Discussion:
Don Brash the racist
(too old to reply)
Pulp Fixxion
2004-02-16 21:46:54 UTC
Permalink
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.

Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?

Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.

The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
Roger Dewhurst
2004-02-16 21:53:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?

R
Mrs Norris
2004-02-17 23:59:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
R
Very hypothetical.
Warwick
2004-02-16 22:55:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
R
Very hypothetical.
Whats hypothetical about it?
steve
2004-02-16 23:51:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If so what?
R
Very hypothetical.
Whats hypothetical about it?
Warwick....you worry me when you ask questions like this.

1. The very question is hypothetical - as Roger said.
2. It purports to compare two randomly selected circumstances with no
context whatever. The only difference is race. Yet the question implies
that one person is "entitled" to something....also unspecificed.

Hence....."very hypothetical"

....so lacking in any sort of detail as to be utterly meaningless. Yet Roger
has clearly vested some assumptions in it that one can guess at....but it
would be highly speculative even then.

Very speculative, non-specific, un-detailed hypothetical circumstance.

In a word: Meaningless of itself.....but we may be able to draw some
tentative conslusions about how Roger's mind works. Even there, we need
more information.
Warwick
2004-02-17 00:11:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If so what?
R
Very hypothetical.
Whats hypothetical about it?
Warwick....you worry me when you ask questions like this.
1. The very question is hypothetical - as Roger said.
2. It purports to compare two randomly selected circumstances with no
context whatever. The only difference is race. Yet the question implies
that one person is "entitled" to something....also unspecificed.
Hence....."very hypothetical"
....so lacking in any sort of detail as to be utterly meaningless. Yet Roger
has clearly vested some assumptions in it that one can guess at....but it
would be highly speculative even then.
Very speculative, non-specific, un-detailed hypothetical circumstance.
In a word: Meaningless of itself.....but we may be able to draw some
tentative conslusions about how Roger's mind works. Even there, we need
more information.
It does not matter what the entitlement is. The situation most certainly
exists.

But for arguments sakes lets say that the entitlement is access to free
education that his poorer white counterpart must pay eight thousand dollars
a year for. Now can you answer Roger's question?
Mrs Norris
2004-02-18 04:43:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
R
Very hypothetical.
Whats hypothetical about it?
How many Maori do you know earning 50K ??
Only those given racist preferential treatment in the first place.
Get real.


Anyway, what is it you think this Maori person is getting now ?
Warwick
2004-02-17 03:57:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
R
Very hypothetical.
Whats hypothetical about it?
How many Maori do you know earning 50K ??
Only those given racist preferential treatment in the first place.
Get real.
Anyway, what is it you think this Maori person is getting now ?
So you are saying the situation is very hypothetical because it doesn't
exist? IE there are no Maoris on 50 kpa?.

The original question was what should that Maori get over his poorer pakeha
counterpart. Your counter to that was 'very hypothetical' by which I think
you are saying that the situation is so rare as not to be worth
considering.

That is not true. I can think of several Maori acquaintances on that kind
of money or better. More are frequently mentioned in the news, usually not
for the best of reasons.
Denver Fletcher
2004-02-17 04:04:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
(more) Respect.

It's not easy being raised with both your own people and everyone else
telling you you're so hopeless you need special privileges, and then STILL
going out and making something of yourself over and above the average.
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Roger Dewhurst
R
Very hypothetical.
Whats hypothetical about it?
How many Maori do you know earning 50K ??
Only those given racist preferential treatment in the first place.
Get real.
Anyway, what is it you think this Maori person is getting now ?
So you are saying the situation is very hypothetical because it doesn't
exist? IE there are no Maoris on 50 kpa?.
The original question was what should that Maori get over his poorer pakeha
counterpart. Your counter to that was 'very hypothetical' by which I think
you are saying that the situation is so rare as not to be worth
considering.
That is not true. I can think of several Maori acquaintances on that kind
of money or better. More are frequently mentioned in the news, usually not
for the best of reasons.
Mrs Norris
2004-02-18 11:28:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
R
Very hypothetical.
Whats hypothetical about it?
How many Maori do you know earning 50K ??
Only those given racist preferential treatment in the first place.
Get real.
Anyway, what is it you think this Maori person is getting now ?
So you are saying the situation is very hypothetical because it doesn't
exist? IE there are no Maoris on 50 kpa?.
The original question was what should that Maori get over his poorer pakeha
counterpart. Your counter to that was 'very hypothetical' by which I think
you are saying that the situation is so rare as not to be worth
considering.
That is not true. I can think of several Maori acquaintances on that kind
of money or better. More are frequently mentioned in the news, usually not
for the best of reasons.
Actually, I'm not sure why you made the Maori better off than the poor
Pakeha.
Why not have them both earning the average wage ? Then ask the
question.
Or better yet, have the Maori on 30K and his Pakeha schoolmate on 50K.
Realistic.
annemarie
2004-02-18 00:09:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Warwick
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
R
Very hypothetical.
Whats hypothetical about it?
How many Maori do you know earning 50K ??
Only those given racist preferential treatment in the first place.
Get real.
Anyway, what is it you think this Maori person is getting now ?
So you are saying the situation is very hypothetical because it doesn't
exist? IE there are no Maoris on 50 kpa?.
The original question was what should that Maori get over his poorer pakeha
counterpart. Your counter to that was 'very hypothetical' by which I think
you are saying that the situation is so rare as not to be worth
considering.
That is not true. I can think of several Maori acquaintances on that kind
of money or better. More are frequently mentioned in the news, usually not
for the best of reasons.
Actually, I'm not sure why you made the Maori better off than the poor
Pakeha.
Why not have them both earning the average wage ? Then ask the
question.
Or better yet, have the Maori on 30K and his Pakeha schoolmate on 50K.
Realistic.
So if they were school mates presumably and hypothetically they would have
had equal opportunity to education. Therefore who is responsible?
Barry Phease
2004-02-16 22:58:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
And what do you think that your hypothetical maori is entitled to that the
pakeha is not?
--
Barry Phease

mailto:***@es.co.nz
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~barryp
Bobs
2004-02-16 23:53:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
And what do you think that your hypothetical maori is entitled to that the
pakeha is not?
Maori only doctors, Maori only nurses, Maori only hospital wards, Maori
scholarships for his kids, More leniant entry levels into certain
university degrees...

Quite a lot actually.
Barry Phease
2004-02-17 00:40:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bobs
Maori only doctors, Maori only nurses, Maori only hospital wards,
Do you mean that maori have easier access to doctors, nurses and
hospitals? What evidence do you have for that? Just because a doctor
might prefer to see maori patients, doesn't mean that non-maori can't get
to a doctor. As Brash said it just increases choice.
Post by Bobs
Maori
scholarships for his kids,
Most maori scholarships are privately funded. There are other
scholarships for other groups which are also privately funded. In any
case Roger's 25 year old, well-off maori is unlikely to be able to take
advantage of one.
Post by Bobs
More
leniant entry levels into certain
Post by Bobs
university degrees...
There are a small number of places in some restricted entry courses
reserved for maori. However Roger's 25 year old maori will be unlikely to
be getting such a place.
--
Barry Phease

mailto:***@es.co.nz
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~barryp
Bobs
2004-02-17 02:21:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Bobs
Maori only doctors, Maori only nurses, Maori only hospital wards,
Do you mean that maori have easier access to doctors, nurses and
hospitals? What evidence do you have for that? Just because a doctor
might prefer to see maori patients, doesn't mean that non-maori can't get
to a doctor. As Brash said it just increases choice.
Post by Bobs
Maori
scholarships for his kids,
Most maori scholarships are privately funded.
I like how you use the word "most", to try and take away from my point
that the GOVERNMENT provides race based scholarships. There are Maori
people in medical school who SHOULD NOT be there since they didn't get
the required bursary results. However, the government lets them through
solely based on their race. Would you like a doctor treating you that
didn't even reach the basic high school requirements? Let's see how far
your tolerance gets you when he misdiagnosis your hemorrhoids as just an
anus wart.
Post by Barry Phease
There are other
scholarships for other groups which are also privately funded. In any
case Roger's 25 year old, well-off maori is unlikely to be able to take
advantage of one.
Post by Bobs
More
leniant entry levels into certain
Post by Bobs
university degrees...
There are a small number of places in some restricted entry courses
reserved for maori.
Rubbish. I believe each medical school alone has to reserve 5 spots a
year for Maori students who fail to reach the grade. And that's just in
medicine.

And frankly, I don't care if it's only 1 spot for the entire country.
It's still racist regardless of the numbers.
Post by Barry Phease
However Roger's 25 year old maori will be unlikely to
be getting such a place.
Barry Phease
2004-02-17 03:14:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bobs
Post by Barry Phease
Most maori scholarships are privately funded.
I like how you use the word "most", to try and take away from my point
that the GOVERNMENT provides race based scholarships.
The number of government funded scholarships that are only available to
maori is very small (I don't know how many). Why you continue to worry
about minutiae when it comes to maori, is beyond me. There are plenty of
more significant things to worry about.
Post by Bobs
There are Maori
people in medical school who SHOULD NOT be there since they didn't get
the required bursary results. However, the government lets them through
solely based on their race. Would you like a doctor treating you that
didn't even reach the basic high school requirements? Let's see how far
your tolerance gets you when he misdiagnosis your hemorrhoids as just an
anus wart.
Strangely enough you don't need an IQ of 150+ to be a good doctor. Nobody
gets into medical school without the required results. However more
people attempt to enrol than there are places. It has never been the case
that only those with the top bursary marks got in. Would you be happy if
all the top applicants were chinese, and therefore eventually there were
no white doctors in NZ.

We need maori doctors (to give people a choice). Can you postulate
another mechanism that allows us to produce maori doctors?
--
Barry Phease

mailto:***@es.co.nz
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~barryp
TRUEman
2004-02-17 03:43:50 UTC
Permalink
Would you be happy if
Post by Barry Phease
all the top applicants were chinese, and therefore eventually there were
no white doctors in NZ.
Yes IF they were wll trained and the best
Post by Barry Phease
We need maori doctors (to give people a choice). Can you postulate
another mechanism that allows us to produce maori doctors?
choice based on race?????
RACIST PRICK
BTMO
2004-02-17 06:35:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barry Phease
We need maori doctors (to give people a choice). Can you postulate
another mechanism that allows us to produce maori doctors?
Why?

Genuine question btw. I have visited Indian, Pakistani, South African and NZ
doctors.

Never once have I insisted on having an Australian doctor - one who
understands my cultural needs. I was happy just to have one that was
competent.

Cheers,

Brenton
Barry Phease
2004-02-17 08:06:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTMO
Post by Barry Phease
We need maori doctors (to give people a choice). Can you postulate
another mechanism that allows us to produce maori doctors?
Why?
Genuine question btw. I have visited Indian, Pakistani, South African and NZ
doctors.
Can you imagine the howling there would be in this NG if there were no
white NZ doctors? There are certainly people that refuse to visit Indian
and Pakistani doctors. It may or may not be racist, but it is certainly
personal choice.
Post by BTMO
Never once have I insisted on having an Australian doctor - one who
understands my cultural needs. I was happy just to have one that was
competent.
I think most doctors in NZ are competent, even the maori ones.

What about doctors prepared to go to predominantly maori areas? What
about the people that do prefer to go to a culturally comfortable doctor?
What about role models to encourage young people to believe that they can
succeed academically?
--
Barry Phease

mailto:***@es.co.nz
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~barryp
BTMO
2004-02-17 08:39:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barry Phease
Post by BTMO
Why?
Genuine question btw. I have visited Indian, Pakistani, South African and NZ
doctors.
Can you imagine the howling there would be in this NG if there were no
white NZ doctors? There are certainly people that refuse to visit Indian
and Pakistani doctors. It may or may not be racist, but it is certainly
personal choice.
Post by BTMO
Never once have I insisted on having an Australian doctor - one who
understands my cultural needs. I was happy just to have one that was
competent.
I think most doctors in NZ are competent, even the maori ones.
What about doctors prepared to go to predominantly maori areas? What
about the people that do prefer to go to a culturally comfortable doctor?
What about role models to encourage young people to believe that they can
succeed academically?
Our local doctor serves a largely Maori population. I think he is Polish...

Cheers,

Brenton
unknown
2004-02-17 06:39:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Bobs
Post by Barry Phease
Most maori scholarships are privately funded.
I like how you use the word "most", to try and take away from my point
that the GOVERNMENT provides race based scholarships.
The number of government funded scholarships that are only available to
maori is very small (I don't know how many).
Why dont you tell us why there needs to be ANY government funded
scholarships based on race Barry....
--
mlvburke@#%&*.net.nz
Replace the obvious with paradise to email me.
See Found Images at:
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke/
Barry Phease
2004-02-17 08:00:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
Post by Barry Phease
The number of government funded scholarships that are only available to
maori is very small (I don't know how many).
Why dont you tell us why there needs to be ANY government funded
scholarships based on race Barry....
I can't. I don't know in general. I know that some teachNZ scholarships
are to enable more maori to train to be teachers. I think that there
needs to be maori teachers in schools to provide role models for
maori pupils. Also I think that maori speakers teaching in maori language
schools need to be properly trained. I assume that Brash had good reasons
when he instituted maori scholarships from the treasury.

It would not worry me in the slightest if there were none. OTOH I don't
worry about trivia which is what it is in the greater scheme of things.
--
Barry Phease

mailto:***@es.co.nz
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~barryp
Mutlley
2004-02-17 19:40:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barry Phease
Post by unknown
Post by Barry Phease
The number of government funded scholarships that are only available to
maori is very small (I don't know how many).
Why dont you tell us why there needs to be ANY government funded
scholarships based on race Barry....
I can't. I don't know in general. I know that some teachNZ scholarships
are to enable more maori to train to be teachers. I think that there
needs to be maori teachers in schools to provide role models for
maori pupils. Also I think that maori speakers teaching in maori language
schools need to be properly trained. I assume that Brash had good reasons
when he instituted maori scholarships from the treasury.
I would suspect he did this as an employee of the government acting on
a Gvt request, not as Don Brash..
Robert Singers
2004-02-17 01:08:17 UTC
Permalink
Out from under a rock popped Bobs and said
Post by Bobs
Maori only doctors, Maori only nurses, Maori only hospital wards,
Maori scholarships for his kids, More leniant entry levels into
certain university degrees...
That's a bad bad thing. The dumbing down of teriary qualifications has
to stop. And do you really think that a Doctor who got an easy ride
through training because of his\her ethnicity is good for anyone?
--
rob singers
pull finger to reply
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
Warwick
2004-02-17 01:21:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped Bobs and said
Post by Bobs
Maori only doctors, Maori only nurses, Maori only hospital wards,
Maori scholarships for his kids, More leniant entry levels into
certain university degrees...
That's a bad bad thing. The dumbing down of teriary qualifications has
to stop. And do you really think that a Doctor who got an easy ride
through training because of his\her ethnicity is good for anyone?
Yeah, remember the scandal of the cultural sensitivity classes those nurses
went thru? A maori 'academic' was abusive to her pakeha students and told
them all that Maori men were better lovers and had larger penis's than
white folks. (How can she know? was the question put by the then editor of
the then Dominnion, and a well put question indeed).
I am bloody pleased cultural sensitivity is not a mandatory part of a BSc.
Roger Dewhurst
2004-02-17 01:54:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warwick
Yeah, remember the scandal of the cultural sensitivity classes those nurses
went thru? A maori 'academic' was abusive to her pakeha students and told
them all that Maori men were better lovers and had larger penis's than
white folks.
It is the other way round, or so a nurse from Wellington hospital told me
many years ago.

R
Robert Singers
2004-02-17 01:58:40 UTC
Permalink
Out from under a rock popped Roger Dewhurst and said
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Warwick
Yeah, remember the scandal of the cultural sensitivity classes those
nurses went thru? A maori 'academic' was abusive to her pakeha students
and told them all that Maori men were better lovers and had larger
penis's than white folks.
It is the other way round, or so a nurse from Wellington hospital told me
many years ago.
Maori women have bigger penises?

In all honesty who the fuck cares.
--
rob singers
pull finger to reply
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
TRUEman
2004-02-17 03:44:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bobs
Post by Warwick
Yeah, remember the scandal of the cultural sensitivity classes those
nurses
Post by Warwick
went thru? A maori 'academic' was abusive to her pakeha students and told
them all that Maori men were better lovers and had larger penis's than
white folks.
It is the other way round, or so a nurse from Wellington hospital told me
many years ago.
LOl it is .. im gay .. i KNOW

;)
Post by Bobs
R
Eeyan
2004-02-17 10:44:08 UTC
Permalink
NZ isn't racist!! (Yeah Right!!!)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wakeup_nz/
Post by Warwick
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped Bobs and said
Post by Bobs
Maori only doctors, Maori only nurses, Maori only hospital wards,
Maori scholarships for his kids, More leniant entry levels into
certain university degrees...
That's a bad bad thing. The dumbing down of teriary qualifications has
to stop. And do you really think that a Doctor who got an easy ride
through training because of his\her ethnicity is good for anyone?
Yeah, remember the scandal of the cultural sensitivity classes those nurses
went thru? A maori 'academic' was abusive to her pakeha students and told
them all that Maori men were better lovers and had larger penis's than
white folks. (How can she know? was the question put by the then editor of
the then Dominnion, and a well put question indeed).
I am bloody pleased cultural sensitivity is not a mandatory part of a BSc.
I know someone who did her nurse training and the PC crap that was thrust at
the non-maori was incredible.
Hopefully she will enlighten all soon (in the NG).
annemarie
2004-02-18 00:06:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eeyan
NZ isn't racist!! (Yeah Right!!!)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wakeup_nz/
Post by Warwick
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped Bobs and said
Post by Bobs
Maori only doctors, Maori only nurses, Maori only hospital wards,
Maori scholarships for his kids, More leniant entry levels into
certain university degrees...
That's a bad bad thing. The dumbing down of teriary qualifications has
to stop. And do you really think that a Doctor who got an easy ride
through training because of his\her ethnicity is good for anyone?
Yeah, remember the scandal of the cultural sensitivity classes those
nurses
Post by Warwick
went thru? A maori 'academic' was abusive to her pakeha students and told
them all that Maori men were better lovers and had larger penis's than
white folks. (How can she know? was the question put by the then editor of
the then Dominnion, and a well put question indeed).
I am bloody pleased cultural sensitivity is not a mandatory part of a BSc.
I know someone who did her nurse training and the PC crap that was thrust at
the non-maori was incredible.
Hopefully she will enlighten all soon (in the NG).
Hmm I remember my sister talking about her cultural safety training when she
was doing nursing at polytech. It was all about Maori, there did not seem
to be any cultural safety necessary to any other cultural group. Odd that.
Brian Dooley
2004-02-18 02:43:49 UTC
Permalink
On 17 Feb 2004 01:08:17 GMT, Robert Singers
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped Bobs and said
Post by Bobs
Maori only doctors, Maori only nurses, Maori only hospital wards,
Maori scholarships for his kids, More leniant entry levels into
certain university degrees...
That's a bad bad thing. The dumbing down of teriary qualifications has
to stop. And do you really think that a Doctor who got an easy ride
through training because of his\her ethnicity is good for anyone?
That's called begging the question, what evidence have you that
Maori doctors get an easy ride at any time?

Numbers would be favourite.
--
Brian Dooley

Wellington New Zealand
Roger Dewhurst
2004-02-17 00:20:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
And what do you think that your hypothetical maori is entitled to that the
pakeha is not?
The implication contained in the original post is that Maoris are entitled
to something special because their ancestors were mistreated. The
hypothetical Maori here is one who has an above average income and does not
suffer any legacy from historical mistreatment. I asked whether such a
person is entitled to something the lesser paid white equivalen is not. If
so what?

R
Barry Phease
2004-02-17 00:34:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more
than
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which
a 30
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
And what do you think that your hypothetical maori is entitled to that the
pakeha is not?
The implication contained in the original post is that Maoris are entitled
to something special because their ancestors were mistreated.
I think you should read it again. The implication is that the "something
special" that maoris get is the right to live in "shit street".

I ask you again what advantages does your hypothetical maori have?
--
Barry Phease

mailto:***@es.co.nz
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~barryp
Carmen
2004-02-17 01:59:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more
than
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which
a 30
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
And what do you think that your hypothetical maori is entitled to that the
pakeha is not?
The implication contained in the original post is that Maoris are entitled
to something special because their ancestors were mistreated.
I think you should read it again. The implication is that the "something
special" that maoris get is the right to live in "shit street".
I ask you again what advantages does your hypothetical maori have?
--
Barry Phease
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~barryp
Barry it depends how you read Roger's post,
he has asked whether his hyperthetical Maori
is entitled to something the lesser paid white equivalent is not.
The answer is of course no
and to his question :-
'If so what?'

If anything Roger has actually made a valid point,
the point being that Brashness is simply stringing the nation along, with
nothing substantial to back up what he is saying and he is in fact playing
upon some apparently sizeable and unsubstantiated fears.

So the question remains,
exactly what are Maori entitled to that the lesser paid white equivalent is
not ?

I think Brash should front up with something to back up what he is saying
before voters realise they have actually
been played.

Carmen
Duncan Bayne
2004-02-17 23:31:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carmen
I think Brash should front up with something to back up what he is saying
before voters realise they have actually been played.
Voters have been played alright - but not by Brash. Check out posts
to my group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wakeup_nz/ - evidence
enough for ya? Racist scholarships, health funding, voting, tribunals
etc. etc.
t***@texas...removethisbit.usa.com
2004-02-18 03:22:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Duncan Bayne
Post by Carmen
I think Brash should front up with something to back up what he is saying
before voters realise they have actually been played.
Voters have been played alright - but not by Brash. Check out posts
to my group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wakeup_nz/ - evidence
enough for ya? Racist scholarships, health funding, voting, tribunals
etc. etc.
Duncan is a pissed off [most likely white] immigrant.
No matter what age he came to NZ at, he is still an immigrant.

If you don't like it Duncan, piss off from whence you came.

BTW, Tut, tut, didn't do enough homework before you spake forth.
You took the word 'sponser' and deliberately turned it into 'tax payer
funded' without a second thought.


Date: Mon Nov 10, 2003 1:21 am
Subject: Retraction & Apology re. Manukau City
Council
Hi All,

I have been been contacted by the Manukau City
Council, to bring to my
attention that they are *not* sponsoring the
Maori-only awards, as
originally stated in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wakeup_nz/message/16.
The confusion
arose from the listing of sponsors on the press
release, which implied
that the Manukau City Council was an award
sponsor.

I apologise for any confusion caused, and would
like to reiterate: the
Manukau City Council did *not* use ratepayer
money to sponsor
racially-restricted awards.

Please find below a letter of clarification from the
Manukau City Council.

Yours,
Duncan Bayne



=====

Dear Mr Bayne

Thank you for your email concerning the 2003 Maori
Sports Awards.

You have suggested that Manukau City Council
contributed taxpayer funding towards this event.

Manukau were not asked to fund the Sports Awards.
Council is assisting with ratepayer sponsorship and on-site support
for the Tamariki Sports and Cultural Day to be held on Friday, 28
November 2003.

The objectives of the event are to foster pride and
sports participation by young Maori in the wider community, the
emphasis for the day is participation in sport, not winning, and its
target audience is mainly Kura Kaupapa, ages ranging from 8 - 12
years. The children are also invited to develop and perform an action
song, haka or similar based on "always wear your seatbelt".

The awards ceremony, as all such events do; celebrates
the successes within a particular community, or community of interest.
Such communities are, or may be, self-defined (eg Manukau Young Faces
Awards, and the Manukau Business Excellence Awards,
etc). In this case the target community is sporting achievement as a
particular proof of pride and a cause for celebration within the Maori
community.

Manukau City Council is committed to supporting the
success of its various communities as its vision for Manukau into the
Future (Tomorrow's Manukau - Manukau Apopo) states:

Tomorrow's Manukau - progressive, proud and
prosperous. People proud of their success and their good education -
confident they can achieve their aspirations and enjoy a variety of
lifestyles in harmony, good health and safety. Also prosperous people
enriched by the diversity of cultures, the beauty of the environment,
the strong economy and the wealth of opportunities.

Again thank you for your email, Manukau welcomes
feedback on its activities.

Yours faithfully



Jenny Young
Team Leader Community Funding
Community Advocacy and Funding
Manukau City Council
Ph 09 262 8959
Fax 09 262 8920
Mob 027 296 1141
Email ***@m...
t***@texas...removethisbit.usa.com
2004-02-18 04:37:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Duncan Bayne
Post by Carmen
I think Brash should front up with something to back up what he is saying
before voters realise they have actually been played.
Voters have been played alright - but not by Brash. Check out posts
to my group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wakeup_nz/ - evidence
enough for ya? Racist scholarships, health funding, voting, tribunals
etc. etc.
Ya made one assumption about funding which was wrong so why should we
believe anything else you wrote?

Cath
Carmen
2004-02-17 01:52:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more
than
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to
which
Post by Roger Dewhurst
a 30
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
And what do you think that your hypothetical maori is entitled to that the
pakeha is not?
The implication contained in the original post is that Maoris are entitled
to something special because their ancestors were mistreated. The
hypothetical Maori here is one who has an above average income and does not
suffer any legacy from historical mistreatment. I asked whether such a
person is entitled to something the lesser paid white equivalen is not.
If
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
R
Exactly Rog

You've hit the nail right on the head.

Like you, Brash is playing devil's advocate
and he's enjoying the joke.

The average NZer seems convinced that Maori have some special entitlements,
somewhere and Brash is simply playing on that fear, knowing all the while
that he is not able to come up with anything tangible.

Helen has mentioned this already, the fact that Brash hasn't presented any
tangible benefits.

Carmen
Roger Dewhurst
2004-02-17 01:57:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carmen
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more
than
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to
which
Post by Roger Dewhurst
a 30
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
And what do you think that your hypothetical maori is entitled to that
the
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Barry Phease
pakeha is not?
The implication contained in the original post is that Maoris are entitled
to something special because their ancestors were mistreated. The
hypothetical Maori here is one who has an above average income and does
not
Post by Roger Dewhurst
suffer any legacy from historical mistreatment. I asked whether such a
person is entitled to something the lesser paid white equivalen is not.
If
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
R
Exactly Rog
You've hit the nail right on the head.
Perhaps I worded the question badly. I should have asked what the original
poster thought that the Maori SHOULD be entitled to over and above what the
white was entitled to.

R
Barry Phease
2004-02-17 03:05:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Perhaps I worded the question badly. I should have asked what the original
poster thought that the Maori SHOULD be entitled to over and above what the
white was entitled to.
The answer to that is clearly nothing from the government. He clearly has
no particular need (well off, no health problems, finished his formal
education). Of course he might be entitled to something from a trust based
on his membership of an iwi, which the pakeha could not expect to get.
--
Barry Phease

mailto:***@es.co.nz
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~barryp
harry
2004-02-17 02:08:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carmen
Exactly Rog
You've hit the nail right on the head.
Like you, Brash is playing devil's advocate
and he's enjoying the joke.
The average NZer seems convinced that Maori have some special
entitlements, somewhere and Brash is simply playing on that fear,
knowing all the while that he is not able to come up with anything
tangible.
Helen has mentioned this already, the fact that Brash hasn't
presented any tangible benefits.
Carmen
Exit Voice and Loyalty
The sudden switch is typical of Exit when Voice is ignored.

Non Maori see nothing but an escalation of Maori grievance.

Getting the votes of the electorate who previously assumed that Nationals
policy on TOW and Maori specific benefits hadn't changed since Doug Graham,
is definitely a benefit to the Nats.
Maori touting for gratuities for various gatekeeper roles conferred by
liberal interpretations of the treaty and legislation that references it,
have definitely affected public perception.
Non Maori perceive the foreshore issues as another attempt to establish
Maori tollgates.
Its been left to the prime minister to defend this behaviour, because Maori
would rather throw tantrums, bare their bums, chop down trees, throw mud and
scream abuse, and demand treaty of waitangi courses which exclude non Maori,
than explain their point of view.
steve
2004-02-16 23:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
R
Can you connect this to the real world?

Or is this just more fantasising about maori "advantage"?
Carmen
2004-02-17 01:47:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which a 30
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled? If
so what?
R
Too hypothetical Rog
can you name any specific entitlements such a maori would get ?

Noooooo you can't can you

Carmen
Roger Dewhurst
2004-02-17 02:00:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carmen
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which
a
Post by Carmen
30
Post by Roger Dewhurst
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If
Post by Carmen
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
R
Too hypothetical Rog
can you name any specific entitlements such a maori would get ?
Noooooo you can't can you
Carmen
Change the last sentence to "If so what SHOULD he be entitled? Note that
'should' was near the beginning of the previous sentence. Seemingly Phease
and his ilk can only grasp one sentence at a time, and that a short one.

R
Mrs Norris
2004-02-18 04:44:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Carmen
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more
than
Post by Carmen
Post by Roger Dewhurst
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which
a
Post by Carmen
30
Post by Roger Dewhurst
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If
Post by Carmen
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
R
Too hypothetical Rog
can you name any specific entitlements such a maori would get ?
Noooooo you can't can you
Carmen
Change the last sentence to "If so what SHOULD he be entitled? Note that
'should' was near the beginning of the previous sentence. Seemingly Phease
and his ilk can only grasp one sentence at a time, and that a short one.
R
Huh ?
Carmen
2004-02-17 11:48:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Carmen
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more
than
Post by Carmen
Post by Roger Dewhurst
the average income. Should he or she be entitled to something to which
a
Post by Carmen
30
Post by Roger Dewhurst
year old white earning 25% less than the average wage is not entitled?
If
Post by Carmen
Post by Roger Dewhurst
so what?
R
Too hypothetical Rog
can you name any specific entitlements such a maori would get ?
Noooooo you can't can you
Carmen
Change the last sentence to "If so what SHOULD he be entitled? Note that
'should' was near the beginning of the previous sentence. Seemingly Phease
and his ilk can only grasp one sentence at a time, and that a short one.
R
Well I don't know,
what do you think he SHOULD be entitled to ?

Carmen
Enkidu
2004-02-17 07:56:04 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:53:18 +1300, "Roger Dewhurst"
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income.
Yeah, he's a nice guy. I met him once. Hypothetically.

Cheers,

Cliff
Roger Dewhurst
2004-02-17 08:09:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Enkidu
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:53:18 +1300, "Roger Dewhurst"
Yeah, he's a nice guy. I met him once. Hypothetically.
You really are a twerp, Cliff.

R
Carmen
2004-02-17 11:53:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Enkidu
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:53:18 +1300, "Roger Dewhurst"
Post by Roger Dewhurst
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Consider a hypothetical Maori, thirty years old and earning 25% more than
the average income.
Yeah, he's a nice guy. I met him once. Hypothetically.
Cheers,
Cliff
Jee Cliff

that was very forward of you to enquire of his income,
you two must be hyperthetically quite close.

Carmen
Robert Singers
2004-02-16 22:06:42 UTC
Permalink
Out from under a rock popped Pulp Fixxion and said
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
He hasn't actually said that, or anything like it. I'd suggest you look
for a media site with transcripts of his speeches, rather than relying on
far fetched knee jerk reactions.
--
rob singers
pull finger to reply
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
Mainlander
2004-02-16 23:01:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped Pulp Fixxion and said
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
He hasn't actually said that, or anything like it. I'd suggest you look
for a media site with transcripts of his speeches, rather than relying on
far fetched knee jerk reactions.
http://www.national.org.nz/wcontent.asp?PageID=100019353
for the Orewa speech

www.donbrash.com for all his recent stuff
--
Full featured open source Win32 newsreader - Gravity 2.70
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpgravity/
steve
2004-02-16 23:43:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped Pulp Fixxion and said
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
He hasn't actually said that, or anything like it. I'd suggest you look
for a media site with transcripts of his speeches, rather than relying on
far fetched knee jerk reactions.
I've read the speech.

It is based on certain assumptions that add up to the same thing.

Worded very nicely....but those assumptions remain:

- That separatism is the agenda

It isn't.

- That Maori are being given special privileges

(rather than finally having their long-standing and long-ignored rights
recognised)

- That there are "two laws".

Wrong: There has always been one law - and it was wahtever pakeha wanted it
to be for their own purposes.

...and so on. These assumptions and others play to the prejudices of the
blue-rinse set so clearly pictured in the audience at Brash's Rotorua
speech the opther day. There wasn't person in that photo under 40 and well
over 50% would heve baan over 60.

It's sad these old racists would seek to mess up the peaceful future of NZ
for the young ones by working out their fantasies of Maori advantage
without regard to the facts of the truth.
Warwick
2004-02-17 00:05:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
I've read the speech.
It is based on certain assumptions that add up to the same thing.
- That separatism is the agenda
It isn't.
- That Maori are being given special privileges
(rather than finally having their long-standing and long-ignored rights
recognised)
- That there are "two laws".
Wrong: There has always been one law - and it was wahtever pakeha wanted it
to be for their own purposes.
...and so on. These assumptions and others play to the prejudices of the
blue-rinse set so clearly pictured in the audience at Brash's Rotorua
speech the opther day. There wasn't person in that photo under 40 and well
over 50% would heve baan over 60.
It's sad these old racists would seek to mess up the peaceful future of NZ
for the young ones by working out their fantasies of Maori advantage
without regard to the facts of the truth.
Assumptions are the mother of all fuck ups steve and you have made far too
many here.

How do you know Brash's audience were racist? You don't, you are assuming.

The assumption that 'white people' have manipulated the law is pure crap.
It is not white people, it is the government that sets legislature and
judges that interpret it and police that enforce it. Those three groups are
not 'white' or any fucking colour in particular.

You talk of long standing and long ignored rights. Immediately you advocate
separitist policy. You are saying some people have rights that others
don't. Then you turn around and accuse Brash and his supporters of racism,
this is patently incorrect.

Entrenching 'rights' to one ethnic group over another in law is
inequitable, and Brash has, rightfully, pointed out the inequity and
surprise fucking surprise, the population agrees with him.

It is probably good for Brash that there are a number of mud slingers out
there hurling shit and screaming indignantly. Screams that are both poorly
articulated and poorly reasoned. This narrow perception is making a martyr
out of Brash and he is gaining respect for sticking to his guns.

I can't wait till he's prime minister.

cheers
Warwick
steve
2004-02-17 00:29:20 UTC
Permalink
...........
Post by Warwick
Post by steve
...and so on. These assumptions and others play to the prejudices of the
blue-rinse set so clearly pictured in the audience at Brash's Rotorua
speech the opther day. There wasn't person in that photo under 40 and
well over 50% would heve baan over 60.
It's sad these old racists would seek to mess up the peaceful future of
NZ for the young ones by working out their fantasies of Maori advantage
without regard to the facts of the truth.
..........
Post by Warwick
How do you know Brash's audience were racist? You don't, you are assuming.
You're right. I have assumed. They were also described as his supporters.
Post by Warwick
The assumption that 'white people' have manipulated the law is pure crap.
I'll not bother with your post beyond saying your "pure crap" assertion is
contradicted by the recorded history of New Zealand....which you really
should become more aware of.

Or it's not worth talking to you.
Warwick
2004-02-17 00:47:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
...........
Post by Warwick
Post by steve
...and so on. These assumptions and others play to the prejudices of the
blue-rinse set so clearly pictured in the audience at Brash's Rotorua
speech the opther day. There wasn't person in that photo under 40 and
well over 50% would heve baan over 60.
It's sad these old racists would seek to mess up the peaceful future of
NZ for the young ones by working out their fantasies of Maori advantage
without regard to the facts of the truth.
..........
Post by Warwick
How do you know Brash's audience were racist? You don't, you are assuming.
You're right. I have assumed. They were also described as his supporters.
Post by Warwick
The assumption that 'white people' have manipulated the law is pure crap.
I'll not bother with your post beyond saying your "pure crap" assertion is
contradicted by the recorded history of New Zealand....which you really
should become more aware of.
Or it's not worth talking to you.
Thats your problem, you are dismissive of those that disagree with you.

The law is not set by white people. Unitl you get over this 'white people'
prejudism your arguments will be devoid of reason.

The government is not colour based, it represents the entire population
equally. If you have a problem with this, that is too bad. It is not a
platform from which you can level accusations of racism, and maintain any
semblance of credibility.

cheers
Warwick
steve
2004-02-17 01:46:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warwick
Post by steve
...........
Post by Warwick
Post by steve
...and so on. These assumptions and others play to the prejudices of
the blue-rinse set so clearly pictured in the audience at Brash's
Rotorua speech the opther day. There wasn't person in that photo under
40 and well over 50% would heve baan over 60.
It's sad these old racists would seek to mess up the peaceful future of
NZ for the young ones by working out their fantasies of Maori advantage
without regard to the facts of the truth.
..........
Post by Warwick
How do you know Brash's audience were racist? You don't, you are assuming.
You're right. I have assumed. They were also described as his supporters.
Post by Warwick
The assumption that 'white people' have manipulated the law is pure crap.
I'll not bother with your post beyond saying your "pure crap" assertion
is contradicted by the recorded history of New Zealand....which you
really should become more aware of.
Or it's not worth talking to you.
Thats your problem, you are dismissive of those that disagree with you.
I'm dismissive of people who would waste my (or anyone else's) time debating
an issue when the position they have chosen is in direct contradiction with
the recorded history of this country.......

What's to debate? The Moon isn't made of cheese, either.

I'm happy to spend my time discussing this or any other issue, but
please...do not tell me that white settlers didn't alter the law to suit
their growing taste for maori land.

They did. It's a matter of fact - not opinion. The difference between the
two is quite important.
Warwick
2004-02-17 02:14:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
Post by Warwick
Post by steve
...........
Post by Warwick
Post by steve
...and so on. These assumptions and others play to the prejudices of
the blue-rinse set so clearly pictured in the audience at Brash's
Rotorua speech the opther day. There wasn't person in that photo under
40 and well over 50% would heve baan over 60.
It's sad these old racists would seek to mess up the peaceful future of
NZ for the young ones by working out their fantasies of Maori advantage
without regard to the facts of the truth.
..........
Post by Warwick
How do you know Brash's audience were racist? You don't, you are assuming.
You're right. I have assumed. They were also described as his supporters.
Post by Warwick
The assumption that 'white people' have manipulated the law is pure crap.
I'll not bother with your post beyond saying your "pure crap" assertion
is contradicted by the recorded history of New Zealand....which you
really should become more aware of.
Or it's not worth talking to you.
Thats your problem, you are dismissive of those that disagree with you.
I'm dismissive of people who would waste my (or anyone else's) time debating
an issue when the position they have chosen is in direct contradiction with
the recorded history of this country.......
What's to debate? The Moon isn't made of cheese, either.
I'm happy to spend my time discussing this or any other issue, but
please...do not tell me that white settlers didn't alter the law to suit
their growing taste for maori land.
They did. It's a matter of fact - not opinion. The difference between the
two is quite important.
While that is true, this is also the first time you have mentioned it in
this thread. Vague allegations of 'white mans, law' were difficult to
rebut.

Part of the treaty settlement process involves compenation for those deals
now deemed suspect.

This has nothing to do with what Brash is saying or proposing.

There is no reason why those types of compensation cannot be made and still
have a level playing field for all NZ citizens. Perhaps our history is
regrettable, but that is no excuse to move forward from it in a non biased
fashion.
steve
2004-02-17 04:44:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warwick
Post by steve
I'm happy to spend my time discussing this or any other issue, but
please...do not tell me that white settlers didn't alter the law to suit
their growing taste for maori land.
They did. It's a matter of fact - not opinion. The difference between the
two is quite important.
While that is true, this is also the first time you have mentioned it in
this thread. Vague allegations of 'white mans, law' were difficult to
rebut.
Land law is one of the laws they manipulated. There were others. I did not
feel I had to list them in order to make my point. I assumed a certain
minimal level of shared knowledge.....and lacking thet, at least provided
an opportunity for further investigation/discussion around that.
Post by Warwick
Part of the treaty settlement process involves compenation for those deals
now deemed suspect.
True...and Brash says that should carry on.
Post by Warwick
This has nothing to do with what Brash is saying or proposing.
Exactly what he is proposing is unclear. He has propvided little in the way
of specifics.
Post by Warwick
There is no reason why those types of compensation cannot be made and
still have a level playing field for all NZ citizens. Perhaps our history
is regrettable, but that is no excuse to move forward from it in a non
biased fashion.
The bias is inherent in your statement. Your idea of "non-biased" means
wiping the idea of a Treaty partnership between founding peoples.

If you unilataerally impose that idea on people who DO see the Treaty as a
partnership between two founding peoples, then you can hardly be described
as "non-biased"....or just.

It's just the white folks ignoring the Maoris - again. Once again welching
on the deal made in 1840....and stuck to for barely 15 years at best while
the Crown retained the sole right of pre-emption over land....as they
interpreted the treaty at the time of its signing.

The settlers who wanted that land soon changed that.
BAM
2004-02-17 05:30:07 UTC
Permalink
Fuck off back to Canada you wanker
Post by steve
Post by Warwick
Post by steve
...........
Post by Warwick
Post by steve
...and so on. These assumptions and others play to the prejudices of
the blue-rinse set so clearly pictured in the audience at Brash's
Rotorua speech the opther day. There wasn't person in that photo under
40 and well over 50% would heve baan over 60.
It's sad these old racists would seek to mess up the peaceful future of
NZ for the young ones by working out their fantasies of Maori advantage
without regard to the facts of the truth.
..........
Post by Warwick
How do you know Brash's audience were racist? You don't, you are assuming.
You're right. I have assumed. They were also described as his supporters.
Post by Warwick
The assumption that 'white people' have manipulated the law is pure crap.
I'll not bother with your post beyond saying your "pure crap" assertion
is contradicted by the recorded history of New Zealand....which you
really should become more aware of.
Or it's not worth talking to you.
Thats your problem, you are dismissive of those that disagree with you.
I'm dismissive of people who would waste my (or anyone else's) time debating
an issue when the position they have chosen is in direct contradiction with
the recorded history of this country.......
What's to debate? The Moon isn't made of cheese, either.
I'm happy to spend my time discussing this or any other issue, but
please...do not tell me that white settlers didn't alter the law to suit
their growing taste for maori land.
They did. It's a matter of fact - not opinion. The difference between the
two is quite important.
steve
2004-02-17 07:44:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by BAM
Fuck off back to Canada you wanker
If this is the best you can do.....I think you should leave. You're clearly
the braindead sort who are dragging this country down.
Robert Singers
2004-02-17 01:01:10 UTC
Permalink
Out from under a rock popped steve and said
Post by steve
I've read the speech.
It is based on certain assumptions that add up to the same thing.
Steve everything you've replied with is an assumption that you've made
based probably on an incorrect understanding of history. Not so much in
respect to what happened to Maori but in terms of who did it and what
the motivation behind it was. Do you really think that the majority of non
maori New Zealanders are decended from privilaged *English* colonists?

What Brash said and what people think he has said will have power as
long as there is percieved to be a system of Apartheid operating in NZ. As
long as we have calls for Maori Soverignty echoing Aparteid Fiji you're
going to have mainstream fear of it getting worse.
--
rob singers
pull finger to reply
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
steve
2004-02-16 23:45:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped Pulp Fixxion and said
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
He hasn't actually said that, or anything like it. I'd suggest you look
for a media site with transcripts of his speeches, rather than relying on
far fetched knee jerk reactions.
I've read the speech.

It is based on certain assumptions that add up to the same thing.

Worded very nicely....but those assumptions remain:

- That separatism is the agenda

It isn't.

- That Maori are being given special privileges

(rather than finally having their long-standing and long-ignored rights
recognised)

- That there are "two laws".

Wrong: There has always been one law - and it was whatever pakeha wanted it
to be for their own purposes.

...and so on. These assumptions and others play to the prejudices of the
blue-rinse set so clearly pictured in the audience at Brash's Rotorua
speech the opther day. There wasn't a person in that photo under 40 and well
over 50% would have been over 60.

It's sad these old racists would seek to mess up the peaceful future of NZ
for the young ones by working out their fantasies of Maori advantage
without regard to the facts or the truth.
xlo
2004-02-16 23:38:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped Pulp Fixxion and said
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
He hasn't actually said that, or anything like it. I'd suggest you look
for a media site with transcripts of his speeches, rather than relying on
far fetched knee jerk reactions.
The far fetched knee-jerk reactions are from an (unfortunately) large element of
NZ society, who are being cynically encouraged by Brash and others. They have
bundled up several issues that are only loosely related, put the label "race" on
the package, and have worked themselves into a blind frenzy.
Mrs Norris
2004-02-18 04:31:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped Pulp Fixxion and said
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
He hasn't actually said that, or anything like it. I'd suggest you look
for a media site with transcripts of his speeches, rather than relying on
far fetched knee jerk reactions.
--
rob singers
pull finger to reply
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
And Labour haven't said that they are going to give the foreshore to
Maori.
henyboss
2004-02-16 22:43:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
You mean, oh for the good old days of tribal warfare, slaves, and
cannibalism.
xlo
2004-02-16 23:43:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
You mean, oh for the good old days of tribal warfare, slaves, and
cannibalism.
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and deportations
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother England".
henyboss
2004-02-17 00:18:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
You mean, oh for the good old days of tribal warfare, slaves, and
cannibalism.
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and deportations
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother England".
So you are saying we all started of on an equal footing, which is correct,
so why the suggestion that Maori are under privileged.
By your own argument you destroy the myth of privilege.
xlo
2004-02-17 01:12:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
You mean, oh for the good old days of tribal warfare, slaves, and
cannibalism.
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and
deportations
Post by xlo
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother
England".
So you are saying we all started of on an equal footing, which is correct,
so why the suggestion that Maori are under privileged.
By your own argument you destroy the myth of privilege.
I did NOT say we started off on "equal footing" at all. I am saying that it is
ignorant of you to criticise pre-european maori from a 21st century perspective
without also fairly looking at European society at that time.

The "myth" of privilege??? You must have your head in a bucket if you think
that inherited wealth does not or has not had an ongoing impact on the structure
of society.
henyboss
2004-02-17 01:43:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
You mean, oh for the good old days of tribal warfare, slaves, and
cannibalism.
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and
deportations
Post by xlo
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother
England".
So you are saying we all started of on an equal footing, which is correct,
so why the suggestion that Maori are under privileged.
By your own argument you destroy the myth of privilege.
I did NOT say we started off on "equal footing" at all. I am saying that it is
ignorant of you to criticise pre-european maori from a 21st century perspective
without also fairly looking at European society at that time.
The "myth" of privilege??? You must have your head in a bucket if you think
that inherited wealth does not or has not had an ongoing impact on the structure
of society.
I must have the wrong Pakeha mates and relations, none of them have had
great privilege or inherited wealth.
Yet both the Pakeha and Maori sides of the family have made good lives for
themselves, all managed a reasonable education, all the married ones own
their own houses.
Its called getting of your backside,working hard, saving a few bucks, and
not sitting round snivelling about being underprivileged.
But you would never understand the ethics involved.
xlo
2004-02-17 03:32:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris
are
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ
suffers.
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got
everything
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many
times
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got
because
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries
of
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
You mean, oh for the good old days of tribal warfare, slaves, and
cannibalism.
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and
deportations
Post by xlo
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother
England".
So you are saying we all started of on an equal footing, which is
correct,
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
so why the suggestion that Maori are under privileged.
By your own argument you destroy the myth of privilege.
I did NOT say we started off on "equal footing" at all. I am saying that
it is
Post by xlo
ignorant of you to criticise pre-european maori from a 21st century
perspective
Post by xlo
without also fairly looking at European society at that time.
The "myth" of privilege??? You must have your head in a bucket if you
think
Post by xlo
that inherited wealth does not or has not had an ongoing impact on the
structure
Post by xlo
of society.
I must have the wrong Pakeha mates and relations, none of them have had
great privilege or inherited wealth.
Maybe you do have "the wrong mates and relations". I don't know.
I do know (quite well) a few who have inherited great privilege and wealth.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Yet both the Pakeha and Maori sides of the family have made good lives for
themselves, all managed a reasonable education, all the married ones own
their own houses.
Yes most (not all) of them have, but of the significant number who haven't,
maori are over-represented.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Its called getting of your backside,working hard, saving a few bucks, and
not sitting round snivelling about being underprivileged.
But you would never understand the ethics involved.
Utter crap. I undertstand directly from my own experience. But I am not going
to deny that being "white", and coming from the "right side of the tracks" made
it easier for me.
unknown
2004-02-17 04:40:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Maybe you do have "the wrong mates and relations". I don't know.
I do know (quite well) a few who have inherited great privilege and wealth.
Do you berate them and demand that they donate this wealth and give up
this priveilege to someone less fortunate?

Craig
Remove * to email.

On usenet I speak only for myself.
xlo
2004-02-17 06:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
Post by xlo
Maybe you do have "the wrong mates and relations". I don't know.
I do know (quite well) a few who have inherited great privilege and wealth.
Do you berate them and demand that they donate this wealth and give up
this priveilege to someone less fortunate?
I would if they claimed smugly to me that they were entirely "self made". I
would consider berating them if they whined about paying tax too - but the funny
thing is that they don't.
The worst whiners at present seem to be soggy-arsed boys, sinking under the
weight of the chips on their shoulders, and prepared to blame the ills of the
world on any past or present effort to correct injustice.
Roger Dewhurst
2004-02-17 02:04:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
You mean, oh for the good old days of tribal warfare, slaves, and
cannibalism.
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and
deportations
Post by xlo
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother
England".
So you are saying we all started of on an equal footing, which is correct,
so why the suggestion that Maori are under privileged.
By your own argument you destroy the myth of privilege.
I did NOT say we started off on "equal footing" at all. I am saying that it is
ignorant of you to criticise pre-european maori from a 21st century perspective
without also fairly looking at European society at that time.
The "myth" of privilege??? You must have your head in a bucket if you think
that inherited wealth does not or has not had an ongoing impact on the structure
of society.
The intelligent, without wealth initially, usually gain it. The stupid,
with wealth initially, generally lose it.

R
Roger
2004-02-17 12:12:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
You mean, oh for the good old days of tribal warfare, slaves, and
cannibalism.
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and deportations
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother England".
Have the grand kids of the deportees been compensated for the
mistreatment
Some of the deportees received. Along with the Irish and the Scots.
They also got a hard time from Mother England.

Roger
Bobs
2004-02-17 12:35:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Post by henyboss
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
You mean, oh for the good old days of tribal warfare, slaves, and
cannibalism.
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and deportations
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother England".
Still beats living in a stone aged culture that had no alphabet and
couldn't even fathom something as simple as a wheel though, cretin.
Enkidu
2004-02-18 07:51:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bobs
Post by xlo
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and deportations
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother England".
Still beats living in a stone aged culture that had no alphabet and
couldn't even fathom something as simple as a wheel though, cretin.
You mean West Auckland?

Cheers,

Cliff
Bobs
2004-02-18 07:59:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Enkidu
Post by Bobs
Post by xlo
Oh for the good old days of a life expectancy of 40, hangings and deportations
for minor offences, plagues, poverty and squalour - all in "Mother England".
Still beats living in a stone aged culture that had no alphabet and
couldn't even fathom something as simple as a wheel though, cretin.
You mean West Auckland?
Can't really argue with that, Cliff. Myself excluded of course.
Post by Enkidu
Cheers,
Cliff
Mainlander
2004-02-16 22:55:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Brash is saying basic commonsense. Instead of sitting around whinging all
day long like some of these Maori "leaders" are doing, get a life :)

Basically the above is a lot of nonsense, the average Maori enjoys a
superior lifestyle to the pre colonial days.
--
Full featured open source Win32 newsreader - Gravity 2.70
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpgravity/
xlo
2004-02-16 23:48:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mainlander
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Brash is saying basic commonsense. Instead of sitting around whinging all
day long like some of these Maori "leaders" are doing, get a life :)
Basically the above is a lot of nonsense, the average Maori enjoys a
superior lifestyle to the pre colonial days.
All thanks to us?
So what?
Mrs Norris
2004-02-18 04:34:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mainlander
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
Brash is saying basic commonsense. Instead of sitting around whinging all
day long like some of these Maori "leaders" are doing, get a life :)
Basically the above is a lot of nonsense, the average Maori enjoys a
superior lifestyle to the pre colonial days.
What ?! And they should be grateful ?
Even the Aborigines and Native Americans have a better lifestyle than
they did in 1500.
Even the Blacks in America in 1850. Even 1950. Even now.
Golly gosh ! Thank you, massa.
steve
2004-02-16 23:38:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
...and some people like to believe that.....true.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Obviously not....but the sort of folks who fall for this line aren't much
interested in the facts - on this or any other issue.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
True. The recorded history makes it obvious to those who look at the
history.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
Yes, it does. NZ has no monopoly on people who prefer to be ignorant becasue
it suits their immediate interests - as they narrowly perceive them.
henyboss
2004-02-17 00:28:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
...and some people like to believe that.....true.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Obviously not....but the sort of folks who fall for this line aren't much
interested in the facts - on this or any other issue.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
True. The recorded history makes it obvious to those who look at the
history.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
Yes, it does. NZ has no monopoly on people who prefer to be ignorant becasue
it suits their immediate interests - as they narrowly perceive them.
But has a raft of people like you, who offer constant criticism, but offer
no positive solutions, as to how best treaty claims might be settled.
What's your solution , Maori sovereignty, financial payouts that stretch
ahead for any foreseeable future, do you see it as a problem that can be
solved, or one that is impossible to resolve. How about some positive
feedback for a change.
steve
2004-02-17 01:41:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by henyboss
But has a raft of people like you, who offer constant criticism, but offer
no positive solutions, as to how best treaty claims might be settled.
What's your solution , Maori sovereignty, financial payouts that stretch
ahead for any foreseeable future, do you see it as a problem that can be
solved, or one that is impossible to resolve. How about some positive
feedback for a change.
...and here was me thinking I'd kill-filed you.

All fixed now.
henyboss
2004-02-17 01:50:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
Post by henyboss
But has a raft of people like you, who offer constant criticism, but offer
no positive solutions, as to how best treaty claims might be settled.
What's your solution , Maori sovereignty, financial payouts that stretch
ahead for any foreseeable future, do you see it as a problem that can be
solved, or one that is impossible to resolve. How about some positive
feedback for a change.
...and here was me thinking I'd kill-filed you.
All fixed now.
Pretty much what I expected, when someone asks you to rationalise your
comments, you run away and hide behind your killfile.
So much for Steve the bold champion of the far left.
Redbaiter
2004-02-17 02:33:11 UTC
Permalink
steve says
Post by steve
Post by henyboss
But has a raft of people like you, who offer constant criticism, but offer
no positive solutions, as to how best treaty claims might be settled.
What's your solution , Maori sovereignty, financial payouts that stretch
ahead for any foreseeable future, do you see it as a problem that can be
solved, or one that is impossible to resolve. How about some positive
feedback for a change.
...and here was me thinking I'd kill-filed you.
All fixed now.
The usual pathetic lie. Why insult people's intelligence with
such transparent lies?
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"One man with courage is a majority." Thomas Jefferson
xlo
2004-02-17 03:39:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
Post by henyboss
But has a raft of people like you, who offer constant criticism, but offer
no positive solutions, as to how best treaty claims might be settled.
What's your solution , Maori sovereignty, financial payouts that stretch
ahead for any foreseeable future, do you see it as a problem that can be
solved, or one that is impossible to resolve. How about some positive
feedback for a change.
...and here was me thinking I'd kill-filed you.
All fixed now.
No - you kill-filed Henry.Boss. A few days ago when he was posting under
another name, he made a typo when he changed his name back. He might have fixed
it himself, but as I pointed it out to him, he stubbornly refuses to listen,
even if it is his own interest to do so.
henyboss
2004-02-17 04:10:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Post by steve
Post by henyboss
But has a raft of people like you, who offer constant criticism, but offer
no positive solutions, as to how best treaty claims might be settled.
What's your solution , Maori sovereignty, financial payouts that stretch
ahead for any foreseeable future, do you see it as a problem that can be
solved, or one that is impossible to resolve. How about some positive
feedback for a change.
...and here was me thinking I'd kill-filed you.
All fixed now.
No - you kill-filed Henry.Boss. A few days ago when he was posting under
another name, he made a typo when he changed his name back. He might have fixed
it himself, but as I pointed it out to him, he stubbornly refuses to listen,
even if it is his own interest to do so.
Lol, Why would I wish to post under another name, my views are pretty
bluntly stated and I stand by them.
I think you are confusing me with Steve.
Carmen
2004-02-17 02:16:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
Post by steve
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
...and some people like to believe that.....true.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Obviously not....but the sort of folks who fall for this line aren't much
interested in the facts - on this or any other issue.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
True. The recorded history makes it obvious to those who look at the
history.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
Yes, it does. NZ has no monopoly on people who prefer to be ignorant
becasue
Post by steve
it suits their immediate interests - as they narrowly perceive them.
But has a raft of people like you, who offer constant criticism, but offer
no positive solutions, as to how best treaty claims might be settled.
What's your solution , Maori sovereignty, financial payouts that stretch
ahead for any foreseeable future, do you see it as a problem that can be
solved, or one that is impossible to resolve. How about some positive
feedback for a change.
That is the type of mindset that Brash is capitalising on.
He is stringing you along
think about it !
He hasn't come up with anything tangible
any specific benefits or advantages of being Maori
but he is in fact playing on your fears,
it's a game to him.
Sooner or later he will have to acknowledge that there are international
laws that pertain to indigenous people
and he will have to act within those laws.

The foreshore and sea bed isue is not one that Helen and the Labour Party
dreamed up,
they are in fact trying to resolve this amicably and it was actually forced
into the limelight by the Court of Appeal.

Helen and Labour are attempting to resolve these things with dialogue, Brash
is in fact attempting to halt the dialogue and is intending to bring about
policies in order to do so. Meanwhile he is stringing people such as you
along by their unfounded fears.

Carmen
Mrs Norris
2004-02-18 11:38:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
Post by steve
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
...and some people like to believe that.....true.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Obviously not....but the sort of folks who fall for this line aren't much
interested in the facts - on this or any other issue.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
True. The recorded history makes it obvious to those who look at the
history.
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
Yes, it does. NZ has no monopoly on people who prefer to be ignorant
becasue
Post by steve
it suits their immediate interests - as they narrowly perceive them.
But has a raft of people like you, who offer constant criticism, but offer
no positive solutions, as to how best treaty claims might be settled.
What's your solution , Maori sovereignty, financial payouts that stretch
ahead for any foreseeable future, do you see it as a problem that can be
solved, or one that is impossible to resolve. How about some positive
feedback for a change.
Well for a start, stop thinking of treaty issues as problems.
They are opportunities to redress the perversities of our colonial past.

And what's the rush to resolve treaty claims ?
They will be around for ever. Get used to it !
Sue Bilstein
2004-02-18 04:02:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by henyboss
But has a raft of people like you, who offer constant criticism, but offer
no positive solutions, as to how best treaty claims might be settled.
What's your solution , Maori sovereignty, financial payouts that stretch
ahead for any foreseeable future, do you see it as a problem that can be
solved, or one that is impossible to resolve. How about some positive
feedback for a change.
Well for a start, stop thinking of treaty issues as problems.
They are opportunities to redress the perversities of our colonial past.
And what's the rush to resolve treaty claims ?
They will be around for ever. Get used to it !
If Treaty claims are about redressing specific injustices done in the past,
they should be resolved as soon as possible. Wrongs should be righted.

On what grounds do you assert that the claims will be around for ever? Some
Maori have said that TOW claims will be a permanent wealth-transfer
process - I recall Ranginui Walker saying something like this.

Once the historical claims have been resolved, the process should be
terminated and the Waitangi Tribunal disbanded.
Joy
2004-02-17 08:11:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
No, we live in a world pattern you could say. It's not that the european
element is getting ahead at expense of Maori is more that some Maori aren't
living the world pattern but still expecting the same benefits. The world
pattern is to plan to do well, execute the plan with fortitude, obey common
rules of politeness and look for the main chance. Everyone gets a chance.
Joy
annemarie
2004-02-18 00:15:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joy
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
No, we live in a world pattern you could say. It's not that the european
element is getting ahead at expense of Maori is more that some Maori aren't
living the world pattern but still expecting the same benefits. The world
pattern is to plan to do well, execute the plan with fortitude, obey common
rules of politeness and look for the main chance. Everyone gets a chance.
Joy
Yes in simpler times survival depended on hunting and gathering, finding
shelter etc. These days survival depends on living in a money based
society. Therefore to suceed you need education and work ethic etc etc.
These things can be offered and made available (as they are to all NZ'ers)
but they cannot be forced onto people. Choice is always there.
LAR
2004-02-17 08:26:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
Maori are more than capable of great achievements. Handouts are a
subversive method by the State to keep them oppressed. Handouts kill the
incentive to achieve.
WARREN G
2004-02-17 09:05:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by LAR
Maori are more than capable of great achievements. Handouts are a
subversive method by the State to keep them oppressed. Handouts kill the
incentive to achieve.
Whenever Maori are entitled to something thats always called a handout,
whenever somebody else gets something its not called a handout.
Mrs Norris
2004-02-18 11:34:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by LAR
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
Maori are more than capable of great achievements. Handouts are a
subversive method by the State to keep them oppressed. Handouts kill the
incentive to achieve.
Problem is, Maori have no incentive to make even normal achievements.
They know they will never be judged as equals.
Bobs
2004-02-17 12:28:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by LAR
Post by Pulp Fixxion
The way Brash has been talking lately it sounds like the Maoris are
continually living it up on easy street while the rest of NZ suffers.
Is this true? That the Maoris have such a good life, got everything
over the whole of NZ/Aotearoa?
Well I don't think its true. The Maoris been ripped off so many times
and marginalised that any so called "priveliges" that they got because
they really are living on shit street after nearly two centuries of
colonization.
The pattern repeats itself all over the world.
Maori are more than capable of great achievements. Handouts are a
subversive method by the State to keep them oppressed. Handouts kill the
incentive to achieve.
Problem is, Maori have no incentive to make even normal achievements.
So they don't want a better life for themselves and their kids?
Post by Mrs Norris
They know they will never be judged as equals.
Sounds like trying to justify your failure with excuses. Only losers and
commies do that.
Sue Bilstein
2004-02-18 04:05:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by LAR
Maori are more than capable of great achievements. Handouts are a
subversive method by the State to keep them oppressed. Handouts kill the
incentive to achieve.
Problem is, Maori have no incentive to make even normal achievements.
They know they will never be judged as equals.
A teacher I know (teaches in Whangarei) said that Maori kids who do well at
school tend to get beaten up by other Maori kids. Why would that be, do you
think?
Redbaiter
2004-02-18 04:56:36 UTC
Permalink
Sue Bilstein says
Post by Sue Bilstein
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by LAR
Maori are more than capable of great achievements. Handouts are a
subversive method by the State to keep them oppressed. Handouts kill the
incentive to achieve.
Problem is, Maori have no incentive to make even normal achievements.
They know they will never be judged as equals.
A teacher I know (teaches in Whangarei) said that Maori kids who do well at
school tend to get beaten up by other Maori kids. Why would that be, do you
think?
Does this article answer your question?

A Professor’s Controversial Analysis of Why Black Students Are
‘Losing the Race’

Berkeley scholar says their own anti-intellectualism prevents
academic success

By LEO REISBERG

One recent fall at the University of California at Berkeley a
black student proposed turning her family history into a
fictional short story, peppered with socioeconomic commentary.
This, she told her professor, John H. McWhorter, would be her
senior honors thesis.

The months passed with only two visits from the student and no
written drafts, while Mr. McWhorter’s white students consulted
him once or twice a week. At the end of the semester, she handed
in a family tree-sketched in pencil on notebook paper. The
professor never saw her again.

In another class, a black student turned in a midterm
examination that was so bad that Mr. McWhorter wondered whether
he had attended the lectures. Even after that disastrous
midterm, the student rarely appeared in class. His final exam
was worse, and he never turned in a final paper. Not
surprisingly, he failed the course.

"Sad as it is to say, I have gradually had to admit that this
sort of thing has been the norm for black students I have
taught," the professor writes in Losing the Race: Self-Sabotage
in Black America (Free Press), to be published this month.

Mr. McWhorter, a black associate professor in Berkeley’s
linguistics department, who flirted with controversy in the past
when he argued against the use of Ebonics as a teaching aid for
black students, now tackles affirmative action. In the book, he
calls for an end to racial preferences in college admissions.

Mr. McWhorter says he came to realize that not only were black
undergraduates at Berkeley "among the worst students on
campus," but that black students in general-from kindergarten to
graduate school, and from the ghettos to middle-class suburbia-
were the weakest in America.

He says that black Americans tend to blame their plight on
racism, oppression, poverty, and underfinanced inner-city
schools. But Mr. McWhorter argues that black students of all
classes and income levels lag behind their white counterparts,
because of a mindset endemic to black culture that discourages
learning.

None of the students he mentions in his book grew up in a ghetto
or has ever known poverty, he says. "Black Berkeley
undergraduates are almost all upwardly mobile, bright-eyed young
people, many with cars, none of whom would be uncomfortable in a
nice restaurant and many of whom probably do know what wine goes
with chicken," he writes. Citing figures from Berkeley’s office
of public records, Mr. McWhorter notes that, of the 257 black
freshmen who entered Berkeley in the last class before the ban
on racial preferences took effect," only 83 had parents whose
total yearly income was $30,000 a year or less, a commonly used
metric for ‘lower income.’"

"Year after year, only about a third of the black entering class
could be considered lower income even by the most liberal
metric, while the parents of about half and often more of the
class made at least $40,000 a year, with quite a few in brackets
much higher than that," he writes.

Many of those students enrolled at Berkeley before the passage
in 1996 of Proposition 209, which banned the use of racial
preferences in California university admissions, and touched off
a fiery debate on the campus. Defenders of affirmative action
argued that the policy would bar black children who grew up in
poverty, even though Proposition 209 allows preferences based on
economic status.

That debate is what motivated Mr. McWhorter to write his book.
Affirmative action, he says, contributes to a spirit of "anti-
intellectualism," and to a "deep-reaching inferiority complex"
that encourages blacks to portray themselves as society’s
victims.

Affirmative action-a necessary evil 30 years ago, he says,
comparing it to chemotherapy’s role against cancer-has now
become a way for black students with mediocre academic records
to leap ahead of more-qualified white and Asian students in
gaining admission to elite colleges. Once they are there, he
says, the black students on average continue to do poorly. Many
of them graduate, but without learning much.

"If every black student on a selective college campus were
admitted according to the same criteria as other students," Mr.
McWhorter writes, "it would help to erode lingering feelings of
inferiority to whites, and lessen the drive to assuage this by
taking refuge in dwelling unduly upon vestiges of victimhood and
passing this on to children."

Abandoning racial preferences would surely weaken racial
diversity at many colleges-another necessary evil, he says. That
would be unfortunate, Mr. McWhorter said in an interview, "but
the reason I think it’s tolerable is that it would be temporary.
It would get around in the black community that there are
efforts that need to be made, that you have to work harder, and
what would happen is there would be a reason to embrace
school." Affirmative action, he says, encourages certain
"defeatist thought patterns."

"Black America is currently caught in certain ideological
holding patterns that are today much, much more serious barriers
to black well-being than is white racism, and constitute nothing
less than a continuous, self-sustaining act of self-sabotage,"
writes the 34-year-old professor.

In his book, Mr. McWhorter defines the three thought patterns:

Victimology-a tendency of black Americans to blame their
problems on often nonexistent white racism. He argues that black
people have made such tremendous progress since the start of the
civil-rights movement that their frequent cries of racism are no
longer justified.
For example, he writes, less than one-fourth of black Americans
live in poverty today, compared with 55 percent in 1960; twice
as many blacks were doctors in 1990 as in 1960; and by 1995,
Congress had 41 black lawmakers, up from four in 1960.

Separatism-a mindset that encourages black people to separate
themselves from anything "white." He writes of a black freshman
at Berkeley who depicted himself as "black-identified" and
thought of Berkeley as a "racist school" after only a few months
on the campus.
"Spiritually he had ensconced himself in ‘black Berkeley,’
living on a black dormitory floor and majoring in African-
American Studies," Mr. McWhorter writes. "Many people would see
this student as ‘nurturing his cultural identity,’ or as having
‘inherited the fears of his ancestors.’ Perhaps-but so
determinedly reserving his sincere and open engagement for
interactions with blacks only, he, too, is likely to have some
trouble getting internships and jobs, and will be warmly
supported by his friends in attributing this to racism."

Anti-intellectualism-an attitude that "subtly but decisively"
teaches black students "not to embrace schoolwork too
wholeheartedly," because taking an interest in academics is the
same as "acting white." Mr. McWhorter tells of a middle-class
black student who registered for Advanced Placement classes in
an integrated high school in Illinois, and was called an "oreo"
by his black classmates because "getting good grades was always
connected to white people."
"It is this, and not the unequal distribution of educational
resources, that is the root cause of the notorious lag in black
students’ grades and test scores regardless of class or income
level."

What do Mr. McWhorter’s subjects think of his theories? Preston
Taylor, a black student who grew up in a middle-class suburb of
Oakland, Calif., and graduated from Berkeley in May with a
sociology degree, agrees with some of Mr. McWhorter’s theories.
Mr. Taylor hasn’t read Losing the Race but did read an essay the
professor wrote about the affirmative-action debate.

"He’s on the right track when it comes to understanding that
there’s an internal factor as to why black students don’t do
well academically," says Mr. Taylor, who was president of the
student government in 1998-99. Indeed, he says, black students
who do well in college are "shunned by others in the black
community."

But Mr. Taylor and others at Berkeley say that the reluctance to
apply themselves to academics is not limited to the black
population. This is "not a country that’s known for its embrace
of intellectual pursuits," says Samuel R. Lucas, a black
assistant professor in Berkeley’s sociology department. "We
shouldn’t be surprised that students think more about the party
they’re going to on Friday or the football game than they do
about their studies." He adds, "White students, Latino students,
Asian students, black students are all represented among the
worst and among the best in terms of the grades they get, the
seriousness with which they engage the materials, and the
creativity they bring to the assignments."

One black magazine columnist expects the book to make Mr.
McWhorter a "hero for the black-bashing crowd."

"Maybe because I’m the grandson of a freed slave who died with a
book in his hands, the idea that there’s a historic ‘pan-
racial’ black bias against braininess strikes me as absurdly
simplistic," Jack E. White writes in last week’s issue of Time.

"We’ve got a problem all right," he continues, "but it reflects
everything from the fact that white families on average have 10
times more wealth than black families, to the larger proportion
of uncertified teachers in black schools, to the hopelessness
some black kids feel because so-called experts have told them so
many times that they don’t measure up."

On the flip side of the coin, Stephan and Abigail Thernstrom,
who criticize racial preferences in America in Black and White:
One Nation, Indivisible (Simon & Schuster, 1997), call Losing
the Race a "brilliant, sparkling, effervescent book." They say
that Mr. McWhorter "courageously confronts the problem of black
academic underachievement."

But Mr. McWhorter doesn’t expect to make many friends when the
book hits stores. "It’ll be hard to walk around my own campus
starting in the fall," he says. "A lot of black academics will
never speak to me again. Frankly, though, I don’t need to be
liked by everyone."

Others who are sure to dislike Mr. McWhorter’s book are those
defenders of affirmative action whom he sharply criticizes,
including William G. Bowen and Derek Bok, two former Ivy League
presidents who wrote The Shape of the River:

Long-Term Consequences of Considering Race in College and
University Admissions (Princeton University Press, 1998). That
book-based on a study of 45,184 students who entered 28
selective colleges in the fall of 1976 or the fall of 1989 --
has been lauded by many academics as the most comprehensive look
ever at how students who benefited from racial preferences have
fared both during and after college.

"Every smug, fawning review I read of this book was as
irritating as an eyelash in my eye," Mr. McWhorter writes, "and
reading the book I had to pause several times to avoid throwing
it across the room."

What frustrated him about The Shape of the River is that the
authors "breezily presume that the disadvantages I have
mentioned-high-achieving blacks never sure whether they deserve
their success and generally assumed not to, blacks looking and
feeling stupid, blacks never knowing the test of real
competition, blacks having no incentive to put forth their best
efforts * are somehow unimportant in view of the fact that their
interviewees who were admitted to universities under set-aside
policies are now happy campers."

Mr. Bok and Mr. Bowen were unavailable for comment. Mr.
McWhorter, who grew up in a "solidly middle-class home" and
attended private schools, is familiar with the disadvantages of
affirmative action.

By the end of the book, he acknowledges that his race helped him
land a couple of fellowships at Berkeley and Stanford and a
faculty post at Cornell University.

"I am often congratulated on my career," he writes, "but the sad
fact is that as much as I enjoy my job in many ways, I will
never get beyond the sense of diminishment in having gotten it
to such an extent ‘through the back door.’"
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"One man with courage is a majority." Thomas Jefferson
Sue Bilstein
2004-02-18 06:15:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Redbaiter
Sue Bilstein says
Post by Sue Bilstein
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by LAR
Maori are more than capable of great achievements. Handouts are a
subversive method by the State to keep them oppressed. Handouts kill the
incentive to achieve.
Problem is, Maori have no incentive to make even normal achievements.
They know they will never be judged as equals.
A teacher I know (teaches in Whangarei) said that Maori kids who do well at
school tend to get beaten up by other Maori kids. Why would that be, do you
think?
Does this article answer your question?
A Professor's Controversial Analysis of Why Black Students Are
'Losing the Race'
No; it's about American blacks.

(crosspost to nz.soc.maori trimmed by Clear, who are unable to carry the NG
because their "upstream provider" does not support it.)
Redbaiter
2004-02-18 06:40:16 UTC
Permalink
Sue Bilstein says
Post by Sue Bilstein
Post by Redbaiter
Sue Bilstein says
Post by Sue Bilstein
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by LAR
Maori are more than capable of great achievements. Handouts are a
subversive method by the State to keep them oppressed. Handouts kill
the
Post by Redbaiter
Post by Sue Bilstein
Post by Mrs Norris
Post by LAR
incentive to achieve.
Problem is, Maori have no incentive to make even normal achievements.
They know they will never be judged as equals.
A teacher I know (teaches in Whangarei) said that Maori kids who do well
at
Post by Redbaiter
Post by Sue Bilstein
school tend to get beaten up by other Maori kids. Why would that be, do
you
Post by Redbaiter
Post by Sue Bilstein
think?
Does this article answer your question?
A Professor's Controversial Analysis of Why Black Students Are
'Losing the Race'
No; it's about American blacks.
I see.

Not one of the comments within could be applied locally. Not
even this one..?

-----------------------

Anti-intellectualism-an attitude that "subtly but decisively"
teaches black students "not to embrace schoolwork too
wholeheartedly," because taking an interest in academics is the
same as "acting white."

Mr. McWhorter tells of a middle-class
black student who registered for Advanced Placement classes in
an integrated high school in Illinois, and was called an "oreo"
by his black classmates because "getting good grades was always
connected to white people."

"It is this, and not the unequal distribution of educational
resources, that is the root cause of the notorious lag in black
students’ grades and test scores regardless of class or income
level."
-----------------------

Typically bigoted Bilstein.....
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"One man with courage is a majority." Thomas Jefferson
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...