Commodity ownership?

[Drew]

And you drop into the "them and us" mode as uch as trhe rest of us ... This is a tricky one ... human beings tend to do that al the time .. I'm convijced its biological . anyway ... the problem with that si that if we attempt a "we" then often it is a Pākehā idea of what that we means, as opposed to a Māori idea of what the "we" means ...



Bwhahaha .. my ancetors are Māori, Irish and Scottish .. all fought the English. The Highland clearances forced most people off their land and into the Southern Hemisphere (or ther Americas) .. and then they pushed Māori off their land here ..

How come when you all came here you forgot the lessons the English had taught us all and used Sassenach tactics against the people here ... just like the English in Ireland and Scotland ... Your Masters in Whitehall and Threadneedle Street trained you all very well after the defeats at Cullodon and Vinegar Hill and Tara.


Jeez mate ... only Pākehā New Zealanders have memories that short. The Irish rebellion remembers Oliver Cromwell ... the argument in the Balkans (Serbs and Croatas et al) is the left-overs of an Ottoman invasion (Muslims) 400 years ago ... The Scottish Nationalist Song FLower of Scotland remembers William Wallace (him portrayed in the movie Braveheart) ...

How come the rest of the world gets to rememebr - but we can't? We hold in our iwi memories the names of the people who arrived here on their waka (and the ones who were here before the wakas) and why they left the pacific islands to come here ... Most Pākehā New Zealanders can't even remember the names of the boats that brought their people here less than 200 years ago ... let alone where abouts (specifically) they came from and why ...

That's it, I'm 'us', you're 'them'! Us sounds friendlier I reckon

I want you to prove that you remember the names of waka and man who first came here. And then I want you prove you remember correctly. Because if I say a name to a guys, and that carries on to three hundred people, I bet you a million dollars the name that gets back to me in no way resembles the original.

Based on that and the legal system, Maori have no claim to anything not specifically mentioned in the treaty as belonging to a chief of one tribe or another.

[Banditbandit]

A lot of truths are hidden in 'wind-up', the fact that you avoid answering the question seriously says that answer was likely a truth you didn't want to admit.

And what truth would that be? Pākehā say that Māori are only in it for the money ... did we ever say that? Pākehā have made money important in this world - if we want to help our people with better education, better access to health services, improved quality of life, then we need your commodity in your world ... so we can buy what we need to build our world ...

Metal working? The agricultural and industrial revolutions were specifically British. By Maori logic, if Len Brown wants to build his rail loop I'm owed a divvy because G&R Stephenson are my direct ancestors.

No, sorry - that was a Pākehā suggestion ... (and under that Pākehā suggestion, yes you would be owed money) ... I just took the Pākehā argument a little further - along it's logical path (Māori logical path?) and clearly Pākehā don't like where their own suggestion might lead ...

Interesting twist - a Pākehā suggestion suddenly becomes Māori logic ???

[Banditbandit]

That's it, I'm 'us', you're 'them'! Us sounds friendlier I reckon

I want you to prove that you remember the names of waka and man who first came here. And then I want you prove you remember correctly. Because if I say a name to a guys, and that carries on to three hundred people, I bet you a million dollars the name that gets back to me in no way resembles the original.

Who's idea of "proof"? Western-dreived epistemologies or Māori/Indigenous empistemologies? And if you say western epistemologies, then I might just ask you if you mean those of Galileo, Popper or Feyerabend ... "Proof" is never culture-free!!!

Based on that and the legal system, Maori have no claim to anything not specifically mentioned in the treaty as belonging to a chief of one tribe or another.

Based on our legal system, our "Government" has no legitimacy ... so let's just leave that asside. But I'm not that strong on the treaty personally. I never use it in arguments, I rarely refer to it. It does not need a treaty to treat people ethically and with dignity and respect ... I'd rather argue ethics, dignity and respect than treaty ...

[Drew]

Who's idea of "proof"? Western-dreived epistemologies or Māori/Indigenous empistemologies? And if you say western epistemologies, then I might just ask you if you mean those of Galileo, Popper or Feyerabend ... "Proof" is never culture-free!!!



Based on our legal system, our "Government" has no legitimacy ... so let's just leave that asside. But I'm not that strong on the treaty personally. I never use it in arguments, I rarely refer to it. It does not need a treaty to treat people ethically and with dignity and respect ... I'd rather argue ethics, dignity and respect than treaty ...

Pick any proof you fancy. You're clearly much better educated than I am, so I'm glad you bring up the ethical side of things.

Ethics is borderline philosophy, so I'm fucked here too, but I can at least try.

The greatest harm to came from this, would be total segregation, no? So if at some point this whole thing doesn't just get put to bed and forgotten, no one has the moral high ground.

I have gone straight to the end of the argument, because typing on an iPhone is fuckin hard!

[oldrider]

There is a great debate over what happened 20 years ago and what each side expected. In our own country we expected to maintain our laws - The Treaty gave us Tino Rangatiratanga - self-rule. The European settlers had the same privilege - self-rule. Only the settlers set up a Governmetn and expected to rule us as well as themselves !!!

And the characterization of "Iwi" as "communities" is a colonizing approach. A better interpretation of "iwi" is "nation". The fundamental definition of a nation is a group of people with a defined geographical area, who enforce their laws within that boundary, and proect that bounded area from invasion . That certainly applies to Iwi, each of which had an area of land that was defended and had laws which applied within that boundary ..

Our ancestors were translating "iwi" as "nation" during the 1800s . it was the settlers who did not want to recognise that ...

I think you illustrate why Maori are such gifted musicians, they can take an established tune and rearrange the score to suit themselves and play it any way they like!

The problems we are facing right now are (IMHO) because after the "agreement" was struck Maori stepped back and have been at the back grumbling amongst themselves ever since!

Today they are stepping up to the plate and participating in the politics of the nation and the silent majority are not used to that!

There will be some consternation and fear generated until the nation settles down again into a new paradigm!

It will be difficult enough without all the bullshit but I suppose that is just the way it is and the way it will be but it will continue if we are to succeed as a nation!

[Drew]

Found a card up my sleeve, might be an ace, might be a 2.

Based on our legal system, the government is perfectly legitimate by the way. Precedent has been set now, 200 years of it. Not by the Maori you say? Wrong, because they have taken things to court, within the governmental regime we have.

If any tribe has abstained approaching the treaty claims place we have, they're the only ones who can just say "fuck you honky", and take something back.

[Banditbandit]

I think you illustrate why Maori are such gifted musicians, they can take an established tune and rearrange the score to suit themselves and play it any way they like!

An estasblished tune? Yes - the dominant culture wrote its own tune - we don't always agree with that tune ... and we never have. But then, the victors always get to write their version of history ...

The problems we are facing right now are (IMHO) because after the "agreement" was struck Maori stepped back and have been at the back grumbling amongst themselves ever since!

Today they are stepping up to the plate and participating in the politics of the nation and the silent majority are not used to that!

There will be some consternation and fear generated until the nation settles down again into a new paradigm!

It will be difficult enough without all the bullshit but I suppose that is just the way it is and the way it will be but it will continue if we are to succeed as a nation!

Yes - that's about it ... and we have been trying to estabish a new paradigm for about 200 years ...

[Drew]

Yes - that's about it ... and we have been trying to estabish a new paradigm for about 200 years ...

Really? Doesn't ring true with me. The Maori didn't even know they were getting fucked for quite some time after penetration as far as I can see.

[Banditbandit]

Really? Doesn't ring true with me. The Maori didn't even know they were getting fucked for quite some time after penetration as far as I can see.

Bwhahaha ... Hone Heke attacked Kororareka and cut down the flag pole on Maiki Hil just four years after the treaty was signed .. we knew we were getting screwed over ... despite protests, nothing happened .. and in four years Hone's patience wore out ...

How little of our history history of Aotearoa/New Zealand) people here actually know ..

[CookMySock]

A thing that is legally in your custody is your property. It cannot be wrested from you - that is a criminal act, but you may be persuaded to hand it over, or you may consent to the jurisdiction of some court to make a decision regarding the matter - but if you DO consent, then you are COMPELLED to accept this outcome. There's a lesson there!

[Banditbandit]

A thing that is legally in your custody is your property. It cannot be wrested from you - that is a criminal act, but you may be persuaded to hand it over, or you may consent to the jurisdiction of some court to make a decision regarding the matter - but if you DO consent, then you are COMPELLED to accept this outcome. There's a lesson there!

Yes - definitely a lesson. Which one do you mean and for whom?

[Maha]

Bwhahaha ... Hone Heke attacked Kororareka and cut down the flag pole on Maiki Hil just four years after the treaty was signed .. we knew we were getting screwed over ... despite protests, nothing happened .. and in four years Hone's patience wore out ...

How little of our history history of Aotearoa/New Zealand) people here actually know ..

Who is this ''we'' of which you speak...surely you mean ''early maori'' (of which you are not) ..if it were to be put into context?

Mike Smith attacked a tree on a hill .... a large percentage of people (of every race and creed) living in NZ at the time thought he was a cunt....and they were right.
I am only guessing here, but I would imagine the same was thought of Hone Heke at the time.

[bogan]

And what truth would that be? Pākehā say that Māori are only in it for the money ... did we ever say that? Pākehā have made money important in this world - if we want to help our people with better education, better access to health services, improved quality of life, then we need your commodity in your world ... so we can buy what we need to build our world ...

Pākehā have made more than money important in this world, they've also made education, healthcare, and quality of life important. The claims would be taken much more seriously if they were based in and around the reality of the situation, not some self delusional world view.

[Matariki]

Hahahahahaha, what? No.

I used the wheel example, to illustrate that Maori were no where near technologically advanced enough to harness water, in anything but a bucket.

I have to go a bit off topic and point out my surprise at this too. Maori are descended from asia somewhere aren't they? Those little zipper head mofos have been using water abstractly for centuries haven't they?

Well... to be fair, yes our (for those of Maori descent) ancestors were still at the tribal stage, so they were about a thousand or so years behind in terms of technology before the arrival of pakeha. But that doesn't mean that they were a thousand years behind in intelligence. There is a debate about where they came from, there is good evidence to state that the Maori as we know them today, could of found their origins in both South America and South East Asia. Though the general Polynesian DNA profile fits the South East Asian DNA profile best.

http://lens.auckland.ac.nz/images/3/...inar_Paper.pdf

[imdying]

Meh... none of this really bothers me much... I'm at the top of the pile, and whilst Maori like Banditbandit keep on with this sort of crap, I'll be doing my best to make sure they stay there. Black? Want a job working for me? Better apply elsewhere. Black? Don't want to get arrested, back luck. Black? Don't want to get fucked over by mighty whitey's IRD, heh, surprise! It's too easy...