C&R candidate says something really offensive and stupid

Written By: - Date published: 2:08 pm, October 3rd, 2019 - 21 comments
Categories: auckland supercity, C&R, local government, racism, supercity - Tags:

A candidate for the Whau Local Board of Auckland Council has received some rather unwanted publicity.

His name is John Subritsky and he is is a Community and Residents candidate.

C&R is widely regarded as being a front for the National Party and tends to support right wing policies.

From Ripu Bhatia at Stuff:

A man running in the local body elections has been exposed using racial slurs on Facebook.

Central Auckland resident John Subritzky, who is standing for the Whau Local Board on the Communities & Residents ticket, used a demeaning term in a post two years ago.

“A bit thin skinned. P…. should try being Christians and harden up to some mocking,“ he said.

The comment was made in response to an article about a man who was sentenced to death in Pakistan for allegedly committing blasphemy.

He also accused migrants of being involved in fraud, failing to assimilate and undermining local culture.  Again from Stuff:

A second post saw Subritzky attack minority groups in response to a case of housing fraud in Australia.

“This is a common pattern – you and I pay for the migrants lifestyle, their benefits, their kids, their accommodation,” he said.

“All while they don’t assimilate but rather undermine the culture they chose to join.”

Subritsky works at Promise Keepers which as part of its mission extols
“[r]eaching beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity”.  He may want to reflect on this.

Subritsky claims that he did not know at the time that his comments were hurtful. It seems that under the glare of public exposure he has had a road to Damascus conversion and now realises that what he said was wrong.

Fair enough.  We should always allow people to redeem themselves and change.

But wait it gets worse.

An unnamed C&R spokesperson was quoted as saying this:

John has highlighted some important issues relating to freedom of speech and protecting taxpayers from fraud and we don’t agree that the comments are intentionally racist.

The comments were made well over two years ago and the fact they have been dredged up now suggests political mud-slinging.”

Where does one start?  Describing a self own on social media as political mud-slinging is rather strange.  Especially given that there is no sign of any involvement by any of his opponents/

The really said thing is that the Whau area is a melting pot of diverse cultures and that is really cool.  The profile of the New Lynn electorate which includes much of the Whau area shows that 51% are of Polynesian, Asian or Middle Eastern/Latin American/African ethnicity.  And 43% were born overseas.

You just have to walk around New Lynn or go to Avondale Market on a Sunday to realise and celebrate the diversity.  And how well everyone gets on.

I hope and trust the good people of the Whau area do not vote for Subritzky and his C&R team.  Elected leaders should be working on fostering respect for all cultures and ethnic groups, not spreading hate and division.

21 comments on “C&R candidate says something really offensive and stupid ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. observer 1
    3 October 2019 at 2:50 pm

    He might be sufficiently stupid not to know the term "P*ki" is offensive, but his worst line is later in the article – because he said it yesterday:

    “It‘s not easy being a Christian in New Zealand these days.“

    6 months after a massacre, he sees himself as the real victim. Because he gets criticised for something he said? Awareness, empathy – zero.

    • Wensleydale 1.1
      3 October 2019 at 3:08 pm

      Those poor, poor Christians. How do they cope? By being a bit racist, apparently.

  2. greywarshark 2
    3 October 2019 at 4:08 pm

    This sounds like a major part of the Man-Up program that Brian Tamaki was pushing at Andrew Little to deliver to men in NZ jails.

    Promise Keepers think:

    – We believe that the Bible is God's written revelation to man and that it is verbally inspired, authoritative, and without error in the original manuscripts.
    (II Peter 1:20-21, II Timothy 3:16, Revelation 22:18-19, John 17:17, Matthew 5:17-18)

    A Promise Keeper is committed to…
    1. Honouring Jesus Christ through worship, prayer, and obedience to God’s Word in the power of the Holy Spirit.
    2. Pursuing vital relationships with a few other men, understanding that he needs brothers to help him keep his promises.
    3. Practising spiritual, moral, ethical, and sexual purity.
    4. Building a strong marriage and family through love, protection, and biblical values.
    5. Supporting the mission of his church by honouring and praying for his pastor and by actively giving his time and resources.
    6. Reaching beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity..
    7. Influencing his world, being obedient to the Great Commandment (Mark 12:30,31) and the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19,20)..

  3. Ad 3
    3 October 2019 at 4:55 pm

    If the British High Commissioner can stand up and apologise to the good people of the Gisborne area for the actions of Captain Cook and party, surely a tiny little candidate in a local board election can have the courage to do the same.

    Just takes a little grace.

  4. Ken 4
    3 October 2019 at 5:40 pm

    He let the Nat mask slip a bit there eh?

    So often, those who claim to be the most pious are the most bigoted, racist ratbags.

    "Promise Keeper" indeed…….that's one pit of vipers that I'll be steering well clear of.

  5. Climaction 5
    3 October 2019 at 8:05 pm

    Wow, local body politician says something crazy and offensive. Small wonder nobody cares enough to vote. I seriously suspect the only people who consider local government to be a calling are losers who either blame rich people or poor people and different ethnicities.

    In other political news, has this government achieved anything of note for the environment this week now that NZF now controls the forestry industry?

    • mickysavage 5.1
      3 October 2019 at 8:43 pm

      I get the feeling that your attack on NZF immediately after your attack on local government politics is related. Care to provide details?

      • adam 5.1.1
        3 October 2019 at 9:00 pm

        His “feelings” mickysavage – it just feels right to him.

        As for people not voting – why would they – Auckland has to be one of the most anti-democratic cities in the country – beholden to a mind numbing ideology only someone from the looney right could conjure up.

      • Climaction 5.1.2
        4 October 2019 at 12:02 pm

        Shane Jones, a minor party politician, has effectively silenced the forestry industry. Said industry could be a fantastic partner in the fight against climate change. In light of recent protests and conferences and accords, surely the crazy utterances of a minor party politician need the light shone on them, particularly when our futures are at stake

  6. Sanctuary 6
    4 October 2019 at 7:04 am

    There is a savage piece (paywalled) in the Herald today by Simon Wilson on the idiocy of "…The Auckland Ratepayers Alliance, aka the Taxpayers' Union in local costume…" and it's right wing cheerleaders at a local elections meeting in Auckland. Tamihere, Lord and the braying mob of the not-so-genteel entitled Auckland right get excoriated by Wilson in the piece. Well worth a read if there is a copy of the Herald in the staff room or cafe or you know how to do an end run around the paywall (I would never suggest buying a paper that has Hosking in it, my apologies to Simon Wilson but there you go).

  7. observer 7
    4 October 2019 at 3:50 pm

    Subritsky has made a habit of showing his remarkable ignorance and bigotry:

    https://twitter.com/michaelwoodnz/status/1179935966447857665

    There’s too much stupid to unpack, but to take just one example: he thinks Arabs bad, Christians good (a bit generous to say he “thinks”).

    He doesn’t even know that there are millions of Arab Christians. Please, John, read another book.

  8. karol121 8
    4 October 2019 at 4:48 pm

    Well, what is offensive these days when it comes to political grand-standing on so-called; "righteousness principles" in any case?

    However, this could be the new maxim in relation to certain political self interest groups using the Christian doctrine or general religious verse as an excuse to spew out vitriol.

    In any case, Mr Subritzky doesn't appear to be asserting that he is well balanced and short on ignorance with respect to other cultures and beliefs, (irrespective of how bizarre or realistic those beliefs may appear to be). He is happy to express a one sided opinion based on his version of a concept. So why hit on him?

    A candidate is free to express opinion and be offensive. If the majority of voters dislike it, then this will usually be reflected in the polls on voting day. If the statement contravenes some human rights convention legislation, then somebody can make a complaint, which might then be decided on, in another forum.

    Like others, I have felt the impact of some rather damaging religious rituals throughout the course of my life. On one non-Christian assertion alone, (and I am not referring to the person whom Mr Subritzky mentioned), I don't promote dying for 72 raisins, but if some people believe that they must, then they should do it at home, and alone.

    • observer 8.1
      4 October 2019 at 5:00 pm

      "Why hit on him?"

      = Why inform the voters about candidates' opinions?

      Because that's how it works.

      • karol121 8.1.1
        8 October 2019 at 2:49 pm

        Please. In context.

        Information about any candidate's opinion or position, along with that candidate or anybody else informing others interested enough to read about or listen to it NOT read as; "how it works", might be construed as ridiculous.

        But if this was how my post was read, then perhaps either (or both) my grammar and the way I express my opinion may be at fault.

        Axiomatic. When we attack any political candidate by hitting on him (or her) straight away, we may well deprive the community the opportunity for that candidate to dig himself/herself an even deeper hole, and to later show their true colours.

        Personally, let them go for it. And further down the track, question by way of media post, how it is that they provided such a biased or unrealistic public viewpoint to begin with.

        But I accept, different type strokes for different folks.

  9. michelle 9
    8 October 2019 at 12:00 pm

    another rich idiot trying to get more power with a name like subritsky he ain't from our country

    • karol121 9.1
      8 October 2019 at 3:26 pm

      I suspect that he (Subritzky) sort of is from New Zealand, Michelle. C&R, Auckland mid-West state him as being around the scene (Lynfield and environs) for about forty years. But with the statements he is reported to have made, many could justifiably suggest that he might have just recently fallen from a rain shower, (or rain storm).

      Unconfirmed rumours are that he and other family members might be associated with that Lynfield/Mt Roskill evangelist crowd that's been operating around that neck of the woods for yonks.

      If the above is correct, then I could understand why such a stern outpourings from him on faith related matters, even though I cannot support such statements just the same.

      Still, with such statements, I would certainly give him points for his provocative style, almost guaranteed to generate publicity.

    • observer 9.2
      8 October 2019 at 4:50 pm

      He may well be a rich idiot, Michelle, but he is definitely from our country.

      Maybe you were "joking", but if you really meant that prejudiced comment … shame on you.

      (I wonder what surnames you find acceptable?).