Sheer hikoi madness

[James Deuce]

Speaking of dispelling myths...

The Treaty of Waitangi was signed in 1840 before the Land Wars which didn't commence until 1844 in the North and 1860 in Taranaki. The Treaty is not a truce, but a declaration (in the English version) of British sovereignty in exchange for the Maori having guaranteed rights of possession of "exclusive and undisturbed possession of their lands and estates, forests, fisheries and other properties". Of course much debate has raged over whether the words used in the Maori version meant the same as in the English version.

The Land Wars arose later because the treaty was not upheld in many ways by the government of the colony, resulting in land confiscations both by armed force and dubious dealings.

The new Treaty of Waitangi website is a good attempt at providing some background to why the treaty was signed and what went wrong following the treaty, which has lead to the recent treaty settlements.

I suggest it would be quite good reading for people on both sides of this arguement!

Ahh yes but there were several post Waitangi Treaty truces with different tribes at different times.

[SPman]

Dunno. ....
Possibly the treaty was considered the best economic solution to something that otherwise could have had enormous expense for not much return (ie a long term war of attrition)
Just my 0.02 worth.

Also, didn't the british want to get in before the French, who were making inroads into the Pacific in terms of Colonisation and aquiring officially recognised European sovreignty. The French were already in Akaroa and NZ had not been "claimed" by anyone, so a rushed treaty with the natives was in order.

[wkid_one]

WHO FUCKEN CARES?

I don't mean to be flippant in making that statement - but really - lets just try and live as one country for once......all this Waitangi Treaty shit is what is holding this country back.....too many people living in the past. I am honestly sick to death about hearing about it. It seems not a news article can go by on the news at night without some reference to Maori-dom and the injustices they face in this country.

I am all for equality - I am not for a minority holding a country to ransom and the detriment of the growth, development, encouragement and betterment of the country as a whole because they see an opportunity to create a little 'isle of wealth' for themselves.

The sooner this crap can be put to bed the better. It seems our government spend sooooooo much time fighting over these very issues amongst themselves that they actually forget there is a country they have been entrusted to direct and govern.

I also don't mean to brush aside any 'legitimate' claims some may have - I just suggest we bloody resolved the whole thing in one foul swoop and be done with it.

[MacD]

Ahh yes but there were several post Waitangi Treaty truces with different tribes at different times.

Yep, I just get frustrated when I see people confusing the Treaty of Waitangi with the Land Wars in terms of timeline and cause and effect. This whole argument seems so fundamental to the future of this country that you think people would take the time to try and find out what happened in our history that got us to this point.

Anyhow, it's sunny outside so I'm going for a ride...

[Ms Piggy]

Yep, I just get frustrated when I see people confusing the Treaty of Waitangi with the Land Wars in terms of timeline and cause and effect. This whole argument seems so fundamental to the future of this country that you think people would take the time to try and find out what happened in our history that got us to this point.

Anyhow, it's sunny outside so I'm going for a ride...

That's exactly my point MacD

Yeah it loverly! Lets hope we get more of the same tomorrow!

[Ms Piggy]

WHO FUCKEN CARES?

I do.

[White trash]

I do.

Me too. Last thing I want is for my grandchildren, not to be able to go to the beach (and I'm sure it wouldn't get to that!) because someone (anyone) is barring access to anyone else.

I don't fully understand both sides so I'm purposefully staying out of this discussion but it is very interesting to read other peoples views on the subject.

[jimbo600]

The British own everything you know.

"Land of Hope and Glory,
Mother of the Free,....etc etc

[Coldkiwi]

.

I don't fully understand both sides so I'm purposefully staying out of this discussion but it is very interesting to read other peoples views on the subject.

ditto. interesting comments guys, I'm learning quite a bit here!

I have to say thouugh that whatever the argument, Tame Iti isn't advancing the purpose of the Hikoi one iota. I see he's saying in the Herald that his snotting/spitting wasn't very extreme at all and could've done worse except that he didn't have any toilet paper. If he really cared about advancing the Maori case to be heard in court, he should wisen up to the fact that the media have as much moral backbone as jellyfish and will use his public display to make the cause look unreasonable (and as was noted earlier , because it gets ratings). With maori iwi being quoted left, right and centre about how inappropriate his behaviour was, I think someone needs to pull his head in for him!:spudwhat:

[wkid_one]

I do.

Read the remainder of the thread CSL for the full point

[Ms Piggy]

Read the remainder of the thread CSL for the full point

Yep I did mate but I still give a fuck.

[wkid_one]

Yep I did mate but I still give a fuck.

So - you then are happy for this stupid argument to be debated for eons to come rather than have a resolution and allow the country to move on?

My POV is that I don't give a fuck about the arguing.....I wish to see this put to bed (excuse the pun) once and for all......I am sick of this country being held to ransom over a 150+ year old document. For sure they have rights (as per my original thread - I am not arguing that point) - but lets address them, resolve them and then burn the fucken thing.

Why won't the minority do this? Because they are scared of settling in case they find out in 20 years they missed out on something. Plus - this is the one thing that they can hang around the countries neck for decades to come. It is ridiculous that a country can be so held to task over something.

As I said before - not a day goes by where there isn't some reference to the TOW......We as a country appear to be governed first and foremost by the TOW......

[Ms Piggy]

So - you then are happy for this stupid argument to be debated for eons to come rather than have a resolution and allow the country to move on?

My POV is that I don't give a fuck about the arguing.....I wish to see this put to bed (excuse the pun) once and for all......I am sick of this country being held to ransom over a 150+ year old document. For sure they have rights (as per my original thread - I am not arguing that point) - but lets address them, resolve them and then burn the fucken thing.

Why won't the minority do this? Because they are scared of settling in case they find out in 20 years they missed out on something. Plus - this is the one thing that they can hang around the countries neck for decades to come. It is ridiculous that a country can be so held to task over something.

As I said before - not a day goes by where there isn't some reference to the TOW......We as a country appear to be governed first and foremost by the TOW......

I don't think we've be "held to ransom" I think that we are finally been made accountable for a document that promised Maori equality (among other things) but in reality didn't deliver it.

I'm with you mate, that it would be nice to sort it our once & for all and my lecturer at Uni, in my Treaty of Waitangi paper, believes that maybe a new Treaty, a contemporary one, could be the solution.

I think it's really good to talk about this stuff b/c I feel like there a lot of people (I used to be one) who spout off about Maori and the Treaty like they know what they're talking about when in fact they are talking out their arse.

Not that I'm saying I'm any expert at all.

It's not simple problem to fix and that's why it's such a huge issue. My understanding is that it's about "who" Maori are and their connection to the land that was lost. So maybe (and this is just off the top off my head now) it's kinda like losing a child/loved one & getting life insurance...that might be a good analogy - you can get an insurance payout for the loss of the child/loved one and life moves on but you always have that loss. Not a perfect analogy but meh.

I'd like it to be resolved but I'd also like to see peole more edjamacated on the topic.

HAPPY MOTHERS DAY!!

Anyway off for a ride soon

[Shafted]

So - you then are happy for this stupid argument to be debated for eons to come rather than have a resolution and allow the country to move on? ......

This is not actually a fair account of the options. The argument and debate is a necessary part of reaching a sustainable way forward. If 'the country' (what a concept that is!) wants to see itself, and be seen as, Just - as in the place where everyone has a 'fair go' etc- it needs to address the suggestions that the present state of things has been produced out of systematically having shafted particular groups in the population.

The treaty is increasingly seen as providing the constitutional foundation of the State and of all things that we associate with it- the end of the treaty discussion is not that the discussion would disappear and that the document would be burnt (!!) but that we 'as a country' could see the treaty as a legitimate basis for a just country rather than a licence to dominate and/or steal or whatever ...

I am not too sure about the notion of a 'new treaty' or whatever - it seems to me that we have to recognise that the treaty is complex (Historian Jamie Belich (of NZ wars fame) suggests that there are over five different versions of the treaty - we often talk as if there was just one - the english version - and sometimes recognise that there was at least a maori and an english version with radical differences in 'translation' - Much of what the Waitangi Tribunal has been doing over the last twenty five years has been to walk a path between these different versions in its talk of 'principles' rather than the specific articles etc which lead to the minefield of different translations etc ....

Anyway , long story , short version - the tow is not going away anytime soon . Cheers.

[Jackrat]

This is not actually a fair account of the options. The argument and debate is a necessary part of reaching a sustainable way forward. If 'the country' (what a concept that is!) wants to see itself, and be seen as, Just - as in the place where everyone has a 'fair go' etc- it needs to address the suggestions that the present state of things has been produced out of systematically having shafted particular groups in the population.

The treaty is increasingly seen as providing the constitutional foundation of the State and of all things that we associate with it- the end of the treaty discussion is not that the discussion would disappear and that the document would be burnt (!!) but that we 'as a country' could see the treaty as a legitimate basis for a just country rather than a licence to dominate and/or steal or whatever ...

I am not too sure about the notion of a 'new treaty' or whatever - it seems to me that we have to recognise that the treaty is complex (Historian Jamie Belich (of NZ wars fame) suggests that there are over five different versions of the treaty - we often talk as if there was just one - the english version - and sometimes recognise that there was at least a maori and an english version with radical differences in 'translation' - Much of what the Waitangi Tribunal has been doing over the last twenty five years has been to walk a path between these different versions in its talk of 'principles' rather than the specific articles etc which lead to the minefield of different translations etc ....

Anyway , long story , short version - the tow is not going away anytime soon . Cheers.

There were several copys of the treaty and only one was written in english,all the others were in Maori.
It seems the two main copys have gone missing (Kind'a odd that).
Some copys were rewritten after being signed,(Also kind'a odd).
If one reads the version of the treaty on the TOW web site it becomes pretty obvious that it does in fact contradict its self.It gives the English Queen total rule over all of NZ and the people living here yet at the same time promises Maori things it has never delivered.
Even if you take a middle of the road view of the thing it has double meanings. (Once again very odd)
Personaly I would of though thirty odd years of warfare between the two groups of people that it was ment to represent would of made it null an void anyway.