Post by Kiwi Frontline on Jun 1, 2016 5:46:27 GMT 12
The Northern Advocate 1/6/16
TRIBALISM RULES
Rewriting history and propaganda are tools used by powerhungry people, so their self proclaimed superior status can never be questioned.
It’s fascinating to read how “groupthink” and blind public obedience has evolved in authoritarian states like Russia, China and North Korea.
It is rather more frightening to watch it happening here in New Zealand.
The techniques have worked well, making many think that democracy is now wrong, and that the handing over of government power to private interest Maori groups is the right thing to do. Question this and you are labelled "racist".
Here's how it's happening here:
1) Get academics to rewrite our history as a fantasy novel, in which Maori are goodies and Pakeha baddies. And that any-one with a drop of Maori blood is kinder to children, old people, ancestors (only Maori ones count) and nature.
2) Get schools and universities to brainwash the young with this fake history.
3) Get the media to peddle the fake history, to stoke Maori grievance and Pakeha guilt.
4) Brand as "racist" anyone who questions the fake history or special Maori entitlement.
5) Entrench processes whereby private Maori groups are en-titled to take control of government and resources, and tax-payers to pay for it — thus ensuring permanent Maori power and wealth.
6) Threaten countrywide violence if New Zealanders object. (John Key's "hikois from hell".)
7) Pretend at all times that Maori are a separate, superior race, and ignore the fact that they are all part-Pakeha.
Fait accompli! Tribalism rules and R.I.P. democracy
GEOFF PARKER
Kamo
Wanganui Chronicle 1/6/16
TREATY PRINCIPLES
H Norton (letters, May 26) fancies his own twisted logic, but let us look more closely. He writes that the so-called Treaty of Waitangi "must be a treaty, because it has that writ large ... it's a formal agreement between two or more states".
Now, although it has been called a treaty ever since day one and even by Hobson, as constitutional lawyer David Round has pointed out, it is not really a treaty at all for the simple reason that there was no Maori state, merely a collection of petty tribes, many of which were mortal enemies.
Nevertheless, whatever we may call it, by the "Treaty", chiefs who signed it surrendered whatever sovereignty they possessed to the Queen, completely and forever; all Maori became fully entitled British subjects and the property rights of all the people of New Zealand were guaranteed. That is all.
No High Court or anybody else is entitled to write anything else into that retrospectively, in particular any spurious opinion that there is a "partnership".
None of John Robinson's books are "ill-based, anti-Maori rants," even if racists want to believe it. We may, however, refer to TL Buick's classic book The Treaty of Waitangi, written in 1914 before political correctness overwhelmed us. He observes: ". . there being amongst them [the chiefs] a wide comprehension of the two great principles embodied in the treaty — that they were surrendering the magisterial control of the country to the Queen, and retaining the possession of the land". "Britain's right to colonise and govern in New Zealand was incontestable before the world." Buick states the only real principles it contained. The recently invented batch of so-called principles is make-believe.
BRUCE MOON
Nelson
RIVER LEGISLATION
Re the Chronicle article of May 26, "Te Awa Tupua Bill passed first reading": Here we go again with this National Government to give Wanganui iwi $80 million to give a river a legal identity with the corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a legal person.
What a pathetic load of crap. John Key has said that no one owns the rivers but is paying local iwi to look after it. Where is the $80 million for the rest of us people who can look after the river as well? The rest of us have just the same respect for the waters.
When the 14 Wanganui (with-out the "h") chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi in Wanganui in 1840, there was no mention of rivers, lakes, seabed or foreshore. Once it was signed, these were the property of the Crown, held in trust for all the people of New Zealand.
Since governments hold waterways in trust for the public; they cannot sell or give away to private ownership or control.
Maori today have inter-married of their own free will with other races and therefore are no longer the group of people that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840. Maori today are New Zealand citizens that claim varying degrees of Maori ancestry, as one sees in the continuing amended legislation since 1865 as Maori ancestry become further and further diluted. This payout is another bribe to get votes. It's another theft from the public purse.
I B
Springvale
Bay of Plenty Times 1/6/16
LOCAL IWI CAN AFFORD TO BUILD
I totally support correspondent Ross Darrell’s inquiry (letters May 28) as to why local iwi have not used the millions they have been given to build houses for Maori homeless and, referring to a Tommy Wilson column, the many Maori leaving prison “with nowhere to go”.
One cannot help wondering how much of this homelessness is due to misfortune and how much for the mindset of many young people, and others, that there is no need to try and save for the future — there is always Government benefits to fall back on. How much of the money spent in pubs, on drugs or cigarettes, could have contributed to a home? (Abridged)
M B
Tauranga
TRIBALISM RULES
Rewriting history and propaganda are tools used by powerhungry people, so their self proclaimed superior status can never be questioned.
It’s fascinating to read how “groupthink” and blind public obedience has evolved in authoritarian states like Russia, China and North Korea.
It is rather more frightening to watch it happening here in New Zealand.
The techniques have worked well, making many think that democracy is now wrong, and that the handing over of government power to private interest Maori groups is the right thing to do. Question this and you are labelled "racist".
Here's how it's happening here:
1) Get academics to rewrite our history as a fantasy novel, in which Maori are goodies and Pakeha baddies. And that any-one with a drop of Maori blood is kinder to children, old people, ancestors (only Maori ones count) and nature.
2) Get schools and universities to brainwash the young with this fake history.
3) Get the media to peddle the fake history, to stoke Maori grievance and Pakeha guilt.
4) Brand as "racist" anyone who questions the fake history or special Maori entitlement.
5) Entrench processes whereby private Maori groups are en-titled to take control of government and resources, and tax-payers to pay for it — thus ensuring permanent Maori power and wealth.
6) Threaten countrywide violence if New Zealanders object. (John Key's "hikois from hell".)
7) Pretend at all times that Maori are a separate, superior race, and ignore the fact that they are all part-Pakeha.
Fait accompli! Tribalism rules and R.I.P. democracy
GEOFF PARKER
Kamo
Wanganui Chronicle 1/6/16
TREATY PRINCIPLES
H Norton (letters, May 26) fancies his own twisted logic, but let us look more closely. He writes that the so-called Treaty of Waitangi "must be a treaty, because it has that writ large ... it's a formal agreement between two or more states".
Now, although it has been called a treaty ever since day one and even by Hobson, as constitutional lawyer David Round has pointed out, it is not really a treaty at all for the simple reason that there was no Maori state, merely a collection of petty tribes, many of which were mortal enemies.
Nevertheless, whatever we may call it, by the "Treaty", chiefs who signed it surrendered whatever sovereignty they possessed to the Queen, completely and forever; all Maori became fully entitled British subjects and the property rights of all the people of New Zealand were guaranteed. That is all.
No High Court or anybody else is entitled to write anything else into that retrospectively, in particular any spurious opinion that there is a "partnership".
None of John Robinson's books are "ill-based, anti-Maori rants," even if racists want to believe it. We may, however, refer to TL Buick's classic book The Treaty of Waitangi, written in 1914 before political correctness overwhelmed us. He observes: ". . there being amongst them [the chiefs] a wide comprehension of the two great principles embodied in the treaty — that they were surrendering the magisterial control of the country to the Queen, and retaining the possession of the land". "Britain's right to colonise and govern in New Zealand was incontestable before the world." Buick states the only real principles it contained. The recently invented batch of so-called principles is make-believe.
BRUCE MOON
Nelson
RIVER LEGISLATION
Re the Chronicle article of May 26, "Te Awa Tupua Bill passed first reading": Here we go again with this National Government to give Wanganui iwi $80 million to give a river a legal identity with the corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a legal person.
What a pathetic load of crap. John Key has said that no one owns the rivers but is paying local iwi to look after it. Where is the $80 million for the rest of us people who can look after the river as well? The rest of us have just the same respect for the waters.
When the 14 Wanganui (with-out the "h") chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi in Wanganui in 1840, there was no mention of rivers, lakes, seabed or foreshore. Once it was signed, these were the property of the Crown, held in trust for all the people of New Zealand.
Since governments hold waterways in trust for the public; they cannot sell or give away to private ownership or control.
Maori today have inter-married of their own free will with other races and therefore are no longer the group of people that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840. Maori today are New Zealand citizens that claim varying degrees of Maori ancestry, as one sees in the continuing amended legislation since 1865 as Maori ancestry become further and further diluted. This payout is another bribe to get votes. It's another theft from the public purse.
I B
Springvale
Bay of Plenty Times 1/6/16
LOCAL IWI CAN AFFORD TO BUILD
I totally support correspondent Ross Darrell’s inquiry (letters May 28) as to why local iwi have not used the millions they have been given to build houses for Maori homeless and, referring to a Tommy Wilson column, the many Maori leaving prison “with nowhere to go”.
One cannot help wondering how much of this homelessness is due to misfortune and how much for the mindset of many young people, and others, that there is no need to try and save for the future — there is always Government benefits to fall back on. How much of the money spent in pubs, on drugs or cigarettes, could have contributed to a home? (Abridged)
M B
Tauranga