Hard News: Right This Time?
378 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 12 13 14 15 16 Newer→ Last
-
National can't make it 13 months but all we're being treated to is lots of coverage on issues of personalities and expenses and zero on issues of policy.
Policy ? What is this policy thing you are talking about? ;)
-
I'm quite disgusted at how little coverage the issue between the Greens and National is getting from the MSM. So far I see one, fairly light-weight article at Granny, and absolutely nothing at Stuff or either of the major TV news sites.
Efficiency is actually a major issue. If the efficiency of our vehicle fleet improved by 50% in the next ten years (a very realistic figure), then we'd import a huge amount less oil.
This would improve our current account deficit. That in turn would reduce interest rates. It would also reduce pressure on the dollar (although the current account deficit also has a negative affect on th dollar). That in turn would allow the economy to grow, as productive investment would be encouraged. It would reduce our rather large Kyoto liabilities. And last, but not least (for anyone but the bunch of lunatics on the 9th Floor), we'd pollute a whole lot less and create less harmful carbon emissions.
So why not? Because improving vehicle standards is the work of a "nanny state". We can't be like Europe or Japan or China or California. If efficient showerheads were too much, god forbid we dare have efficient cars.
-
Ironic headline of the week: Maori Party dividing NZ - Peters
-
And on the subject of pollution and Government buy-in, this idea is probably doomed to failure. National don't appear to give a fig for trying to bring the reality of NZ's environmentally-conscious image into line with the fantasy, and preserving a sky-scape would require restricting development in the surrounding area. Can't be having that.
-
why did brailsford veer markedly away from the commission ngai tahu gave him to write your histories ??? is it cos he found out the truth that they werent indigenous or the original settlers of the sth island and wouldn't skew his findings in your favour to support your claims.
i understand its in your best interest to discredit but you stil cant take away the fact, that the tattoed land and greenstone trails are fully legit. its like saying, yeah michael jackson may have been a paedo but thriller and off the wall are still the shit !!!
and exactly what did you make of this ?
http://www.archive.org/stream/talesofbankspeni00jacoiala/talesofbankspeni00jacoiala_djvu.txt
dunno bout the atrocities at parihaka but what about the stories of ngai tahu cutting off the heads of shitloads of *enemies* and skewering them along the heathcote hills as warning not to be fucked with ?
true or false ?
and exactly what year did ngai tahu come into existence as an iwi ?
-
Matt P:
I'm quite disgusted at how little coverage the issue between the Greens and National is getting from the MSM. So far I see one, fairly light-weight article at Granny, and absolutely nothing at Stuff or either of the major TV news sites.
National currently has issues with 3/4 of its partners, and it's been a year since they got elected. H1 and H2 managed to keep things seemly until well into the second term, despite the media waiting beneath the tightrope with bared, dripping fangs. National can't make it 13 months but all we're being treated to is lots of coverage on issues of personalities and expenses and zero on issues of policy.
Again, I cite whitebread and media circuses. "Look at moi", anybody?
George D:
So why not? Because improving vehicle standards is the work of a "nanny state". We can't be like Europe or Japan or China or California. If efficient showerheads were too much, god forbid we dare have efficient cars.
I very much fear our decision-makers will keep their heads stuck in the tar sands, unless civil war breaks out in Iran or the Copenhagen talks turn to shit.
-
he found out the truth that they werent indigenous or the original settlers of the sth island
But... everyone knows Ngai Tahu weren't the 'original settlers of the South Island'. You're all 'gotcha!' about an accepted fact. Boring old Te Ara encyclopaedia entry:
'The process was again one of small incursions, occasional bloodshed, piecemeal occupation and intermarriage rather than steady conquest. Kinship connections were forged to legitimise residence in each region. Ngāi Tahu occupied the Otago coast and the far south.... While there were skirmishes between Ngāi Tahu and the tribes of Raki-ihia, the settlement was enduring. In fact, all the southern South Island signatories to the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 were descendants of this union, and of all three tribes, Ngāi Tahu, Ngāti Māmoe and Waitaha.'
The fact that all this intermarriage occurred (by whatever means - I'm certainly not all 'hooray for exchanging your daughters for goods and ceasefires!', but it was all too common in many societies around the world) means that your whole point is just... obsessive and weird. What do you suggest the solution is? Chopping up Islander and me into appropriately Ngai Tahu, Kati Mamoe and Waitaha bits so you can feel better about the Treaty settlement?
-
H1 and H2 managed to keep things seemly until well into the second term, despite the media waiting beneath the tightrope with bared, dripping fangs.
Not exactly. Everybody seems to forget that Labour chose to participate in the invasion of Afghanistan knowing it was resulting in civil war within the Alliance. The engineered collapse of your major coalition partner is hardly smooth running. It's history now, but history is important - without it we forget how things came to be this way.
-
NO Kai Tahu has EVER stated or written that we were the original settlers of the South. We are *very clear* about our North Island (in Aotearoa) provenance and our relationship with - for example - Ngati Porou. We are from Takitimu-te-waka. And we have been equally clear about our relationships with Kati Mamoe and -earlier still- with hapu within Waitaha.
I have already acknowledged the worth of Brailsford's original editions of "The Tattooed Land" and "Greestone Trails" - and those works were, just incidentally, the reason the tribe commissioned him in the first place.
"Tales of Banks Peninsula" - what should I make of it? It's a collection of reminisences with some Kai Tahu input (the Tikao family.) I would point out that the massacres at Akaroa were *of* Kai Tahu *by* Kati Toa (Te Rauparaha's lot.)
What year did Kai Tahu come into existence as an iwi? As you should know, we didnt organise ourselves by pan-hapu units (which is why my great-grandfather variously referred to his tribal affiliations as Kati Tuhaitara, Kati Rakiamoa, and Kati Hawea), so your question is pretty silly. I would suggest that the 1848 Blue Book census marks recognition *in printed form* of Ngai/Kai Tahu (if you dont want to accept Shortland's earlier -1843- work.) But we were calling ourselves Tahu's People long before that-
"shitloads of enemies"? What an exact figure...staking mokamokai was a practise most hapu carried out along disputed rohe lines, not just Kai Tahu hapu. Like cannibalism. Like enslavement. Like forced marriage among the high-ranked people. Ugly practises - but that was then.
-
But... everyone knows Ngai Tahu weren't the 'original settlers of the South Island'.
but danielle not everyone does know that. certainly not your average white muthafucka and its not like you guys promote it either. its not in your best interest and neither is it to acknowledge brailsford as anything other than a new age loony.
the point is not to aggrieve on the treaty or what percentage of ancestry you derive from where but to highlight the nature of indigenousity and exactly how long does one have to live in settlement as an immigrant within a region to gain indigenous or tangata whenua status ? as applied to the treaty, the question then begs, is it still possible to form new hapu and iwi from ngai tahu and claim further settlement from tront ?
The process was again one of small incursions, occasional bloodshed, piecemeal occupation...forged to legitimise residence in each region
apply what you wrote there to the west bank and the israeli occupation. they are going on 3 generations of continued settlement or even by virtue of their histories recorded as the old testament can they legitimately claim tangata whenua status and fuck what anyone else thinks ?
-
Actually dubmugga, everyone who is interested *does* know that - and we (Kai Tahu) actually promote this information (go to the tribe's website & have a look-see.)
Your second paragraph is obviated by
a) one of your earlier comments about the Blue & Pink census Books &
b)by those records themselves.No further responses to you from me.
-
haha...nigga please i wasnt even talking to you
i was talking more about whitey legitimately claiming tangata whenua status by virtue of having occupied your lands and breeding with you for centuries.
i'm talkin bout takin the best they got, not taking the worst in the form of corporate capitalism and making it yours, nah fuck it ours, our kids, all of us not, just those descendents from an old skool register which is ultimately what lies at the heart of the foreshore and seabed issue.
-
fairly light-weight article at Granny
It's worse than "light-weight", just another unquestioning regurgitation of govt spin and big-upping Key.
-
not everyone does know that. certainly not your average white muthafucka
I don't have it with me now, but I'm pretty sure it's in Keith Sinclair's History of New Zealand, which is about as white muthafucka as you can get about New Zealand history. I think it's in King, as well, and probably Belich.
And, if my MA thesis is to be believed, all of those books are about the question of indigeneity, and by what methods a people can become some version of tangata whenua.
-
Maybe it's just me.
-
Everybody seems to forget that Labour chose to participate in the invasion of Afghanistan knowing it was resulting in civil war within the Alliance.
After the September 11 attacks on the United States, planned and orchestrated from within the failed Afghan state, an invasion of that place to root out Osama Bin Laden's global reach and kill his followers was legal, just and right. As such it was supported by the vast majority of New Zealanders. Most people wished to express their support for our United States ally in it's actions against the criminals who planned the 9/11 attacks.
Don't blame Labour because the Alliance was full of romantic "Hanoi Jane" wannabes, relics from another era. The Alliance imploded not because of the actions of the government of the day, but because it hadn't moved on from a hokey, foolish, thirty year old "One, two, three, four we don't want your Asian war" view of international relations. -
by what methods a people can become some version of tangata whenua
Yeah, I'm curious about that. If we include the first immigrant in my family tree as the first generation, I'm now the sixth generation on my father's side to call NZ home, and at least fourth on my mother's. I have no other place to go, no matter what the Harawiras may desire.
At what point do we become no less legitimately the people of NZ than the Maori? After all, it's not like the Maori have a history in NZ that's measured in multiple millennia, as opposed to, say, the Australian Aborigines or native Africans. This country has no true native peoples, just varying degrees of remove from trans-oceanic immigrants.
Oh, and dubmugga, you can't pick-and-choose what you take. If you want the wheel, written records, and materials science, you get firearms, corporatism, and the criminal justice system. Them's the breaks.
-
Let's not forget the land stealing and paternalism too. Colonialism, got to love it.
-
Don't blame Labour because the Alliance was full of romantic "Hanoi Jane" wannabes, relics from another era. The Alliance imploded not because of the actions of the government of the day, but because it hadn't moved on from a hokey, foolish, thirty year old "One, two, three, four we don't want your Asian war" view of international relations.
But they were right. The war in Afghanistan has been a disaster. I was really annoyed about the breakup of the Alliance, and still think that the loss of that coalition party cost Labour dearly in terms of energy and ideas. But, from the vantage point of 2009, it's pretty clear that the Alliance had a point about the Afghan invasion. And Anderton's gung-ho speeches about standing shoulder to shoulder with the US in the wake of 9/11 were disgusting.
Speaking of overseas relations, there's an article in today's Guardian taking NZ to task for gross hypocrisy over green issues. I wonder if this will be the start of a trend?
-
Squandering our unearned green marketing advantage is far from "ambitious".
The European farming lobbyists have been looking for ammo to undermine NZ produce in their markets and we've given it to them through our government's craven sucking up to big polluters, construction companies and oil giants.
-
Squandering our unearned green marketing advantage is far from "ambitious".
Absolutely. I remember listening to Key's two-handed-head-clutcher of a victory speech last year and thinking the same thing. "Nuh Zillun's got food and it's got scenery!" Great. Nice one, John. You do realize that, in the long term, those two things are largely incompatible? The more dairying there is, the more forest gets cleared, the more effluent and run-off there is in the waterways, and the uglier things get. Eventually, it's going to be so obvious even the tourists will notice.
-
H1 and H2 managed to keep things seemly until well into the second term, despite the media waiting beneath the tightrope with bared, dripping fangs.
Matthew: Sorry, but you've really got to stop re-writing history here. Clark didn't do a damn thing to stop the Alliance melting down -- and why would she? It provided a pretext (however weak) for calling a snap election in 2002.
-
in the long term, those two things are largely incompatible
Quite. A smart, ambitious leader might direct investment, action and marketing into sustainable farming and sustainable tourism. Be the most green tourist destination, that kind of thing. 100% pure, if you like.
-
This country has no true native peoples, just varying degrees of remove from trans-oceanic immigrants.
You can redefine the term until it's useless. Go back to Gondwanaland and very little that we consider native in NZ was here. Native in reality means "was here when white people arrived". We're all actually from Africa and the Middle East, anything after that is a coloniser in one way or the other.
NZ has an indigenous people, who (largely) signed a treaty with the Crown which allowed New Zealand to become what it is today. The attempts of people to move on from that basic fact now that chickens have come home to roost is really shameful.
-
Refresh my memory: the dissolution of the Alliance was because of internal strife on whether or not to support a Government policy? How is that in any way comparable to not consulting the Greens on matters that were explicitly specified in an MOU? It's certainly in no way comparable to MPs from support parties doing stupid things very publicly and then having to fall on their swords, having first dragged the major party in either by their explicit words (Rodney's comments about Key) or the inflammatory nature of their utterances.
When I said "kept it seemly" I didn't mean no disagreements at all. That's impossible. This is politics. I meant no spectacular clashes between parties over the activities of members of other parties. The Alliance was a single party, so whatever happened within its structure wasn't Helen's responsibility, just like I don't hold Key responsible for how the Maori Party deals with Hone.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.