Kohia te kai rangatira, ruia te taitea

Written By: - Date published: 5:06 pm, August 14th, 2009 - 68 comments
Categories: uncategorized - Tags:

For just a moment today, perhaps set aside a little time for reflection on, or to lift a glass and toast those New Zealanders who are ‘one of us’ and not ‘one of them’.

Ivor Lloyd Richardson, Silvia Rose Cartwright, Leonard Ramsay Castle, Witi Ihimaera-Smiler, Nigel (Sam) Neill, Vincent O’Sullivan, Ranginui Walker, Cassia Joy Cowley, Patricia Grace, Patricia Mary Hook, Penelope Ann Jamieson, Pauline Margaret O’Regan, and Margaret Wilson.

Kia kaha, kaumatua

– BLiP

68 comments on “Kohia te kai rangatira, ruia te taitea ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. toad 1
    14 August 2009 at 5:27 pm

    Nigel John Dermot Neill

    I never knew that. We’re only making plans for Nigel!

    Why the hell would anyone from Ireland call their kid Nigel – one of the names most closely associated with the English upper classes? Nigel Lawson and all that!

    Anyway, totally understandable why he chose to call himself Sam.

  2. Brett Dale 2
    14 August 2009 at 5:29 pm

    Ones of them, I guess by that you mean people who have different political views than yourself.

    I have said it a million times this site is the mirror image of faux news.

  3. djp 3
    14 August 2009 at 5:33 pm

    Wait.. lets not single them out for any special honour, that just wouldn’t be right 🙂

  4. Lanthanide 4
    14 August 2009 at 5:36 pm

    Frankly I think if these people rise high enough to be nationally recognised in such a way, they should be able to stick something on their name, so that people can instantly recognise their status.

    • DeeDub 4.1
      14 August 2009 at 5:48 pm

      Noone here is attempting to deny their mana. Just whether it devolves from a colonial figurehead or the people of Aotearoa/New Zealand.

      That distinction is everything.

      Surely, if they have truly served their community, their own name is sufficient for us to know ‘who they are’.

      The people listed above have decided they would rather be honoured by their own people as one of them, rather than perpetuate the English class system, which holds people with title above the rest of us..

      Good on ’em.

      • Swampy 4.1.1
        14 August 2009 at 8:19 pm

        Quite sad to see people trying to rewrite history and pretend colonisation has not brought great benefits to this country.

        • Tigger 4.1.1.1
          14 August 2009 at 9:49 pm

          Titles are akin to the emperor’s new clothes – those wearing it think they’re special when in fact they’re not wearing anything at all.

          I applaud all those who chose not to take these titles – to me they have all the ‘status’ one could ever wish for.

        • DeeDub 4.1.1.2
          15 August 2009 at 11:44 am

          I’m certainly NOT attempting to ‘rewrite history’, Mr Marsh. Indeed, British colonisation did bring many fine & noble things to this country. A sense of entitlement by the rich and powerful and the rewarding of such behaviour with knighthoods was not one of them. I really thought we’d got over that shit as a country…. I’m embarrassed that some haven’t.

          Anyway, you’re the one trying to rewrite history if you deny this or say the benefits of colonisation somehow mitigates the terrible cost it had on Maori right up to this very day.

  5. Sir Easydoesit 5
    14 August 2009 at 5:43 pm

    Brett Dale,: what?
    Sir Brett. Ah, got it. One of them.

  6. bobbity 6
    14 August 2009 at 5:47 pm

    Why not honour all of them who are one of us.

    http://www.dpmc.govt.nz/honours/lists/nzom.html

    Would make a change from the usual divisive shit you post.

  7. Quoth the Raven 7
    14 August 2009 at 6:22 pm

    In my books any one who accepted a title is a pompous arse. What inspires me is those people who declined. I have great respect for them for their success and their courage. Just like I have great respect for people like Jean-Paul Sartre who turned down a nobel prize. The others have lost any respect I might have had for them.

    • Luxated 7.1
      14 August 2009 at 7:50 pm

      I personally don’t mind the Nobel prizes so much, especially Physics, Chemistry and Medicine as these recognise quantifiable contributions to society through there respective fields, Literature and Peace prizes being more open to interpretation (NB. There is no Nobel in Economics contrary to popular belief). Knighthoods however…

    • Swampy 7.2
      14 August 2009 at 8:20 pm

      No, they are having a buck both ways. In that way they can get the honour and yet go on about how high and mighty they are for turning down the Sir or Dame.

      If they really were noble people they would turn the whole honour down.

      • DeeDub 7.2.1
        15 August 2009 at 11:50 am

        They accept the HONOUR and refuse the TITLE!

        Somehow you find that hard to understand?

        Read much?

  8. Brett Dale 8
    14 August 2009 at 6:24 pm

    Personally I wouldnt except a SIR in front of my name, because I don’t believe in royalty.

  9. Scott Yorke 9
    14 August 2009 at 6:48 pm

    I may also lift a glass to many of the 66 who chose to accept the honours.

    I’m not a fan of the honours system, but I still recognise that the achievements of many of those 66 deserve to be recognised. They don’t deserve to be called “one of them” (in this context I’m not sure what is meant by “them”, but I suspect a derogatory meaning is intended).

    That they chose to accept the honour is a personal choice.

    • BLiP 9.1
      16 August 2009 at 2:12 am

      “One of them” means people who are not willing to be honoured by Aotearoa alone.

      • Scott Yorke 9.1.1
        16 August 2009 at 12:47 pm

        I hope that is what the author of the post meant. .Although I suspect a more derogatory meaning was intended.

        • bobbity 9.1.1.1
          16 August 2009 at 1:19 pm

          What the author of the post meant is captured quite well in her/his comments further down the thread.

          “It is, in fact, those who have taken the title that are the spiteful. They are the ones that wish to separate themselves from Aotearoa, to become, in their minds, better than me. And, as for “sad’, no, not at all. I take heart from and celebrate those who truely are one of us and are happy to be so. Kia ora to them and fuck off to you.”

          Interesting really – I disagree with her/him completely and would be interested to get her/his take on the Maori King/Queen.

  10. Rex Widerstrom 10
    14 August 2009 at 6:53 pm

    Errrrmmm I’m probably about to reveal myself as a complete fool, but if that’s a list of people who have declined to append “Sir” or “Dame” to their names, what’s Ivor Richardson and Silvia Cartwright doing on there? AFAIK they’ve both used their (well-deserved) titles for yonks?

    • Luxated 10.1
      14 August 2009 at 7:55 pm

      I agree with what your saying but I presume BLiP doesn’t count them as the title came with the job, somewhat like (Rt) Hon. or Professor. My question is are they turning the title down because they genuinely don’t want it or because they’ve already got one?

      • BLiP 10.1.1
        16 August 2009 at 1:51 am

        Luxated is correct. Two of the above mentioned received their titles as part of their jobs, just like the Rt Honourable. Their “working titles” were subsequently upgraded when, not only did they do their job, they did it exceptionally well – and carried on their example after the office. That they chose settle for the indigenous upgrade and not add another frippery from England confers upon them the mana of Aotearoa.

  11. Sir Easydoesiteasydoesitson 11
    14 August 2009 at 6:53 pm

    O.K. then.

    sir Brett?.

    Ah, much better all round.

    sir Jon Key, Minister of Tourism & War. ffs

  12. torydog 12
    14 August 2009 at 7:09 pm

    Tory mentality:- you are nothing without a title!

    Pathetic and so typically tory to put value on something so utter pathetic.

    I cant wait to see next years Honors list……there will be a whole array of sad tory twats benefiting from there party being power.

    • lukas 12.1
      14 August 2009 at 7:32 pm

      See how much better the standard of debate at The Standard is compared to Kiwiblog?

      • lprent 12.1.1
        15 August 2009 at 6:01 am

        Friday. Besides I’ve never noticed you raising the level of debate. Diminished it usually because of what looks to me like being an attitude without intelligence.

  13. Dean Knight 13
    14 August 2009 at 7:09 pm

    Or we can adopt titular titles which are more meaningful or acceptable to some:

    http://www.laws179.co.nz/2009/08/new-zealand-order-of-merit.html

  14. Ianmac 14
    14 August 2009 at 7:36 pm

    I glimpsed Joh Key in the front row -drooling. I am quite sure the plan is for
    Item 3. Get knotted. Oops. Get Knighted.
    “Sir John Key to you peasants! Why do you think I grabbed a fortune, became PM, and organised Knighthoods?
    Ah. Sir Sir John Key. Ahhhhh.”

  15. Ianmac 15
    14 August 2009 at 7:40 pm

    And great respect for those who are loyal to NZ.
    Witi Ihimaera-Smiler was just great on Close Up tonight. His words resonated with me, without ever denigrating those who chose the knighthoods.

  16. North 16
    14 August 2009 at 8:00 pm

    What a load of disingenuous rubbish from “Sir” Colin……..”Don’t any of my mates dare call me ‘Sir’……..”

    A clapped out old Tory really……..

  17. Swampy 17
    14 August 2009 at 8:17 pm

    And Dame Cath Tizard, shee would agree with you would she, after all no one forces anyone to get an honour, it is just really such a crock to suggest this is as big a deal as you try to make out. Sad really

  18. Mental Mickey 18
    14 August 2009 at 8:58 pm

    The reinstituted knighthoods are being devalued.

    NZ is just too small a population, and needs the Sam Neils and Patricia Greces of the county onboard to make the honours viable, otherwise the whole exercise stinks of cronyism

    If people make a habit of rejecting knighthoods, then the only ones left to accept them will be status-hungry Jenny Shipley-types. It’ll look pathetic. (It kinda does already).

    It works better for the UK – although someone like Harold Pinter might reject their gong, there’s another five of his calibre (like David Hare) prepared to accept one in their place.

  19. Zaphod Beeblebrox 19
    14 August 2009 at 9:02 pm

    Don’t know about you but the title ‘Sir’ doesn’t actually conjure up many positive images anymore. Perhaps it’s all the knighthoods handed out by that turkey Sir joh Bjelke Peterson.

  20. sk 20
    14 August 2009 at 9:03 pm

    The point is that the move to reinstate honours is a big step back. The future is Asia, not Great Bankrupt Britain with their discredited royals. Time to leave colonialism behind and move into the 21st century.

    For all you who love the titles, don’t you get it that the toffs don’t like us kiwis anyway.

  21. Dean Reynolds 21
    14 August 2009 at 9:34 pm

    The Tories need to enjoy their knighthoods while they can because Australia is the precedent. Whitlam abolished knighthoods, Fraser brought them back ( like Key ), Hawke abolished them a second time & Buck Palace said, ‘no more knighthoods for Australia, they’ve become a political football.’ The next NZ Labour Govt will abolish them a second time & that’ll be the end of the whole pathetic system.

    • Uke 21.1
      16 August 2009 at 11:11 am

      Fingers crossed.

      Interesting isn’t it, haven’t seen any discussion in the mainstream media about the Australian system.

    • Rodel 21.2
      18 August 2009 at 10:27 pm

      To Dean Reynolds
      Thanks for your post. It is the best so far and made me realise that all is not yet lost to the torymindset.

  22. Pascal's bookie 22
    14 August 2009 at 9:50 pm

    Do they still have to provide the Crown with a levy of trained and equipped soldiery?

    Bloody well should.

    Otherwise it’s just a farkn pisstake.

  23. Hilary 23
    14 August 2009 at 10:25 pm

    Great post. Thanks

  24. mike 24
    15 August 2009 at 7:57 am

    Never forget that this lot had the CHOICE of what to take. Czar Helen took that option away

  25. vto 25
    15 August 2009 at 8:50 am

    such a small mind and narrow perspective BLiP.

  26. mike 26
    15 August 2009 at 9:19 am

    Were these the ones who relented to helen’s pressure?

    • Spectator 26.1
      15 August 2009 at 12:27 pm

      Do you mean to say that Witi Ihimaera, and others of those who didn’t feel the need to tug their forelock in the presence of a foreign Head of State, have somehow been “got at” by Helen, all the way from New York?

      If so, your tin-foil needs tightening.

  27. Murray 27
    15 August 2009 at 9:44 am

    Ahh the politics of envy

  28. Relic 28
    15 August 2009 at 10:48 am

    A bunch of curs (soft c) alright, dames inclusive. What a mincing, personally revealing spectacle some of these eager twisters made of themselves. R. Coutts and even Snell.

    Oh well, the refusnik 13 get to keep their integrity and see their reputations grow over time.

  29. coolas 29
    15 August 2009 at 11:36 am

    Dean Reynolds explains the inevitable future which makes that ceremony even more farcical. What a cringe. Shipley, Coutts and Meads. Honoured for their service to our country. Titles are a joke. Shipley was champion of the divisive policies of Bulk Funding, ACC Privatisation and the ECA. Meads promoted a rip-off Property Investment company, and Coutts jumped ship. Hero’s to be honoured?

    I applaud those who turned down the title. Why sully a good reputation by joining such a dubious clique

  30. Murray 30
    15 August 2009 at 6:15 pm

    What a sad spiteful bunch you lot are

    • BLiP 30.1
      16 August 2009 at 2:03 am

      It is, in fact, those who have taken the title that are the spiteful. They are the ones that wish to separate themselves from Aotearoa, to become, in their minds, better than me. And, as for “sad”, no, not at all. I take heart from and celebrate those who truely are one of us and are happy to be so. Kia ora to them – and fuck off to you.

      • bobbity 30.1.1
        16 August 2009 at 8:38 am

        “It is, in fact, those who have taken the title that are the spiteful. They are the ones that wish to separate themselves from Aotearoa”

        How so ? Looking at the entire list I’d say the vast majority of them are proud and patriotic NZers.

        “…..to become, in their minds, better than me”

        Well in my mind they’re far better than you – they’ve achieved at a high level and been rightfully honoured, you’re a spiteful bitter pseudonym on a blog.

  31. Murray 31
    16 August 2009 at 8:58 am

    Man Have you got problems. You need some help badly If you think like that

    • vto 31.1
      16 August 2009 at 10:12 am

      Gotta agree with you Murray.

      BLiP, this “They are the ones that wish to separate themselves from Aotearoa, to become, in their minds, better than me.” truly exhibits the small mind and narrow perspective that I first sensed in your original post. This subsequent provides ample reinforcement.

      Other than the naive, inexperienced, envious, guilt-ridden, or simply stoned thoughts that are spinning inside that big empty head of yours, do you have any evidence to support your two ludicrous assertions in the above statement?

      The whole anti-brigade has shown nothing but shallow hollowness and lack of historical perspective in their consistently pinch-arsed nastiness to this matter.

      • BLiP 31.1.1
        16 August 2009 at 1:42 pm

        Hehehehehe – your use of ad hominem is proof of your own intellectual paucity and festering inner nastiness.

        • vto 31.1.1.1
          16 August 2009 at 3:01 pm

          So you clearly don’t have any evidence to back your child-like assertion “They are the ones that wish to separate themselves from Aotearoa, to become, in their minds, better than me.”

          And so the ad hominem was well justified.

          Tell me BLip, what caused you to make that assertion?

          Are you going to back yourself and try to explain or are you going to ignore the question and attack again?

          Actually, I dont really give a toss. The majority of posts on this site are total shit compared to a few months ago.

          • BLiP 31.1.1.1.1
            16 August 2009 at 3:52 pm

            Perhaps you can explain why an indigenous honour is not good enough for them.

            • vto 31.1.1.1.1.1
              17 August 2009 at 8:15 am

              So your child-like assertion “They are the ones that wish to separate themselves from Aotearoa, to become, in their minds, better than me” can’t be justified or evidenced in any way. The only conclusion then is that you must have just made it up through some sort of unknown process in your own mind (see earlier description).

              And now you try to divert and avoid with yet another child-like assertion that they think the earlier honour “is not good enough for them”. I’ll try again BLiP – how do you know these recipients think the earlier honour “is not good enough for them”? What on earth makes you think they think like that?

              I think you have absolutely no idea whatsoever about the reasons people support the return of some parts of the earlier system.

  32. no leftie 32
    16 August 2009 at 9:19 am

    Well said.

    Good on Sir Ivor Richardson and Dame Silvia Cartright not accepting the titular honours of Sir or Dame.

    • no leftie 32.1
      16 August 2009 at 6:32 pm

      Too subtle eh…

      How about….

      Because if Sir Ivor Richardson and Dame Silvia Cartright choose not to accept these elitist and spiteful honours, then they’ll just remain plain old Sir Ivor Richardson and Dame Silvia Cartright and not set themselves above everyone as Sir Ivor Richardson or Dame Silvia Cartright.

      Another glorious victory for the proletariat.

      Oh and BLiP the Republicanism by Stealth of the last government is gone – deal with it.

  33. Beyondthebeltway 33
    16 August 2009 at 11:32 am

    I raised a toast last night to the above living wonders, and to “their” people, those who selflessly on piss poor wages get rid of the garbage, clean up old peoples homes, cut the crippled neighbours lawn, or perform surgery gratis etc etc, all of our heroes, we love you. Heres to you.

    ps. Go the All Blacks, no gongs on offer but we love you too!

  34. Rodel 34
    18 August 2009 at 10:22 pm

    I applaud the real kiwis who declined the silly and let’s face it, childish titles of the aristocratic mafia from a far off country and a far off time. They’re solid as I reckon – or was that the other side?.