Ummm... that was a petition to the British Crown in 1831 and was after the declaration of Independence of Northerm Iwi in 1835 which was facilitated and acknowledged by the British. Indeed by 1835 NZ could already be described as a British protectorate in ...
The policy of assimilation (or as Governor Grey put it amalgamation) wasn't in anyway hidden from Maori. The Crown in their negotiations kept discussing the benefits of colonisation and joining of the two people as one. It was one of the key points that ...
There is also no indication that Iwi would have been any more or less concerned about French intentions to New Zealand. Regardless they could have signed a protection treaty in those circumstances. They did not.
That was not evidenced in the debates that they held at the time.
The threat of the French has been overstated. It was not an overriding factor in the development of policy by the Colonial office towards NZ.
The Crown certainly had an agenda that didn't align with many Iwi. However the general thrust of the Crown's involvement in NZ could not really be described as treacherous as such. Most anti-Maori action were driven by British Settlers rather than as a ...
Limit the harm from other colonialists???
A question for the ToW purists here. Why did the Iwi leaders who signed the Treaty agree to Article 3 if there was no perceived benefits of being part of the British empire and therefore to colonisation?
I don't think you understood my point. Why is the Climate Change Commissioner recommending action that is unnecessary for tackling climate change?
This is the problem. The Climate Commission is recommending that the government ban the installation of Gas appliances when the real issue is not the appliances themselves but the type of fuel they are using. Surely you just want to ensure that the Gas ...
You are not addressing the issue I raised. Why are gas fired appliances a problem if they use biofuel?
Except I thought the idea was to restrict the installation of gas appliances. Surely there is little problem with gas appliances if they use Biogas?
The issue is how effective it would have been taken up by Maori. Maori had the ability, many of the skills, land, and resources required to develop a sophisticated economy. What they lacked was a large population base and capital.
Ummm... the Northern War was a mere sideshow and certainly did not lead to massive loss of life for anyone and did not kick off a long term decline in the Maori population in the area. The northern part of NZ suffered from a lack of attention by the Crown ...
Why should the government regulate gas out of existence when surely biogas is as much a "clean" energy as using wood? In many cases (such as rural areas and camping) gas fired cookers are the best way of cooking food.
Interestingly the much touted Maori economic development prior to the land wars of the 1860's was encouraged and supported by the Crown. "Governor Grey developed several policies in the early 1850s that were considered enlightened humanitarian ideals. He ...
Not entirely. The Maori economy was in serious decline by 1859 prior to the major conflicts in the land wars. https://www.tpk.govt.nz/documents/download/102/tpk-histoicinfluence-2007-eng.pdf "By the late 1850’s, the most significant and long lasting ...
If you follow standard Marxist thinking NZ needed to have a period of capitalist development to get to the stage where it was developed enough for socialism to be implemented.
Interestingly the biggest fall in Maori population was between 1840 and 1859 (That is if the 1840 figure is to be believed). This would suggest it was less the direct impact of colonisation but other effects that would probably have occurred regardless ...
Ummm... the given objection that Andrea Vance stated that was given by Mahuta was not that she was too busy but she objected to two journalists being involved in the interview process.
Ummm.. ACT got 8 % last election. The MMP threshold is 5%
I can tell you that research indicates the core support base for ACT has doubled and is sitting comfortably higher than 2%. On top of that the number of people open to being influenced towards ACT's policies has rocketed up.
Clearly that is not the case because BOTH parties rose in the poll. If ACT was only taking support from National then National would likely be falling.
ACT nicely consolidating it's support despite Natonal rising in the polls. It looks like those claiming ACT is only cannibalising National support are wrong.
And yet he won't be removed any time soon given he is incredibly popular and the Conservatives are doing well.
Not many farmers are pushing for land or livestock or crops to be owned collectively though. Sure they are cool with (voluntary) collective approaches to dome inputs and marketing efforts buy that's about it.
Does he really believe in the collective ownership of the means of production? I somehow doubt that he does. Considering he represents an electorate that is largely rural some of his constituents might be concerned that he wants to change the ownership of ...
Ho ho. How very droll. I hope you didn't expend too much effort coming up with that response. It certainly doesn't look like you did.
Um... except ACT is on many more percentage of the vote than the Maori party in recent polling so I doubt that the MP performance is causing ACT to lose sleep.
I don't believe she objected to the Haka beyond that it led to him being ejected and therefore unable to participate in further debate.
A good take on this from a political perspective from Chris Trotter. https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2021/05/14/will-labour-defuse-the-he-puapua-time-bomb/