Post by Kiwi Frontline on Nov 6, 2018 6:04:00 GMT 12
Dominion Post 6/11/18
INHERENTLY RACIST
Joel Maxwell (Playing with the notion Pakeha is a racist word, Nov 5) may well claim the word Pakeha is not an insult, but the problem with the term is that it refers to everyone who is not Maori, no matter what race or ethnicity.
Being Maori means being tangata whenua and therefore holding a special status that comes with ethnic-based rights and a superior recognition of culture and beliefs.
The term Pakeha may not in itself be derogatory, but it does by definition carry a cultural inferiority. For these reasons it is an inherently racist term.
I am of European heritage, of Welsh and Scottish descent. I don't describe myself as Welsh or Scottish, and nor as a Pakeha, but rather as a New Zealander or a Kiwi, because these are inclusive terms. They include everybody who considers New Zealand home, be they of European, Asian, African or American extraction, and are also inclusive of Maori.
We need to be a country where we celebrate our differences, where our diversity enriches us, where ethnicity matters but does not bestow privilege, where all citizens are united equally under the law. If we continue down the path of separatism we will fail as country.
RICHARD PRINCE, Tauranga
Northland Age 6/11/18
LIBELLOUS AND MALICIOUS
It would seem that Massey University is not alone in its efforts to suppress free speech (review proceeding). In the autumn edition of Auckland University's alumni magazine Ingenio, language professor Stephen May described Hobson's Pledge as "racist and militantly anti-Maori."
Only when a letter from a Hobson's Pledge lawyer stated that the statement was untrue and defamatory, and implied the possibility of legal action, did the university's Vice-Chancellor, Stuart McCutcheon, answer, acknowledging that the article was "arguably defamatory and should not have been published."
An apology to that effect was published online, and in Ingenio's spring edition.
How a group that actively works to promote equality for all can be deemed racist, whilst a group claiming ethnic privilege is not, defies logic.
The media continue promoting negative comments about Hobson's Pledge without giving them a right of reply.
It is to be hoped that the Marxist left-wing philosophies now rampant in the universities of the US and Canada do not flourish in our seats of learning.
But then Stephan May's statements are an obvious example of hate speech, libellous and malicious.
BRYAN JOHNSON Omokoroa
MAKING IT UP?
I don't know if Wally Hicks (letters November 1) has a comprehension problem or 'simply' likes making stuff up based on revisionist fabricated neo-history.
Whereas, in high-sounding, flowery leftist form, Mr Hicks 'estimates', 'believes' and 'more or lesses', conversely I have produced verifiable facts and figures.
Did CAP give a reason for abandoning their Maori-dominant 'conversation'? I wonder if they abandoned it in the face of huge public opposition and the NZCPR's so-called 'meaningless' (Wally's word) ICRP campaign? Well done NZCPR, another win for democracy, as in my view nearly 80 per cent of Kiwis would support your stance.
Mr Hicks finds it a funny thing that "neither CAP nor Constitution Aotearoa are even talking about a Treaty-based written constitution. Yet these two links are clearly talking about a Treaty-based written constitution — CAP tinyurl.com/y8tgvngx — Constitution Aotearoa tinyurl.com/ya2hepnx
And of course,' treaty-based `means the bogus version of the treaty with fictitious partnership and treaty principles add-ons.
While groups, NZCPR, Hobson's Pledge, Kiwi Frontline and others, that share
common views, goals and interests could be regarded as esprit de corps, they are not a form of tribalism. Further, they are not confined to race, as is tribal Maori, and do not have an agenda for Maori sovereignty of our country, an agenda supported by a few misguided unpatriotic non-Maori.
Since 1840 'one law for all' and 'racial equality' have been part of our heritage and birthright, and these hallmarks are nothing to be ashamed of. Only a separatist would see those doctrines as holding our country back.
What's holding our country back is the funnelling of wealth and assets into elite part-Maori pockets coupled with the huge burden, socially and financially, of the many race-based Maori-only special privileges and rights being handed out, which would be far better applied to all Kiwis.
Mr Hicks stated in the Northland Age (June 14, 2018) that Dr Muriel Newman and Hobson's Pledge used the term `daughter slaughter.' On June 19, 2018, I challenged him to produce evidence of this. To date he has not done so — enough said on the question of credibility, methinks.
GEOFF PARKER, Kamo
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers
INHERENTLY RACIST
Joel Maxwell (Playing with the notion Pakeha is a racist word, Nov 5) may well claim the word Pakeha is not an insult, but the problem with the term is that it refers to everyone who is not Maori, no matter what race or ethnicity.
Being Maori means being tangata whenua and therefore holding a special status that comes with ethnic-based rights and a superior recognition of culture and beliefs.
The term Pakeha may not in itself be derogatory, but it does by definition carry a cultural inferiority. For these reasons it is an inherently racist term.
I am of European heritage, of Welsh and Scottish descent. I don't describe myself as Welsh or Scottish, and nor as a Pakeha, but rather as a New Zealander or a Kiwi, because these are inclusive terms. They include everybody who considers New Zealand home, be they of European, Asian, African or American extraction, and are also inclusive of Maori.
We need to be a country where we celebrate our differences, where our diversity enriches us, where ethnicity matters but does not bestow privilege, where all citizens are united equally under the law. If we continue down the path of separatism we will fail as country.
RICHARD PRINCE, Tauranga
Northland Age 6/11/18
LIBELLOUS AND MALICIOUS
It would seem that Massey University is not alone in its efforts to suppress free speech (review proceeding). In the autumn edition of Auckland University's alumni magazine Ingenio, language professor Stephen May described Hobson's Pledge as "racist and militantly anti-Maori."
Only when a letter from a Hobson's Pledge lawyer stated that the statement was untrue and defamatory, and implied the possibility of legal action, did the university's Vice-Chancellor, Stuart McCutcheon, answer, acknowledging that the article was "arguably defamatory and should not have been published."
An apology to that effect was published online, and in Ingenio's spring edition.
How a group that actively works to promote equality for all can be deemed racist, whilst a group claiming ethnic privilege is not, defies logic.
The media continue promoting negative comments about Hobson's Pledge without giving them a right of reply.
It is to be hoped that the Marxist left-wing philosophies now rampant in the universities of the US and Canada do not flourish in our seats of learning.
But then Stephan May's statements are an obvious example of hate speech, libellous and malicious.
BRYAN JOHNSON Omokoroa
MAKING IT UP?
I don't know if Wally Hicks (letters November 1) has a comprehension problem or 'simply' likes making stuff up based on revisionist fabricated neo-history.
Whereas, in high-sounding, flowery leftist form, Mr Hicks 'estimates', 'believes' and 'more or lesses', conversely I have produced verifiable facts and figures.
Did CAP give a reason for abandoning their Maori-dominant 'conversation'? I wonder if they abandoned it in the face of huge public opposition and the NZCPR's so-called 'meaningless' (Wally's word) ICRP campaign? Well done NZCPR, another win for democracy, as in my view nearly 80 per cent of Kiwis would support your stance.
Mr Hicks finds it a funny thing that "neither CAP nor Constitution Aotearoa are even talking about a Treaty-based written constitution. Yet these two links are clearly talking about a Treaty-based written constitution — CAP tinyurl.com/y8tgvngx — Constitution Aotearoa tinyurl.com/ya2hepnx
And of course,' treaty-based `means the bogus version of the treaty with fictitious partnership and treaty principles add-ons.
While groups, NZCPR, Hobson's Pledge, Kiwi Frontline and others, that share
common views, goals and interests could be regarded as esprit de corps, they are not a form of tribalism. Further, they are not confined to race, as is tribal Maori, and do not have an agenda for Maori sovereignty of our country, an agenda supported by a few misguided unpatriotic non-Maori.
Since 1840 'one law for all' and 'racial equality' have been part of our heritage and birthright, and these hallmarks are nothing to be ashamed of. Only a separatist would see those doctrines as holding our country back.
What's holding our country back is the funnelling of wealth and assets into elite part-Maori pockets coupled with the huge burden, socially and financially, of the many race-based Maori-only special privileges and rights being handed out, which would be far better applied to all Kiwis.
Mr Hicks stated in the Northland Age (June 14, 2018) that Dr Muriel Newman and Hobson's Pledge used the term `daughter slaughter.' On June 19, 2018, I challenged him to produce evidence of this. To date he has not done so — enough said on the question of credibility, methinks.
GEOFF PARKER, Kamo
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers