Posts by Manakura
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I have to agree with David and Che on the relative levels of bigotry in Oz and NZ. I'd like to see empirical evidence but my feeling is there is little difference. Unlike Australia, NZ has a much larger and more visible indigenous population that, in my lifetime anyway, doesn't tolerate the sort of behaviour Che describes. This in turn emboldens Pakeha and others who are disgusted by bigotry to speak up about it.
One of my closest mates, a pathologically stroppy Samoan afakasi woman got called a "dirty bonga b**ch" by a passing car full of (mostly but not all pakeha) drunken yobos.
We didn't need to hold each other back cause the token Pakeha in our NZ Austronesian diaspora gang wrenched open their car door at the red light the stopped and proceeded to tell them how peeps like them made her embarassed to be a Pakeha NZer. It was a savage tongue lashing and they all looked shamed, especially when they realised much of the onlookers were just as peeved as our mate.
We didn't need to say or do a thing because she wasn't speaking for us, she was defending her own sense of honour as a Pakeha. It was a sweet moment.
But what so many NZers express when they think they're in private or not in front of their 'others' is really no different to what Aussies do in public.
-
I find Manakura's views oddly similar to those of D'Souza's.
You could read it like that, but I assure you I think nothing is ever entirely one person or groups fault. Life is soe complicated shit. I just recognise the thoughtless exercise of military might by Western nations against Muslim populations plays a significant role in appeal of radical Islam. This is not to deny other factors of course, but to suggest Islam as a religion is inherently bad as Danyl seems to be implying is not particularly helpful.
Simon, that's very interesting, I wonder if it's an 'Islam thing' or if it's more to do with the places women generally occupy in Austronesian societies? I guess it's a case of the pre-existing culture gelling with the more recent Muslim layer.
Whoops I totally forgot my vow to not post on this topic from yesterday! This is why I've never bothered with NY resolutions.
-
i can see i'd better start shaving my head, pronto...
Even if you did you'd still be in a minority - Bhuddists make up only 5.89% of the worlds observers of religion!
-
Here's my question to Weston - what do you think is 'right' with Islam?
From the wikipedia page on Sharia law:
<quote?Islam unequivocally allows both single and married women to own property in their own right. Islam restored to women the right to inherit property, in contrast with some cultures where women themselves are considered chattels that can be inherited. A woman's share of inheritance is completely hers and no one, including her father or husband, can make any claim on it. However, rich a woman may be, her male relatives in order of closeness are required to financially support her. It is her prerogative to forgive the male relatives their obligations of support.</quote?
I believe this makes Islam the only major organised religion that explicitly protects the property rights of women. Correct me if I'm wrong (Unfortunately I had trouble finding an internet source that cited references- can you help with that Anjum?
Also have a read through of
http://www.ias.org/articles/Women_in_Islam.htmlNo doubt the ideals of the prophet are often not actually practiced by Muslim men, but then the same applies to many cherised ideals of Jesus and of Western modernity, such as equality and personal liberty.
-
And I haven't noticed any western industrialised country 'raining violence' down on Indonesia, multi-cultural New Zealand or large swathes of London in the recent past
Didn't read Anjum's post then? I use violence more widely than just dropping bombs and shooting first and asking questions later. It all counts towards pushing people to the edge and fostering distrust etc etc.
You are misunderstanding me, I am saying a large amount of terrorism that is directed at western nations is because these nations employ violence much too often. Terrorism and extremism between Muslims was not part of my point.
My position is a little more subtle than I have space to explain here, but if I am to convincingly defend what is right with Islam to others I need the latitude to condemn what I believe to be wrong with it. I believe this approach is more likely to succeed in fostering good will in bad times than one that seeks to romanticise our differences.
Well said Weston, you've inspired to refrain from ever posting to threads like this again, save for purposes of comic relief. Its a bit rich for people like me to blather on about it in the face of other peoples lived experience, such as Anujum's.
Anjum, don't you just know it that if any of you or your brother Muslims NZers decided to kick some skinhead arse they would turn into nice if troubled middle class boys! See it happen to my Maori Brothas and Sistas all the time - otherwise good people, they get pushed and pushed then when they lash out they turn into thugs, scum, or haters and wreckers. Frustrating, neh?
-
It doesn't get much more ironic that slagging off the horrors of modernity over the internet.
O please, of course I recognise the irony. I'm merely pointing that many core aspects of the modern project are rather fucked and have hugley negative outcomes for much of the globes population, but not all aspects of modernity. We could pick out isolated developments of any kind of society and say "isn't that great" all day long.
I think it's a little unfair to blame all the problems of the Middle East on 'The West'.
Danyl, you're conflating 'muslim' - an organised religion - with 'middle east' - a geographic area. I wasnae referring to the middle east, but rather the muslim world (yes, a stupendously vague term, but this is a net forum not Time) which encompasses Indonesia, other parts of S E Asia, large swathes of London, and as Anjum's post illustrates our very own City of the Future, and more.
If you can find in my post anything approximating 'Its all The West's fault' then you are a magician. What I was poiting out is that a lot of fundamental Islamic activity finds its mandate with muslim people in the violence Western nations perpetrate on the Muslims and predominantly Muslim countries. If countries like the US, UK, France didn't so readily turn to their armed services in their dealings with Msulim countries then Radical Islam would lose a lot of power.
Or in short: the war on terror makes the problem of terror worse:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.htmlex=1316750400&en=da252be85d1b39fa&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rssRB, I'm glad Modernity works for you, it works for me too in certain ways, (though I still think the art is crap!), but why should that stop me from pointing out that modernity doesn't work for everyone, and perhaps to someone extent many modern developments rely on the exploitation of people, resources, planet?
-
Radical Islam should be opposed because it is unjust, violent, anti-modern and lends itself to authoritarian political structures.
Agreed about Radical Islam, and well radical just about everything especially Fundy Christianity, but what is so great about the modern world? Industrialisation, global capital, nationalism, colonisation and so on are all inherent to modernism and they aint nothing great about any of those things. Ugly art too!
I don't condone what fundy matyrs of any stripe do, but considering the violence that nearly all modern industrialised western nations have rained down on the muslim world are we surprised that Radical Islam is such a powerful force? Furthermore, the assemtry of the violence between the msulim nations/organisations and western nations is so extreme, i would suggest the onus on reducing conflict lies with the nations of the west.
-
Lyndon.
1876, Canada: Parliament passes the Indian Act, which like the Dawes Act in the U.S.A. was intended to help with the cultural elimination of indigenous Canadians. It created a distinction between status and non-status Indians. The former lived on reserves and/or belonged to bands and were therefore qualified for certain treats via treaties signed by their people and the colonial government. The latter got not a thing. A clause in the act stated that when a status Indian married a non-status Indian he/she and all their descendents became non-status.
1987, Canda: Parliament repeals aforementioned clause of 1876 Indian Act and around 100 000 peeps regain their 'status', for what it's worth. However it simply reinstates the old regime by creating a law that says if 2 consecutive generations marry 'off the reserve' then the third generation lose their status and hence all rights to aforementioned treaties. It merely slows the genocide via oppressive biological notions of authenticity down.
You were probably listening to Harry Daniels, who was once the leader of the Aboriginal Congress in Canda. He calls the new version of the Indian Act the 'Abocide Bill'. Here in Aotearoa we only got rid of our blood quantum laws in the mid-70s, I think. I only just missed out on having 'Octoroon' or 'Quadroon' or something even sillier stamped on my Birth Cert.
Funny how settler populations can absorb any amount of indigenous genes and remain authentic but the absorbing of any European stock into indigenous populations diluted their racial purity and rendered them 'inauthentic' and ineligible for their own heritage.
-
E, no need to be snippy it was a question asked in good faith.
the learning media web site, while really useful for some quick online definitions, is not the best way to come to grips with te reo. i wonder what is - it's hard to find a course.
Vic Uni would be your first stop, their Maori studies is called Te Kawa a Maui. It offers an excellent te reo Maori course I'm told. If what they offer doesn't suit then one of the tutors will be able to point you in the right direction to a tech course, night course or marae based wananga. And if you strike one of the nannies that teach at Vic they'll have you fixed up with one of their multilingual grand daughters if you're not careful! :)
-