests*, and they’re into everything, not unlike other groups.

    I can also tell you that the vast majority of the Asian communities, do not see themselves as NZ’ers, and have little interest in functioning outside their own groups, again not entirely unlike any other immigrants.

    The fascinating thing which is common among the various nationalities of Asians I’m involved with, is a universal dislike for the Chinese, many of the Asian groups I interact with, simply have a weary attitude towards them, right or wrong, that is the sentiment, and its not new, or happened since they came to NZ!

    A theme which repeats when I ask around, revolves around the the Chinese having little to no respect for the environment, their host, or even their fellow Chinese, and the word *dirty* is commonly used when referring to Chinese (again , these are Asians talking about other Asians) . Chinese, it seems genuinely do not give a toss, for anything other than themselves, and money, again, not too dissimilar to other sectors of what passes for, society!

    The door has been opened, our immigration policies deliberately set to ensure that NZ is unable to maintain any identity, which is a long standing issue in any case, what with colonization by the English etc in any case. Multi culturalism, brings many wonderful aspects into cities etc, but it also brings problems, and these appear to be conveniently left out of most discussions, while people debate *where the comments racist or not*, and other such juvenile angles!

    Auckland is already a borderline shithole in many respects, its destined to become much worse, it very easy to see the direction, because its not changed in almost 3 decades, which became even more clear after of a decade of living abroad, returning to AKL to notice the decline, mostly through the lack of any obvious improvement! With the

    Winston is right, he has always been right, whether altruistically, or as a protagonist, his comments stand, he should however, target a wider audience, instead of targeting a singly nationality!

    • weka 5.1
      25 May 2013 at 9:56 am

      My interactions with Chinese immigrants has been through learning tai chi etc, and my experiences have been overwhelmingly positive. Maybe it’s not the Chinese that are the problem, but the immigration criteria ie we’re allowing the wrong kind of immigration. This is probably true of much of our immigration policy, but it would be interesting to see a break down of the different kinds of visas people from various countries are getting, and how many nationalities getting residency are getting it via which immigration policy.

      On my more cynical days I do tend to agree that immigration policy is designed to undermine identity (or at the least is a desirable side effect from the policy designers). The idea that any and all immigration is good (esp where that is a reaction against people like Peters) completely denies the reality of the complexity of culture and ethnicity, what happens when you mix them, and NZ’s particular issues around that (esp our relative geographical isolation, and the fact that we still haven’t got to grips with the Treaty of Waitangi yet).

      • KJT 5.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 10:34 am

        Agree

        Too much immigration is allowed because shonky employers are allowed to go bleating to the immigration department, whenever their lack of training programs, refusal to pay competitive wages and trying to screw their staff instead of working on a more efficient business, begins to bite.

        I suspect the reason why the usual suspects are so keen on more immigration, is that it keeps the prices of their speculative assets rising.

        If I wanted to live in a city of high rise slums, millions of impoverished, underpaid people, few amenities and dodgy infrastructure, there a plenty I can move to.

        Don’t need to turn Auckland into a copy.

      • One Anonymous Knucklehead 5.1.2
        25 May 2013 at 10:42 am

        Maybe it’s neither the immigrants nor the immigration criteria. Maybe the racists are the problem.

        If Auckland is a worse place look to Roger Douglas, not the yellow peril.

        • r0b 5.1.2.1
          25 May 2013 at 11:16 am

          If Auckland is a worse place look to Roger Douglas, not the yellow peril.

          Exactly.

          • KJT 5.1.2.1.1
            25 May 2013 at 11:24 am

            Agreed on Roger Douglas, but our present immigration policies, which are designed to benefit the same people as most of Douglas’ policies, are part of the Douglas legacy also.

            Do you think the Chinese are racist investing in their own country and people, refusing to let foreigners own land and restricting immigration?

            Their Government is looking after their own people, as they should. It is a pity our Government looks first at whatever gains more wealth for their party funders.

            As far as immigration goes I would rather we used our immigration policy to be a decent world citizen, and rescue some more refugees from concentration camps, instead of selling citizenship to the highest bidder.

            • r0b 5.1.2.1.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 11:39 am

              Do you think the Chinese are racist investing in their own country and people, refusing to let foreigners own land and restricting immigration?

              No, not if they are not selecting / picking on any particular racial group.

              It is a pity our Government looks first at whatever gains more wealth for their party funders.

              Yes.

          • ghostrider888 5.1.2.1.2
            25 May 2013 at 3:17 pm

            yes, and yes, to r0b.

    • ghostrider888 5.2
      25 May 2013 at 3:16 pm

      Paras, 1, 2, some of 3, 6 and 7, imo, muzza.

  6. Jane 6
    25 May 2013 at 10:03 am

    Why is there such a drive to increase the population? Always wondered why Auckland’s population is expected to increase by a million by 20 whatever… seems a ok sort of place now why pile more people in?

    • KJT 6.1
      25 May 2013 at 10:36 am

      Because immigration and population increase make developers, rentiers and speculators, NACT voters, rich!

      • Colonial Viper 6.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 12:10 pm

        Also increasing population is one of the strongest and most reliable drivers of economic growth (of which the property side of things you mention is one aspect).

        The converse relationship is that stagnant or falling populations will tend to reinforce and worsen stagnant or declining economies.

        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 6.1.1.1
          25 May 2013 at 12:26 pm

          increasing population is one of the strongest and most reliable drivers of economic growth

          So, given appropriate employment laws, immigration should have no effect on wage rates?

          • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1.1
            25 May 2013 at 12:48 pm

            I prefer a combination of tight labour pool and strong employment laws. If the excess labour pool grows too large with too many people willing to work (and employ) for less than minimum wage, you get the California sitiuation.

            • One Anonymous Knucklehead 6.1.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 12:58 pm

              Yeah, we should take care not to develop a land border with Mexico.

          • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.1.2
            25 May 2013 at 1:29 pm

            That would be true if everything balanced perfectly. Unfortunately, it doesn’t and other factors such as productivity increases also need to be taken into account.

          • ghostrider888 6.1.1.1.3
            25 May 2013 at 3:19 pm

            what “appropriate employment laws”? 😉

            • One Anonymous Knucklehead 6.1.1.1.3.1
              25 May 2013 at 3:25 pm

              For this country over the last thirty years, what Chomsky said about Capitalism: “Show me some!”

        • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.2
          25 May 2013 at 1:25 pm

          Also increasing population is one of the strongest and most reliable drivers of economic growth

          Actually, it’s the only driver of economic growth. If population stayed the same then all those productivity increases that we’ve seen would have caused huge deflation and unemployment. In fact, if we didn’t export so much (an effective artificial increase in population) we’d be looking at much worse unemployment now.

          • KJT 6.1.1.2.1
            25 May 2013 at 1:34 pm

            Which is why we need to change our economic paradigm.

            To one that works without constant growth, constant increase in resource use, and constant need for people to find ever more creative ways of ripping off their fellow human beings.

            A workable steady state economy.

            Which means one that does not depend on population growth.

            The fact is we can now produce all that we need and a fair proportion of things we do not without full employment.

            Which makes the push for a later retirement age and the opposition to a guaranteed income, by those who should know better, even more baffling.

            Don’t see why reducing trade necessarily results in less employment however. Our two way trade in real goods and services is slightly in surplus. meaning it is just about neutral. less imports would mean substituting many jobs offshore with jobs in NZ.

            • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.2.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 2:02 pm

              less imports would mean substituting many jobs offshore with jobs in NZ.

              But not necessarily the same amount of jobs. Considering that a lot of what we export is labour intensive compared to what we import I suspect that the substitution would result in less jobs.

              • KJT …
                25 May 2013 at 3:56 pm

                I don’t think that is necessarily true..

                It seems to me that it is the more Labour intensive! jobs are the ones that are now done by cheap Labour in China and Bangladesh.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  25 May 2013 at 4:06 pm

                  That’s right, there’s no point outsourcing non-labour intensive jobs to a country with cheap workers.

                  The issue however is with automation and mechanisation – fewer and fewer workers are needed to make the same amount of product these days. Even Foxconn is replacing Chinese iPad assembly line workers with robots.

                  Here’s a simple reality: we need an economy which has a focus on giving people worthwhile roles in society and not on creating profit.

  7. Observer Tokoroa 7
    25 May 2013 at 10:10 am

    ANTHONY ROBINS

    It pleases you very deeply that foreigners come to New Zealand and put up buildings. Unlike the man you despise Winston Peters, you have no intention of giving stock standard real work to Kiwis. In your case, you want Asians to do it. Okay.

    However, it is not racist for others to want New Zealanders to do it. I wonder who has brain washed you into thinking it is?

    There are many relatively simple tasks that Aucklanders already hand over to foreigners. Parking is one of them. Squillions of easy dollars flip home across the water to Asia, just from parking.

    Auckland Bankers are foreigners too. Billions of Kiwi dollars are sent to Australian owners every year simply because the business of banking is thought to be beyond Kiwis.

    Even the grocery business – has been shovelled off. Auckland is STUNNING at handing off sources of wealth to foreigners Anthony.

    The current government is in the serious business of selling off land to nationalities which refuse to sell their own land to any outsider. China prominent among them.. You must be very happy with this NZ policy. It is your right to be happy. But the big majority of New Zealanders think your policy stinks. They find it revolting to be honest. Nasty like your headline language.

    Mr Peters does too.

    You dislike him because he is a politician who wants the chance to put New Zealanders first. It is an idea that will be new to you. It will be a shock to you. I am sorry if your Hong Kong friends miss out on building your brothel. It is just that Kiwis need the work. And Kiwis actually live here and have their families here.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 7.1
      25 May 2013 at 10:34 am

      Most recent studies of racism link it to low intelligence, and point out that many of its victims lack the cognitive ability to recognise their own failings.

      In these circumstances it is likely that emotional appeals will have more resonance, and therefore be more effective, than rational arguments.

      • KJT 7.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 10:56 am

        Most recent studies of Neo- liberalism link it to low intelligence, and point out that many of its proponents lack the cognitive ability to recognise its failings.

        Fixed it for you.

        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 7.1.1.1
          25 May 2013 at 11:48 am

          Yeah, nah.

          Despite their important implications for interpersonal behaviors and relations, cognitive abilities have been largely ignored as explanations of prejudice. We proposed and tested mediation models in which lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice, an effect mediated through the endorsement of right-wing ideologies (social conservatism, right-wing authoritarianism) and low levels of contact with out-groups. In an analysis of two large-scale, nationally representative United Kingdom data sets (N = 15,874), we found that lower general intelligence (g) in childhood predicts greater racism in adulthood, and this effect was largely mediated via conservative ideology. A secondary analysis of a U.S. data set confirmed a predictive effect of poor abstract-reasoning skills on antihomosexual prejudice, a relation partially mediated by both authoritarianism and low levels of intergroup contact. All analyses controlled for education and socioeconomic status. Our results suggest that cognitive abilities play a critical, albeit underappreciated, role in prejudice. Consequently, we recommend a heightened focus on cognitive ability in research on prejudice and a better integration of cognitive ability into prejudice models.

          • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.1.1
            25 May 2013 at 12:12 pm

            Yeah that may hold true, however it is interesting to note that those found guilty and executed/imprisoned at the Nuremberg trials were all found to have above average IQ, sometimes significantly above average.

            • One Anonymous Knucklehead 7.1.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 12:17 pm

              That doesn’t mean some racists are intelligent, it means the Milgram experiment has supporting material.

            • Draco T Bastard 7.1.1.1.1.2
              25 May 2013 at 1:31 pm

              Psychopaths often have a higher than normal IQ.

      • ghostrider888 7.1.2
        25 May 2013 at 3:23 pm

        Love ya work OAK, that FIFT!

    • prism 7.2
      25 May 2013 at 10:50 am

      Observer Tokoroa
      You have been observing haven’t you. And it’s a bit of a jigsaw. And you have put multi positioned pieces in the wrong places. So you will never get the real picture of what is going on and why and how we can make as a nation enough money to pay out your, and my, and all the other pensions.

      We feel just as concerned as you are. But there aren’t easy answers, and when Winston states things firmly in his unique way, he is interesting to listen to but cannot provide any solutions. Not without causing more problems. We have to live in the world as it is, not just what would suit us.
      You no doubt have heard that Stockholm has had riots of young unemployed men from the poorer areas of the city.

      This is reality today, our economy hollowed out by our own government opening our borders and giving away all our valuable policies such as tariff protections that enabled us to function well. Can you think how we can protect against this happening again with TPP? Have you written to John Key to tell him of your concerns about everything being owned by overseas landlords and large corporates sucking profit overseas, often to Australia. Because he and the Roger Douglas battalion have been active in this dismantling of our country’s enterprise and resources.

      • Observer Tokoroa 7.2.1
        25 May 2013 at 11:52 am

        Prism

        I do not think we are talking complex things.

        We are discussing whether people who have New Zealand nationality and good education, have the right to work in their own land.

        It is a shame to see some deep feeling guy (A Robins) wringing his hands over the possible prospect of Kiwis building his brothel in Auckland – and not imported labour from Hong Kong.

        Leaving aside whether foreign banks may dictate who does the work, the question is: why is it racisct for a person to suggest kiwis should build it?

        Or does NZ have the unique obligation to provide all the employment and wealth for everyone in the world – except its own citizens. ? I am sorry if this seems complex.

        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 7.2.1.1
          25 May 2013 at 12:00 pm

          It isn’t complex: it’s the product of a below-average intelligence.

          • Colonial Viper 7.2.1.1.1
            25 May 2013 at 12:13 pm

            Which Winston is not.

            • One Anonymous Knucklehead 7.2.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 12:19 pm

              Mr. Peters displays extreme cynicism.

              • Colonial Viper …
                25 May 2013 at 12:25 pm

                Yes he does. And he plays the corners pretty hard.

                • Rhinocrates …
                  25 May 2013 at 9:04 pm

                  There are people who like to confuse cynicism or machismo with intelligence, or, as they like to say “realism”.

                  I wouldn’t even want to confuse low cunning with real intelligence – it’s very narrow, very inflexible. It’s very good at exploiting a limited niche as long as it is allowed to endure, but that’s all. I don’t know why Hoots affects to hate Peters – they’re so much alike, really.

        • prism 7.2.1.2
          25 May 2013 at 12:13 pm

          OTokoroa
          If you were really interested in the matters you are discussing you would have read how The Standard commenters support NZ employment. I don’t know why you criticise here. Go onto the NACT site and give them a rark up there. They sorely need one.

    • r0b 7.3
      25 May 2013 at 11:23 am

      Observer Tokoroa

      Kindly do not presume to put words into my mouth.

      It pleases you very deeply that foreigners come to New Zealand and put up buildings.

      Not really no, but it doesn’t bother me either.

      Unlike the man you despise Winston Peters,

      I don’t despise Winston Peters, he isn’t worth getting worked up about. If it wasn’t him, it would be somebody else representing the same views.

      you have no intention of giving stock standard real work to Kiwis. In your case, you want Asians to do it. Okay.

      And on you go with further irrational ranting. Bye bye.

      • Draco T Bastard 7.3.1
        25 May 2013 at 1:40 pm

        Not really no, but it doesn’t bother me either.

        From some of the stories I’ve heard it should do.

        • r0b 7.3.1.1
          25 May 2013 at 1:50 pm

          I don’t know much about it DTB, likely my opinion would shift one way or the other if I learned more.

  8. One Anonymous Knucklehead 8
    25 May 2013 at 10:26 am

    Thirty years of market fundamentalism but it’s immigrants ruining the country. Have a Tui.

    • KJT 8.1
      25 May 2013 at 10:38 am

      Our present immigration policy is part of market
      fundamentalism.

      The threat is held over New Zealanders. “Work for the miserly wages and conditions we offer or we will bring in more cheap labour”.

      It is used as a way of bypassing the effects of supply and demand from the New Zealand market.

      • One Anonymous Knucklehead 8.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 10:43 am

        Says who?

        • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1
          25 May 2013 at 5:23 pm

          It’s not said out loud, but it is mouthed every time a Fisher & Paykel relocates to China or Mexico

          • One Anonymous Knucklehead 8.1.1.1.1
            25 May 2013 at 5:57 pm

            Which means that immigration policy is ruining Auckland?

            • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 6:11 pm

              do you actually have any idea of the calculus used in the private sector to minimise wages paid to labour???

              Your preoccupation with “employment law is all that is needed to fix things up” is naive as it is simplistic.

              It’s the hallmark of someone with a narrow focus on one aspect of a single sector of a battle and is not willing, or able, to give a damn about what is happening on the rest of the front.

              No more unskilled or low skilled economic immigrants if they do not meet a strategic NZ need that we cannot fulfil ourselves, OK, is that so hard to understand?

              As for Auckland. Good luck to all you Aucklanders, 2M people by 2030, should be a ball.

              • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                25 May 2013 at 6:23 pm

                Oh, so our existing immigration laws, with their strict rules around work visas and economic migration, are all good then?

                Because so far you’ve produced no evidence that any of your so called problems actually exist, especially with regard to the alleged problems in Auckland. Nor have you said which rules you’d change.

                It’s the hallmark of someone who’s full of shit, and so is your feeble attempt to change the subject onto fuckwit assertions about me.

                Now, if you’re with Peters, and you think that there are too many “Asians” in Auckland, then have the guts to say so instead of this mealy mouthed bullshit.

              • infused …
                25 May 2013 at 10:48 pm

                CV and knucklehead going at it. I would have never guessed.

                CV has this one.

  9. KJT 9
    25 May 2013 at 10:52 am

    It is blatantly obvious.

    My own trade is one of the ones where we are considered to have a skills shortage.

    We do not. We have a shortage of people who are willing to work for the extremely poor pay and conditions, considering the level of skills and training required.

    And Employers have not trained any New Zealanders for decades, knowing they can rely on immigration policy.

    They are now screaming blue murder, because it is now biting them on the bum, as even immigrants from the third world, now only work here as a stepping stone to Australia, or Singapore, where pay is a lot better.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 9.1
      25 May 2013 at 11:35 am

      The only thing “blatantly obvious” is your bias.
      \
      Thirty years of wages and conditions being driven down by deliberate government policy to weaken collective bargaining and it’s all the immigrants’ fault.

      Feeble.

      • KJT 9.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 11:41 am

        Fuck off.

        I never said it was. I said it is one of the tools employers use to drive down wages.

        Employers would not have been able to ignore all of the skilled people going to Australia if it wasn’t for immigration policy.

        Those who make the policies fault. Nothing to do with individual immigrants, or their ethnicity.

        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 9.1.1.1
          25 May 2013 at 11:43 am

          The issue is employment law then. So why are you bringing immigration policy into it?

          • KJT 9.1.1.1.1
            25 May 2013 at 11:45 am

            Try reading and comprehending!

            Without immigration, the neo-liberals would never have got away with the attack on workers rights.

            They would have been left with no workers!

            • One Anonymous Knucklehead 9.1.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 11:51 am

              So the problem is the attack on workers.

              Not the immigration. Without the attack on workers the immigrants would have joined a union.

              • Colonial Viper …
                25 May 2013 at 11:59 am

                No no no

                you can’t think of this in linear terms

                the Neolibs used every tool and every front at their disposal, simultaneously. Attacks on unions, ensuring supplies of workers into the labour pool vastly expanded, etc.

                While the Left got left behind, gobsmacked (as it were) trying to work out what the principled way to respond was. Result – encirclement by the right wingers and subsequent crushing. The Left being too often disorganised, confused and badly led, well what’s changed.

                Didn’t help that Ken Douglas and a bunch of his cohorts were spineless sell outs. And that no one had the guts to call a General Strike against a Labour Government.

                • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                  25 May 2013 at 12:04 pm

                  If your theory is correct, Auckland wages should be lower than the rest of the country. Shall we check, or do you concede the point?

                  Without the shitty labour laws you’ve got nothing. Fix the shitty labour laws.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    25 May 2013 at 12:16 pm

                    Come on OAK, you’re better than this. Don’t think you are, know you are.

                    If your theory is correct, Auckland wages in relation to cost of living should be worse than the rest of the country. Shall we check, or do you concede the point?

                    Perhaps it is you who should now conceed?

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 12:22 pm

                      Explain what changes you would make to immigration policy to address this problem of (according to you) low wages.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 12:31 pm

                      immigration policy has to be strongly linked to the strategic needs of this country in terms of demographic needs, skill shortages and long term financial capital. The policy needs to fully consistent and supportive of a national industrial and technology policy.

                      Low and medium/low skilled workers should not be welcomed into NZ as workers as our own young people can fill those gaps.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 12:49 pm

                      Explain what changes you would make to immigration policy as it relates to low-skilled workers.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 12:52 pm

                      I dunno you wanna give me a team of policy analysts and 3 months to get back to you?

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 1:56 pm

                      You didn’t need them to “identify” the problem. Funny that.

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:33 pm

                      ahhh, this can go here!

                      -The primary thing when you take a sword in your hand is to cut the ‘enemy’, whatever the means.Whenever you parry, hit, spring or strike or touch the ‘enemy’s’ cutting sword, you must cut the ‘enemy’ in the same movement.

                      -Miyamoto Musashi.

                      Tadah! 😀

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:39 pm

                      “He hit me, so I hit him first.”

                      Trad wushu aphorism 🙂

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:48 pm

                      “Hit me with you rhythm stick, hit me hard, hit me quick.”
                      (wonder who has got the ‘balls’ to stem the Asian immigration tide, certainly will not be any party on the third-way-neoliberal ends of the economic spectrum, not with all that PROFIT to be made).

                      ahhh, Demographics, don’t ya just love numbers.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 5:37 pm

                      Gr888: 🙂

  10. gobsmacked 10
    25 May 2013 at 11:20 am

    Targeting one ethnic group = racism. Simple as that.

    Peters could raise a bunch of legitimate issues (house prices, Sky City, skill shortages etc) by attacking the government. But that doesn’t make a big enough headline. So he pushes prejudice for easy headlines, and votes.

    Thousands of New Zealanders (sic) are feeling more uncomfortable in their country this morning, when they have done nothing wrong except be who they are. Winston Peters does not speak for me, and nor do his apologists.

    • KJT 10.1
      25 May 2013 at 11:27 am

      Targeting one group is racism.

      Objecting to the pandering to the wealthy and dysfunctional employers, aspects of our immigration policy, IS NOT.

      Why do some people shut down, anyone who finds our present immigration policy does not work for New Zealanders, with screams of racism and xenophobia.

      Why are they so scared of rational discussion on the subject.

      Peters is wrong in several counts.
      .We should not be bringing in skilled people, we should be training New Zealand kids.
      And. The Chinese are not the problem. Our immigration policy is!

      • KJT 10.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 11:37 am

        25 thousand unemployed kids in Northland.

        So we bring in unskilled labour from overseas to rebuild Christchurch.

        Doesn’t make sense.

      • One Anonymous Knucklehead 10.1.2
        25 May 2013 at 11:42 am

        It’s because blindingly obvious that the problems you ascribe to immigration are manifestly home-made, of the Rogernomic variety.

        It’s laughable that you blame immigration policy for problems caused by employment law.

        • KJT 10.1.2.1
          25 May 2013 at 11:42 am

          See above.

          • One Anonymous Knucklehead 10.1.2.1.1
            25 May 2013 at 11:53 am

            Where you failed to support your assertion that immigration policy is the problem and tried to build circular arguments that fell over?

            • KJT 10.1.2.1.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 1:28 pm

              I think I explained my position perfectly well.

              Not my fault if you cannot comprehend something that is not black and white.

              • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                25 May 2013 at 1:53 pm

                I comprehend your position perfectly well: the problem is due to the influx of British immigrants in the 1950s and ’60s, to keep wages low, and that Winston Peters is playing on the unease this causes.

                That is your position, isn’t it? As per your first comment?

                I recall how wages fell dramatically in the 50s and 60s as a result.

                • KJT …
                  25 May 2013 at 3:44 pm

                  Immigration in the 50’s was part of an attack on workers rights also.

                  Of course, if you have forgotten what happened in 1951?

                  • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                    25 May 2013 at 5:39 pm

                    Right, so let me see if I can get this straight. The response to the waterfront dispute was to bring in a “…huge wave of English immigrants in the 50′s and 60′s, who brought their dysfunctional adversarial industrial relations system…”

                    Your “arguments” just had a head-on collision. Own goal. Oops.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    25 May 2013 at 5:41 pm

                    I dont know why its so difficult to understand. Globalisation in all its many forms has been used to advantage capital and disadvantage labour. That’s obvious. Have some formerly 3rd world labourers been made better off? Yes. But the cream has been skimmed off by the normal players. And workers in first world countries have suffered significant wave deflation as a result.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 5:43 pm

                      So now the problem is “free” trade, not immigration policy?

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      25 May 2013 at 5:50 pm

                      The important thing in strategy is to suppress the ‘enemy’s useful actions, but allow his useless actions.

                      -and that would be…Miyamoto Musashi, again. 😀

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 6:14 pm

                      gr888…now you’re talking…some days you have to ask yourself which category commenting on the Standard falls into…

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      25 May 2013 at 6:23 pm

                      well, I like to s p r e a d the word. Somethings gotta rub off. WE ‘know’ these things.

        • prism 10.1.2.2
          25 May 2013 at 12:33 pm

          OAK
          You seem determined to stick with a biased opinion and then confrontationally face everyone to protect it. There is a window of opportunity showing sun threough it in our area before a possible week’s bad weather why don’t you get some fresh air. You’re getting cabin fever.

          • One Anonymous Knucklehead 10.1.2.2.1
            25 May 2013 at 12:44 pm

            I asked for supporting material and been told “it’s obvious”.

            I’ve heard a confused melange of so-called “arguments” that contradict one another – “immigration drives wages down and encourages economic growth”, for example.

            Nothing so far to shake my confidence in the finding that low IQ predicts for prejudice.

            But if you’ve got some rational argument as to why immigration, rather than Rogernomics, is at the root of Auckland’s woes I’m all ears.

            • Draco T Bastard 10.1.2.2.1.1
              25 May 2013 at 1:46 pm

              The immigration policy is part of the Rogernomics attack on workers.

              • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                25 May 2013 at 1:55 pm

                No, KJT says it started in the 1950s. Rogernomics dates from much later than that.

              • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                25 May 2013 at 2:01 pm

                Oh. and it’s funny, but there’s extensive analysis on Rogernomics online, but I can’t find any reference to the changes they made to immigration law.

                It’s almost as though you just now pulled that out of thin air. You can recall the changes made to immigration law by the fourth Labour government, can’t you?

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  25 May 2013 at 2:17 pm

                  IIRC, they loosened up immigration from what it was previously allowing more people into the country. One change that has happened, although not specifically 1980s, is the loosening up of seasonal work visas, something that never used to exist and it happened because the fruit growers couldn’t find people to do the work for the amount that they wished to pay. It also appears that imported workers are easier to abuse.

                  • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                    25 May 2013 at 2:41 pm

                    Changes to immigration law occurred in 1987, 1991, 2003 and 2007.

                    You will struggle to show any correlation between these changes and income or employment levels, let alone causation.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 2:53 pm

                      It’s almost as if you think that having massive increases in the available labour pool, and capitalists having access to cheaper and more compliant sources of labour, is not an important factor.

                      BTW sometimes it takes years for these changes to have their full effects through society. I wouldn’t be surprised if thousands of sub-minimum wage foreign workers have effectively displaced NZers from farms and orchards all around the country.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 2:55 pm

                      Its almost as though you don’t recognise how the 2007 record employment rate blows your hypothesis out of the water.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:08 pm

                      One other factor which is a major driver (perhaps even THE major driver) in employment rate change, as identified by Steve Keen, is acceleration in debt levels.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:09 pm

                      Right, so not 1950s, 60s or even 80s immigration policy, then.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:18 pm

                      PS: you’re in the same position as those wingnuts who claim that increasing the minimum wage causes unemployment: convinced of something but unable to produce any supporting evidence, and the evidence there is suggests no linkage.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:39 pm

                      Nah I’m just more familiar with right wing economic strategies than you are, and how the Left has let rings get run around it.

                      PS: you’re in the same position as those wingnuts who claim that increasing the minimum wage causes unemployment:

                      It makes the employment case for marginal businesses less viable under certain circumstances. In some sectors of the economy there will be an offset as more money enters communities, but in some others this effect will be less.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:42 pm

                      Then you’ll have no trouble producing the supporting material that shows how immigration causes unemployment and lower wages.

                      Yes, it’s time for you to produce the facts, not your opinions of what must be true.

                    • KJT …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:50 pm

                      FFS OAK.

                      Their is a direct cause and effect in my present job between the availability of immigrants, due to it being declared a job where employers can bring in skilled immigrants as of right, and the lower wages than Australia, Singapore and India.

                      Are you still trying to claim that, having a much larger labour pool available, of immigrants, does not affect workers negotiating power and hence wage rates.

                      Bullshit!

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      25 May 2013 at 3:52 pm

                      that would be “the lower wages” then?
                      same as the Pacific seasonal workers accepting what the orchardists / vinters and the ‘market’ will pay rather than let the produce rot or rip them out all together; maybe plant some more cows.

                    • KJT …
                      25 May 2013 at 4:11 pm

                      “you’re in the same position as those wingnuts who claim that increasing the minimum wage causes unemployment: convinced of something but unable to produce any supporting evidence, and the evidence there is suggests no linkage.”

                      Actually, OAK, you are in that position.

                      Claiming that immigration policy does not affect wages, and workers negotiating power.

                      When it manifestly does.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 4:40 pm

                      “It manifestly does”

                      Then you will have no problem producing the evidence that it does instead of a load of unsupported anecdotes about what you reckon, which is that British immigration drives wages down, isn’t it?

                      After all, it’s obvious that if they raise the minimum wage I won’t be able to employ as many people and that will cause unemployment, eh.

                      Go on, plenty of countries have immigration. The ones with more immigration should have lower wages and higher unemployment. It won’t be hard for you to verify that unless you’re talking shit.

                      PS: here’s a head start, Borjas 1999, Duleep 2008, Chiswick 1978, McKenzie 2006, Lubotsky 2007; Beenstock et al. 2005.

                      Studies: lots. Support for your faith-based opinions: not so much.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 4:56 pm

                      Fact: immigrants face significant disadvantages in the employment market.
                      Fact: areas with larger numbers of migrants tend to have lower unemployment and higher wages (the immigrants go where the money is).

                      Prejudice is stupid and racism is wrong and both are useless.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 5:45 pm

                      OAK is that fairly common kind of lefty who switches off his own senses and abdicated it to the research evidence. If its not in the research evidence, its because it doesn’t exist QED.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 5:48 pm

                      😆 What does that say about the link between low wages, unemployment and immigration policy?

                      Attack the messenger. That always works 😆

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 6:16 pm

                      Real easy idea, see if you can cotton on to it: no more unskilled or low skilled economic migrants if a NZer can do that job today, or can be rapidly trained up to do that job. Yeah? Now what’s your problem.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 6:29 pm

                      The evidence that the problem you seek to cure exists, and is the pressing problem for the Left on this issue, as opposed to protecting migrant workers from the National Party racism and exploitation.

                    • KJT …
                      25 May 2013 at 6:45 pm

                      So OAK.
                      The immigrant farmworkers on $3 an hour have nothing to do with immigration policy?

                      Nothing in any “references” I have read, including some you mention contradict what I have been saying. Many support it.

                      However. Carry on arguing with yourself!

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      25 May 2013 at 7:12 pm

                      $3 per hour? Citation please.

                      If true, then yes, being flat-out illegal, it has a lot more to do with local employment conditions than immigration policy.

                      PS: think about it – stronger unions, for example, would prevent this sort of worker exploitation since the DoL isn’t up to the task.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      25 May 2013 at 7:26 pm

                      $3 per hour? Citation please.

                      Because without a citation it doesn’t exist? Gimme a break.

                      I definitely know dairy farm workers who are on the equivalent of $8-$9/hr, not sure about $3.

                      Pull your head out of the sand maybe?

                      I support your call for stronger unions and stronger employment law. But I also support an economic immigration policy which helps young NZers find work at the front of the queue.

                    • RedLogix …
                      25 May 2013 at 7:35 pm

                      Or you could address the issues Peters actually raises:

                      An Asian student cheating industry had emerged, a slave trade was running where immigrants were promised jobs and ended up working for nothing, and some tradespeople were concerned about backyard industries springing up that they could not compete with.

                      Or the immigrant workers I saw last year plastering , three stories up on blatantly illegal scaffolding, freezing wet wind … in t-shirts and jandals.

                      And for the most part this exploitation has been imported into this country within the communities involved. The simple non-controversial, non-racist observation is that across Asia values and attitudes are in general very different to those traditional and established here. There is no question that a combination of overpopulation, an over-exploited environment, gross extremes of wealth inequality, a hyper-competitive economic environment and a significantly different religious and cultural heritage plays out quite differently in Asian societies than ours.

                      Of course this general observation cannot be safely projected onto individual Asians. The handful I’ve gotten to know well have all expressed in one form or another that their reason for being here in New Zealand was a desire to escape from exactly these oppressive aspects of this heritage. In particular I know several Asian women (both long-term partners of old friends of mine) explain that while there is no such thing as the perfect man … they hugely enjoy how much easier it is to find a Kiwi guy who will treat them with far less sexism, more respect and equality than they were every likely to find at home.

                      Indeed these are not too dissimilar to the sort of motivations held by many English, Scots and Irish which drove them to risk highly dangerous sailing voyages in the 1800’s, to permanently leave home and all family, and start a wholly new life in this land. But naturally this colonisation process also meant that they inevitably imported a whole baggage compartment of culture and values with them. As the Maori of the era loudly testified to.

                      This process always has consequences that cannot be ignored, or magicked away by playing ‘racism’ card whenever anyone attempts to debate them.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      26 May 2013 at 7:46 am

                      RL: the problems Peters raises: explain how any of them would be addressed by a change in immigration policy.

                    • RedLogix …
                      26 May 2013 at 8:21 am

                      You miss the obvious parallel. IF Maori in the 1800’s had been in a position to implement an immigration policy, as contrasted to being forced to accept the uncontrolled arrival of hundreds of thousands of immigrants …. then quite possibly the whole process of colonisation which subsequently occurred, and the consequences of which we are still grappling with, might well have taken an entirely different path.

                      Whenever an established population is swamped by the rapid arrival of people with very different values and cultures it always has bad consequences. Equally it is undesirable to close the door to new arrivals completely, so for this reason ALL nations have strong immigration policies to control the process.

                      As a nation we’ve lived through an uncontrolled colonisation once already in our short history; we really don’t need to do anything similar all over again.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      26 May 2013 at 9:57 am

                      I’m not missing the parallel, I’m just not convinced there’s any evidence it is happening again, especially in regard to “Asian” (what country is that again) migrants.

                      What is happening is that

                      The ethnic mosaic of New Zealand’s population is changing, with the Mäori, Pacific and Asian ethnic groups making up a growing proportion of the population. This reflects past and likely future differentials in fertility, as well as the impact of growing miscegenation (intermarriage) and changes in immigration policy. Also, the Mäori, Pacific and Asian populations have a more youthful age structure and thus a greater built-in momentum for growth than the European population. Coupled with higher fertility for Mäori and Pacific people, and the assumed net migration levels for Asian people, these ethnic groups are likely to grow at a much faster pace than their European counterparts.

                      Question: when Maori make up the largest ethnic group, will white racists continue their obsession with the Chinese?

                    • RedLogix …
                      26 May 2013 at 11:07 am

                      I’m just not convinced there’s any evidence it is happening again, especially in regard to “Asian”

                      I’m using the word ‘Asian’ in it’s broadest sense; covering the broad sweep of ethnicities from India through to Chinese.

                      In 1840 virtually all the non-Maori in this country were a relatively small handful of American whalers and sealers, missionaries and a scattering of adventurers from all over. A mere 50 years later and people were talking about Maori in terms of “smoothing the pillow of a dying race”.

                      The excellent document you link to presents data that when projected over a similar 50 year period could have a similar outcome. And while Asians are at present around 10% of the population, most of them are concentrated in Auckland where the cultural impact .. as Winston points out … is correspondingly greater. Projected over a mere 20-30 years at the current rates of immigration and Auckland will be an almost entirely Asian city.

                      Because winning seats in Auckland is vital to being in government, the pressure to open up immigration even further will become inevitable. This would all be well and good if this is were we want to go as a nation.

                      But can you imagine the Chinese tolerating (proportionately speaking) say 150m Europeans migrating into Beijing … and demanding say … democratic government? Or insisting of the right to form unions, or freedom of religion?

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      26 May 2013 at 12:28 pm

                      I note you failed to even acknowledge, let alone address the issue of Pakeha becoming a minority behind tangata whenua, in favour of a fixation on Chinese.

                      My thesis is that racists will have far more of a problem with that than Chinese becoming a slightly enlarged minority, no matter how hard you blow that dog-whistle.

                      Who gives a shit what the criminal Chinese government would do? Are they supposed to be some sort of benchmark now?

                    • RedLogix …
                      26 May 2013 at 2:26 pm

                      I note you failed to even acknowledge, let alone address the issue of Pakeha becoming a minority behind tangata whenua, in favour of a fixation on Chinese.

                      I didn’t bother addressing it because you had already answered the question. Maori and European are perhaps some of the most intermarried populations on Earth. My family has been here since 1832 and I’m one myself.

                      We’ve had a 160 odd years to get used to each other and within another couple of generations the difference between European and Maori/Pacifica will become pretty academic. Even so it will have been a bumpy ride. Colonisation is like that.

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      26 May 2013 at 2:50 pm

                      So, what are we left with?

                      Ethnic tests for new immigrants? Racial quotas?

                      Or, as I prefer, would it be better to address issues such as worker exploitation and prejudice against minorities, before deciding that the migrants are the problem?

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      26 May 2013 at 2:59 pm

                      A valuable contribution by RL is the concept of another ‘colonisation’ underway, and the appeal to that demographic by the politicians.(and OAK’s reiteration that the future is ‘brown’).

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      26 May 2013 at 3:30 pm

                      It’s drawing a long bow to describe the arrival of migrants as ‘colonisation’. Especially given the effect the actual colonisation of Aotearoa New Zealand had upon its inhabitants.

                      Nor has anyone explained why a large migrant population is a bad thing, except to point to abuses of workers’ rights, which we have the tools to address irrespective of immigration policy.

                      The specific ethnicity of the migrants seems to be the most pressing concern, people cite human rights abuses in particular countries as though race were a determining factor in such crimes.

                      It’s always fascinating to witness white privilege bemoaning denial of democracy and human rights abuses, especially accompanied by the assurance that “they” are more prone to it than “we” are. Gentle reader, human rights abuses, corruption, and denial of democracy are equal opportunity offences. Daniel Francois Malan meet Pol Pot meet Augusto Pinochet meet Idi Amin. George W is trying to make eye contact with Indira Ghandi.

                    • Populuxe1 …
                      26 May 2013 at 10:41 pm

                      CV: “OAK is that fairly common kind of lefty who switches off his own senses and abdicated it to the research evidence. If its not in the research evidence, its because it doesn’t exist QED.”

                      Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Bwahahahahahah *snort* hahahahahah *guffaw* Ouch, my spleen. Hahahahahahahahahahaha. Roll on the flat earth, the geocentric universe, and Creationism. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Fuck that’s funny. Ahahahhahahahahahahahahahah

                      Bad bad lefty for relying on objective studies and not your pitiful, weak human senses, assumptions and prejudices hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      26 May 2013 at 10:55 pm

                      So how is your scientifically rational and statistically objective world working out for you mate?

                    • Populuxe1 …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:02 am

                      “So how is your scientifically rational and statistically objective world working out for you mate?”

                      More effectively than your dark ages superstitious paranoia, petitio principii, onus probandi, cum hoc ergo propter hoc and any number of other informal logical fallacies, I’d wager.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:06 am

                      Logic and rationality are merely beginnings, not more.

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:14 am

                      OAK, “colonization” began with the voyagers, then the traders, the whalers etc; a trickle becomes a flood in time.

                    • Populuxe1 …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:14 am

                      “Logic and rationality are merely beginnings, not more.”

                      As opposed to what? Burning old women at the stake as witches because they know something about medical herbs and persecuting people for not believing in the same invisible sky fary as you do? Let’s just all go back to the fucking Dark Ages, eh? It was so much fun back then. Why let ourselves be guided by objective evidence when we can just make shit up when it suits us, like CV?

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:15 am

                      Gee Pop, rather late for latin, but diligently (public education you see) I’ll look them up. sigh.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:18 am

                      What does someone focussed blindly on his feet like yourself know of this thing called “Dark Ages”?

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:21 am

                      got the Latin, why didn’t ya just say ‘So’ Pop. Anyway, Draco placed an elegant summary of some anthropological study into the WEIRD culture’s influence on cognition in today’s Open Mike.

      • gobsmacked 10.1.3
        25 May 2013 at 12:00 pm

        Why are they so scared of rational discussion on the subject?

        Rational discussion is welcome. The question then, is: Does Peters’ speech contribute to rational discussion? And was that its purpose?

        No, and no.

        His pandering to racial prejudice makes it harder to discuss problems and solutions. For example, many people might want to oppose a new brothel in the CBD, but not because the owner is “Hong Kong born”. That’s irrelevant. But Peters takes legitimate concerns and undermines them.

        It’s his old trick, it’s nasty, it’s obvious, and he should be called on it. Every time.

        • KJT 10.1.3.1
          25 May 2013 at 1:25 pm

          No great fan of Peters, but immigration policy is something that should be discussed.

          Including as yet another, not the sole one as OAK thinks I am saying, enabler of attacks on workers rights.

    • ghostrider888 10.2
      25 May 2013 at 3:37 pm

      points to OAK and gobsmacked, imo.

  11. tc 11
    25 May 2013 at 11:34 am

    Peters is as peters does, all the while Collins self appointed squash commissioner does nothing, what a joke as she should be ticking him off so makes me wonder this is what Slippery and CT want, to let it run awhile at least.

    Oz is no better in terms of racism so kiwis will keep leaving in droves under NACT and be repalced by migrants. This does nothing aside from dog whistling up the rednecks as Winnie looks to get whoever he can to vote NZF it’s a shame as he’s done some good stuff then goes and does this, ah well that’s Winston for ya.

    • Roy 11.1
      25 May 2013 at 12:29 pm

      Indeed, what the hell is with Devoid saying she doesn’t want to get involved. Why did she apply for her position if she is not prepared to comment on such blatant racism?

      • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 1:49 pm

        She didn’t apply, she was shoulder tapped.

        • fender 11.1.1.1
          25 May 2013 at 4:00 pm

          Apparently she was hanging out one white sheet and one black sheet on the washing line one day when her neighbour Tony Ryall stuck his shiny head over the fence and declared he had found the new RRC.

  12. Colonial Viper 12
    25 May 2013 at 11:50 am

    I like Chinese, they really are eager to please.

    But, it’s been great for our local gangs to have had been helped along the road of professionalisation and international networking by overseas Chinese associates. The Chinese originally helped create the concept of organised crime centuries ago and along with pasta it was a nice little export to Europe through the silk road. Brilliant entrepreneurial people 🙂

    Btw Eliot Spitzer would say that these days the real money in organised crime comes from legal corporate business with monopoly characteristics.

    • ghostrider888 12.1
      25 May 2013 at 3:38 pm

      😀

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 12.2
      26 May 2013 at 3:54 pm

      I like Taoism. Not so fussed on Confucianism, but I can see why people are drawn to it. I think the invention of moveable typesetting was pretty cool too. Likewise the compass.

  13. ak 13
    25 May 2013 at 11:58 am

    Hooters and e spinner both putting the boot in?

    Excellent. Proof positive that Johnny-no-mates’ latest extensive overtures were unsuccessful.

    Watch it Winnie. Now they’ll stop at nothing.

    • Colonial Viper 13.1
      25 May 2013 at 12:04 pm

      Yeah they can’t believe Winnie’s actually back and desperately want to fuck him for good now.

      In fact, I think the Left should treat Winston like that cantankerous, and slightly racist, old uncle “of that generation” who turns up and annoys a few people at the family gathering, but is otherwise very entertaining and has a lot to contribute.

      DON’T not invite him, just DON’T give him access to the whisky too early in the evening.

      • One Anonymous Knucklehead 13.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 12:29 pm

        That’s the real reason they oppose NZPower: more of Peters’ supporters will survive through winter.

      • prism 13.1.2
        25 May 2013 at 12:34 pm

        CV VG +1

      • prism 13.1.3
        25 May 2013 at 1:23 pm

        CV
        Sounds like the best response to the old ‘statesman’. Now if it was Nick Smith under consideration, he’s just another toy from Macdonalds.

        • Colonial Viper 13.1.3.1
          25 May 2013 at 3:58 pm

          Indeed. We have all got to know Winston pretty well. We know he’s not leading the BNP. Yes he does himself a disservice by playing the race card and R0b is quite right to criticise him for it. But I wouldn’t write him off because of it.

  14. Pascal's bookie 14
    25 May 2013 at 3:08 pm

    Where’s Susan Devoy at?

    Not a peep.

    What are we paying her for again?

  15. Chooky 15
    25 May 2013 at 4:11 pm

    When Winston was Foreign Affairs Minister he got on brilliantly with Asian politicians. They understand each other . They speak the same language. They have the same values, up to a point which, they all recognise ..ie ….FAMILY COMES FIRST! NZers COME FIRST IN NEW ZEALAND!!!!! EMPLOY UNEMPLOYED NZers first! …TRAIN NZers first for employment…LOOK after our own unemployed Kiwis first!…Look after our standard of living and what matters to the most humble NZers first!..

    Winston is not a racist!!!!(That is an ugly slur and by trendo politically correct people who probably have a problem with racism themselves but wont admit it.) One on one Winston gets on very well with Asians. He is after all part Asian; more so with his Maori ancestry than many of his critics. Winston is not a knucklehead and Winston does have a high IQ! ( A lot of criticism directed at Winston I suspect is racist…His career as a politician has probably been knee-capped by covert racism.)

    HOWEVER: Just a pity you cant always trust Winston not to tango with National( although he has spurned their advances on many occasions and he has walked out on them over issues. of principle)… He is like us chooks he jumps from perch to perch..A cunning rooster if ever there was one and not entirely trustworthy!. …Also Winston doesnt seem to like his greens…..A great pity, because we chooks just love our greens!

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 15.1
      25 May 2013 at 5:10 pm

      Asia. Which country is that again where they all speak the same language?

      Winston may or may not be a bigot, but what is certain is that employing this rhetoric is an appeal to bigotry. His assertions are unsupported. The Left is in the business of protecting migrant minorities, not demonising them.

      • ghostrider888 15.1.1
        25 May 2013 at 5:18 pm

        *sigh* where is the tree you sit under located, Anonymously; might have to saunter by; it is either leaves, or remains rooted. 😉

    • prism 15.2
      26 May 2013 at 11:58 am

      Chooky
      Very amusing intro to Winston a little kind but almost right. You do make him sound more winsome than Winston. And this polly does wear pretty good feathers, an attractive looking and sounding rooster. He’ll cock a snook at them all.

  16. marty mars 16
    25 May 2013 at 5:19 pm

    Winston is part Asian?

    ” He is of mixed ethnicity, his father being Māori and his mother being of Scottish descent.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Peters

    Come on Chooky… please correct me or wikipedia if I’m, or they are, wrong 🙂

  17. Chooky 17
    25 May 2013 at 6:27 pm

    Are Maori of part Asian ancestry or not?…..Taiwan, Japan , South America , Polynesia?…..depends on how you define Asian….NZ is certainly more in Asia than it is in UK or Europe and the Maori certainly look more Asian than Anglo Saxon or Scottish , the latter of which Winston is anyway( a Scottish Mother he was devoted to)….Lets not get too nit picky, genetic and pedantic about this….Winston is a true NZer!!!! (more so than John Key whose parents came from Austria?)…

    The fact of the matter is that Winston was a very good Minister of Foreign Affairs and he had considerable rapport with Asian leaders. He is no racist!!!!

  18. Clockie 18
    25 May 2013 at 8:41 pm

    And this:

    There are three theories regarding the spread of humans across the Pacific to Polynesia. These are outlined well by Kayser et al. (2000)[10] and are as follows:

    Express Train model: A recent (c. 3000–1000 BC) expansion out of Taiwan, via the Philippines and eastern Indonesia and from the northwest (“Bird’s Head”) of New Guinea, on to Island Melanesia by roughly 1400 BC, reaching western Polynesian islands right about 900 BC. This theory is supported by the majority of current human genetic data, linguistic data, and archaeological data.
    Entangled Bank model: Emphasizes the long history of Austronesian speakers’ cultural and genetic interactions with indigenous Island Southeast Asians and Melanesians along the way to becoming the first Polynesians.
    Slow Boat model: Similar to the express-train model but with a longer hiatus in Melanesia along with admixture, both genetically, culturally and linguistically with the local population. This is supported by the Y-chromosome data of Kayser et al. (2000), which shows that all three haplotypes of Polynesian Y chromosomes can be traced back to Melanesia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynesia#History_of_the_Polynesian_people

    • xtasy 18.1
      25 May 2013 at 11:50 pm

      While you have a point with this, the history of Polynesia is bound to be much more diverse than many commonly think. For instance Norwegian explorer, adventurer and also scientist Thor Heyerdahl did with excavations, interviewing locals, and with sundry research on Rapanui, Easter Island, establish, that the Polynesians that lived there, and in other parts of the islands, were partly from South American Indian stock.

      Also were excavations and other research on the Marquesan Islands, on Tahiti, other Society Islands and the Cook Islands showing, that there were statues and carvings by the early natives, that resemble very much similar statues in Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia.

      There were even ancient vocal records, referring to travels between South America and the islands of Eastern Polynesia.

      At the same time there has been some evidence that East Asian peoples migrated also into the Americas, over times when there was a crossing possible between Alaska and Siberia, and they mixed and mingled with earlier migrants to the Americas, who in party also are supposed to have some ancient historic ties to Phoenicians, who actually appear to have settled in both North and Central America thousands of years ago.

      But to try and establish a link between Chinese and Polynesians is too much a bow to stretch, as those ancient Taiwanese, that also appear to have travelled to South West and Central Polynesia and Melanesia, are genetically, culturally and otherwise not that much related to the present Han and other Chinese populations. Also was South East Asia settled by Malays and similar groups, after it was for thousands of years rather home to dark skinned native populations, of which the ones living on the Moluccan Islands are remnants.

      Most recent findings suggest, that Australia was even reached by seafarers not only from South East Asia, but also Africa, long before Europeans ever “discovered” it.

      I think there will be much more coming out about history of this and other parts of the world over coming decades. The Europeans only “discovered” much in their own ego centric belief. There were others already living in parts of the world they had not seen before, and they were also in contact, even if just casually, with other people from other regions, long before.

      • Clockie 18.1.1
        26 May 2013 at 12:21 am

        Yes ! This gentleman provides an exciting read as well..

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_von_D%C3%A4niken

        • xtasy 18.1.1.1
          26 May 2013 at 12:37 am

          Clockie: Looked at that years ago, sorry, he is “outer spaced mad”, he was, since he died of course. NO, that is not what I believe in, but then again, enjoy your reading of whatever.

          • Clockie 18.1.1.1.1
            26 May 2013 at 1:08 am

            Xtasy, no offence but I have to tell you that most mainstrean anthropologists view Heyerdahl’s theories in pretty much the same light that most sane people view von Daniken.

            Heyerdahl’s theory of Polynesian origins never gained acceptance among anthropologists.[13] Physical and cultural evidence had long suggested that Polynesia was settled from west to east, migration having begun from the Asian mainland, not South America. In the late 1990s, genetic testing found that the mitochondrial DNA of the Polynesians is more similar to people from southeast Asia than to people from South America, showing that their ancestors most likely came from Asia.[14] Easter Islanders are of Polynesian descent.[15][16]

            Anthropologist Robert Carl Suggs included a chapter titled “The Kon-Tiki Myth” in his book on Polynesia, concluding that “The Kon-Tiki theory is about as plausible as the tales of Atlantis, Mu, and ‘Children of the Sun.’ Like most such theories it makes exciting light reading, but as an example of scientific method it fares quite poorly.”[17]

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor_Heyerdahl

            • xtasy 18.1.1.1.1.1
              26 May 2013 at 1:50 am

              Explain then please, linguistic correspondence and similarities between Aymara and Quechua Indian language, and other languages in Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia, for instance the use of the word Kumara for the same sweet potato, and what is used for same things in Polynesia, then.

              Explain please the statues in stone and the marae platforms used in not only Rapanui, but also Hiva Oa, Nuku Hiva, islands like Raiatea, Moorea, Tahiti, Cook Islands and so forth, that are in presence totally the same as in South America!

              I feel you are falling for the dominant “lectures”, but as we know, over history, new findings always come up and reverse the interpretation of history. There were fruits, crops and the likes found in Polynesia, that otherwise only occur in South America, the kumara just being one, so how can you believe that such facts are irrelevant?

              I do not believe the present interpretations, and I also believe that Polynesians are of various backgrounds, not just from “Asia”, as that ignores too much other evidence. It is plain ignorant and stupid. But we know, same with other “findings”, once a school of thought gets established, they hammer their views home, and they want to claim exclusive rights under “science”. BS that is.

              • KJT …
                26 May 2013 at 3:13 am

                Thor Heyerdahl was no sailor, or navigator.

                All sailors with any sense, explore first to windward.

                Find the furthest point they can to windward and then work back towards home.

                Asia to Polynesia makes sense.

                Blowing downwind in a raft, with no chance of getting back if they did not luck on any islands, does not.

                Only idiots go downwind when there is no certainty of finding land.

                How do ensure you get back home, upwind, before your supplies run out?

                • KJT …
                  26 May 2013 at 8:57 am

                  There is an indication, however, that some Polynesians did travel as far as South America and return with at least one variety of sweet potato.

                  http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/01/polynesians-reached-south-america-picked-up-sweet-potatoes-went-home/

                  Genetics and other evidence which was not available in Heyerdahl’s time, and Polynesians own verbal history, has disproved the hypothesis that the Pacific was colonised from America.

                  As someone trained in the art myself, I am totally impressed with their navigation skills.,

                  • xtasy …
                    26 May 2013 at 10:14 pm

                    So Polynesians did travel to South America, risking that they may not be able to return to tiny islands in the vast Pacific Ocean, saw some stone statues that locals there had shaped and were worshipping, and then they went back with some sweet potatoes, and perhaps also took some of those heavy statues with them, to erect on their islands?

                    Or alternatively they saw the statues and decided on the spot, hey, they look nice, we will carve the same kind of statues on our islands back home, and then use them for worship?

                    I think you are adhering to selective thoughts here, sticking to the dominant school of thought, that does not allow for alternative scenarios and explanations.

                    Of course the islands were not “colonised” by Americans, but in part they appear to have been settled from there. Possibly there were some islands not even populated by anyone then, when they arrived from the east.

                    There is verbal history about Polynesians’ ancestors having come from the east. And also on Easter Island they talk about two distinct groups of populations living on that island, before the first Europeans ever arrived there. They had a civil war kind of, which wiped out much of their amazing culture. So there must be more to it than capable sailors that went sailing across the ocean to do a bit of travel and trade.

                • xtasy …
                  26 May 2013 at 10:23 pm

                  “Blowing downwind in a raft, with no chance of getting back if they did not luck on any islands, does not.”

                  Heyerdahl quoted old records by the first settlers and conquistadores of Spanish descent that arrived in Ecuador and Peru, and they say that the Indians told them of islands to the west – in the vast ocean. They also told them of an ancient king or leader, who left to explore those islands. Hence there was some contact between South America and the Polynesia islands in the east of Polynesia.

                  It would not appear to have been frequent and regular contact, but there was some contact and travel, and it may well have stopped, given the difficulties of travel between those places.

                  Polynesia was settled from both sides, the west (and that is East or South East Asia) and in part from the east. There are also distinct differences between Polynesians in Society Islands, Marquesas and so, compared to those on Samoa and Tonga. The mixing resulted in variations of appearances, I would presume.

                  • Populuxe1 …
                    26 May 2013 at 11:05 pm

                    Personally I think you’re just jabbering pseudo-science because if you can make a case for a South American connection you think it will miraculously give your future utterances on New Zealand biculturalism greater significance than that of Maori and Pakeha who have lived here for generations.

                    • xtasy …
                      26 May 2013 at 11:15 pm

                      “Pseudo science” is for instance history written by Euro centric historians, who also promoted scientific “views” and interpretations that are followed ignoring all other evidence. So I realise that the one clinging to pseudo science may well rather be you, Popoluxe1.

                      And do Polynesians really look so “Asian” (meaning East Asian) to you, to conclude they must come from there? I can only shake my head in disbelief if you think so.

                      As for “bicultural NZ” that was not something I came up with, it used to be common theme in the 1980s and into the 1990s.

                      I do by the way not agree with Winston Peters’ claims, but give him some credit to raise certain issues that should be discussed publicly and fairly. But due to a wrongly interpreted “policital correctness” that much of New Zealand now sticks with, it simply gets ridiculed right from the start, so that no debate is allowed.

                    • Rhinocrates …
                      26 May 2013 at 11:35 pm

                      Polynesians really look so “Asian”

                      And so forth.

                      I’m grossly oversimplifying – really, really so, leaving out all sorts of details – but apparently humanity came our of Africa, the Neanderthals arose from an early colonising branch in Europe, the Denisovans arose farther east. All people of European descent have a small percentage of Neanderthal genes as a result of interbreeding, all people of the Pacific and the Americas have that Neanderthal legacy as well as the Denisovan. All, everywhere have undergone their changes as time passed, but as a species, we are remarkably lacking in diversity at the genetic level. A single troop of chimpanzees show more genetic variance than the entire human race. All the racial differences are less than the user preferences on the graphic user interface of the operating system, all represent a great tapestry of time.

                      Listen to someone when they talk about their descent and think of your own, but remember that we are all woven together.

                    • Populuxe1 …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:22 am

                      Evidence that Maori are the product of a long and gradual migration from Asia found in Maori mitochondrial DNA and in the mitochondrial DNA of species Maori brought with them:

                      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110203124726.htm

                      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC24590/

                      Me having blond hair doesn’t make me German

                    • ghostrider888 …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:27 am

                      Its circa Taiwan.(that’s a Full Stop).(that’s another one).

                    • Rhinocrates …
                      27 May 2013 at 12:33 am

                      And there Populuxe1, you miss the wood for the trees.

                    • xtasy …
                      27 May 2013 at 1:03 am

                      Pop:
                      In the article found under the first link you provided, this is stated in the second-last chapter:
                      “Our study of the mtDNA evidence shows the interactions between the islands of Southeast Asia and the Pacific was far more complex than previous accounts tended to suggest and it paves the way for new theories of the spread of Austronesian languages.”

                      In chapter 4 of that report to which your second link leads, the following is stated:
                      “However, analysis of genetic variation amongst Polynesian populations has provided little evidence regarding the settlement of the Polynesian triangle itself.”

                      The Conclusion summarises this:
                      “This study of mtDNA variation in R. exulans populations from a number of Pacific islands supports the following hypotheses. (i) Colonization of the islands of east Polynesia and subsequent contact occurred from a broad central region that included at least the Southern Cook and Society Islands, but the Marquesas Islands probably should not be considered a part of this central region to the same degree. (ii) A minimum of two introductions of the rat into Hawaii supports suggestions of postsettlement human contact with central east Polynesia. (iii) New Zealand’s prehistoric colonization and contact history included multiple visits from the Southern Cook and Society Islands region and the Kermadecs and may have included earlier exploratory visits and/or unsuccessful colonization attempts. (iv) Intermediary and stepping-stone islands (e.g., the Kermadecs) have a significant role in colonization and subsequent voyaging. (v) Relative accessibility and isolation among islands influence colonization and interaction histories.”

                      So what are you trying to prove or disprove in regards to what I commented?

                      Asia that many thousands of years ago was a rather different place, so yes, it is quite likely that a early travellers and settlers from parts of
                      Central or South East Asia came to the Bismarck Archipelago and settled there. They have though surely had interactions with other people that moved in, through or past over the millenia, so some intermingling happened. Also will there have been cultural influences not having had much of a genetic imprint.

                      This all does not rule out some interaction with, and some influence from South Americans, that occured and had an impact on “Central Polynesia”, being Society Islands and other island groups around there.

                      The Americas were also settled from Asia, by the way!

  19. Rhinocrates 19
    25 May 2013 at 9:21 pm

    how do all the conservatives in National and ACT feel about working with Winston Peters and his facile, juvenile, anti-China hysteria?

    Devoy scuttles away with Collins’ endorsement, knowing that she’s paid to devalue her job.

    Key will try to brush it aside with a smirk and smarm up to Peters again later. One thing he knows is that in bankstering and politics, grudges hint at principles, and principles are a liability.

    However, how does Mumblefuck’s mob feel about working with Peters, should he hold the balance of power? Is that why Mumblefuck is once again being so piss-weak?

  20. Chooky 20
    25 May 2013 at 9:34 pm

    Whatever!…..What has this to do with Winston’s concerns about Auckland?…15 story brothels etc….?….How does this help Auckland and the women of Auckland? How do casinos which cater for new immigrant gamblers and new money help old native Aucklanders and those already at the bottom of the heap pokie gamblers?….

    This is not about Winston’s racism…. It is about denigration of Winston as a racist.!!!…It could also be construed as insensitive sexism… a lack of concern for the ordinary NZ women of Auckland and their ability to enjoy their city unmolested and untainted by the surrounding corruption that goes with sexual exploitation of women…….Winston is right to be concerned about immigration.

    • Clockie 20.1
      26 May 2013 at 9:40 am

      Chooky: “Winston gets on very well with Asians. He is after all part Asian; more so with his Maori ancestry than many of his critics.”

      “Are Maori of part Asian ancestry or not?…..Taiwan, Japan , South America , Polynesia?…..depends on how you define Asian”

      You asked, I answered..

      I also explained the context (and I think I got the story right)
      in which Winston himself claimed Asian heritage. It does have some bearing, however tangential to the discussion on this thread.

  21. xtasy 21
    25 May 2013 at 11:31 pm

    Well, another lively debate in this thread, for and against, frowning and also not frowning on Peters, and also in part presenting misinformed bits, that can easily lead to sway the opinion to one or the other side.

    All that I can say to migration of people from especially Mainland China is, that Immigration NZ appears to be a bit incompetent or “stressed” in dealing with many applications from Chinese. It is not just language and cultural aspects, but much of the documentation they have to look at and process.

    I know of one Chinese woman, a friend of a former “associate” of sorts, who has established rather intimate and well connected relationships with a number of Chinese migrants. What I have seen and heard gives me sufficient reason to claim, that there are a fair number of migrants from that country, that should never have been allowed to come and live here, should indeed not have been granted permanent residence. I am sure there are many thousands of such cases.

    This particular woman did what many Chinese migrants do. She consulted Chinese migrant consultants and advisors, Chinese accountants and others, after setting up a small business, that never was profitable, but that was made to “appear” profitable. In short, the figures were always manipulated, but in a way that it was hard to prove this being wrong. So a questionable small “enterprise” was run for a few years, with one goal only, to support a permanent residence application, so that this “business entrepreneur” was granted PR in the end. All the professionals she used to give her support, advice and “cooked figures” and also incorrect documents, were all Chinese. She indeed had and still has very few New Zealand associates, let alone friends.

    The daughter’s intention to study at uni was another motivator to get PR, so she would not have to pay enormous student fees as being a foreign student. A partner of the woman continues to live in China, but was in the end also given PR, but he only comes for short spells now and then, for a visit. He has made lots of money and even supports is wife, and that assisted her to survive here.

    Once she got PR, the shop was closed within months, the business ended, and it was onto the benefit, that is in part. I understand she is able to claim the accommodation supplement, and possibly more, as she has no real job, lives in part from proceeds from China, and has no nother income here.

    Add the many “massage establishments” all over New Zealand, and again I have insider info, and so many now have Mainland Chinese girls and women work there, while here on student or visitors visas. It used to be the Thai women that catered for clientele, but the cheaper Chinese have replaced them. Also add the many small shops that are run by Mainland Chinese, where they have their family work, but employ few if any Kiwis.

    I do not want to appear biased or racist, but there are a many rackets going on, especially by Mainland Chinese. As they are good at what they are doing in this way (cheating their way in), they do mostly not get caught. They also keep a solid wall of silence, so nobody whispers about what goes on.

    Apart from that I suppose that most Chinese coming here do so for honest and fair intentions, but there is sadly a strong element to be concerend about.

    The well-meaning left members do not realise at times the issues at stake, believing firmly in multiculturalism and liberalism. That is fair enough, but also bear in mind, your goodwill, same as that of many NZers, can easily be taken advantage of and abused.

    The example I refereed to is just one amongst many, as that source I have firmly assured me. Better not to talk too much about it, as it may have “harmful” consequences!

    PS:
    My absolutely reliable source, a true “fan” of chinese culture, also told me already years ago, that there are actually dozens, if not hundreds of “advisors” for Chinese migrants, having offices in Queen St, Auckland, who know all about delivering the (manicured and manipulated) documentation that will get Chinese migrants PR! Reason to worry, really, but who cares in “sell out NZ”???

  22. Chooky 22
    26 May 2013 at 8:34 am

    Thank God for an intelligent, informed comment! I think there is a great deal of naivety on the part of some well meaning New Zealanders bending over not to be ‘RACIST’. New Zealand is a haven , a heaven on earth, for many of these immigrants( who are not necessarily desirable citizens ,nor have they got here fairly)…and NZ wont stay that way if we have too many of them….this is not racism. I suggest some of the commentators on this site head for China with a backpack and observe how grossly overpopulated it is , and the quality of life and values( least they be taken for FOOLS!)…..better still visit Tibet, and talk to the Tibetans!.

    I am inclined to believe we have to protect the NZ paradise we have, ignore the money men, by all means accept genuine refugees and for the rest of the would be economic migrants and new money business ventures, only pick a few of the ones we really need and who genuinely want to and who will fit into New Zealand culture. They will become valued NZ citizens and there will be no racial tension. We owe this respect to ourselves and our children and our culture…. which is very vulnerable at the present time.

    Grossly overpopulated countries where human life is cheap and the environment degraded should sort out there own MAN made problems…. Good on Winston for standing up and speaking out !

  23. marty mars 23
    26 May 2013 at 9:43 am

    Red says way up thread “Or you could address the issues Peters actually raises:”

    I don’t think winston has credibility regarding any gambling issues, he was Minister of Horseys after all.

    And i don’t think it will be just Chinese that frequent that brothel.

    And I think any workers bought in for any industry or activity need to be protected from exploitation and not from the Chinese as many workers will already attest.

    IMO The fact is that this call is xenophobic and perhaps racist.

    A thought experiment – do you think he would be saying these things if, after a major ecological disaster in the UK a million people came here? (obviously that wouldn’t include the various people from colonised countries that have made their home there – oh no they would have to be “like us” lol) – I don’t think so.

    The only saving grace is that the debate isn’t based on people who have the faith of Islam – now that would really bring the bad side of people out.

    • Populuxe1 23.1
      26 May 2013 at 11:09 pm

      A thought experiment that relies of subjective assumptions and no real data, which I think is usually referred to as a straw man.

      • marty mars 23.1.1
        27 May 2013 at 9:24 am

        A straw man or straw person, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally,[1][2] is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.[3]
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

        A thought experiment or Gedankenexperiment (from German) considers some hypothesis, theory,[1] or principle for the purpose of thinking through its consequences.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_experiment

        Seems much closer to a thought experiment because of the thinking through of consequences aspect rather than a misrepresentation of an opponents position for the basis of argument, to me. I suppose I could have couched it in formal language for those that can’t see the wood for the trees like you pops, but I realise that you don’t really care anyway do you.

  24. vto 24
    26 May 2013 at 1:03 pm

    Look, New Zealand has a great deal of experience in the arrival of unwelcome people from across the seas.

    What would Maori do? After all, they have been through it before.

    • Populuxe1 24.1
      26 May 2013 at 11:11 pm

      And yet you have the nerve to question things like the presence of Kai Tahu in th eplanning of the Christchurch rebuild.

      • vto 24.1.1
        27 May 2013 at 8:45 am

        “And yet you have the nerve to question things like the presence of Kai Tahu in th eplanning of the Christchurch rebuild.”

        And there folks is the heart of the problem with race and related issues in NZ….

        Perhaps for your credibility pop you could expand on your “nerve” point there. What do you mean by that? Or is it clear that we the people are supposed to just sit down and shut up?

        (and as for the Ngai Tahu and RMA position in the central city rebuild – you failed spectacularly in any sense to understand what the issue was. Feel free to have another crack if you wish though)

        We mustn’t question things.
        We must bow down to greater powers.
        We must listen to those who know more.
        We must serve.
        We must remain in our pews.

        ffs

        • ghostrider888 24.1.1.1
          27 May 2013 at 3:23 pm

          Master and Slave Morality, sorta’ captures all (most) really.