Posts by Simon Fraser
-
I guess I am moved by Voltaire's famous words: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.
Whether Clydesdale is right or wrong, he may say what he likes.
Free speech with the condition that one does not offend is no freedom at all.
Think that gem is from Boston Legal.
-
Islander - to that extent, we can all learn from each other.
Science in its essence has existed in all cultures for millennia.
I once saw a book called the Astronomical Knowledge of the Maori. I didn't get a chance to read it, however, it got me to thinking: of course, they must have studied the stars in a scientific manner. It would have certainly helped with their nagivation.
There are other examples of scientific knowledge residing in ancient cultures, such as the Bible saying that "the life is in the blood" which scientists only recently concurred with.
Sometimes we can be deluded that Modern Science thus science is about 500 years old. However, science goes right back to our most basic observations, understandings, and inferences about the way the world is.
I like how Heinlein's Man from Mars in Stranger in a Strange Land says that on Mars, there is one word that means science, philosophy and religion; thus he is puzzled why we see a distinction where the Martians do not.
-
Clydesdale said:
"It's scary. New Zealand's future growth depends on its ability to create new products and production processes. We're going to have a large proportion of the population without the educational requirements to create that."
in http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4553798a6000.htmlThe same article states: "In 2006, 265,974 people, or 6.9 per cent of the population, identified themselves as Pacific people. The Government grants about 2300 residency permits for Samoa, Fiji, Tuvalu, Tonga and Kiribati each year.
Statistics NZ crime figures show Pacific Islanders made up 9100 of 112,774 people convicted in 2006 - just over 8 per cent."
This seems to be only a slight over-representation of Pacific Islanders committing crime.
'Samoan Advisory Council spokesman Tino Pereira said the study was "lazy academic crap". Though Pacific Islanders had been disadvantaged in areas of health, education and employment, there had been significant improvements, he said.
Students were staying in school longer, more were taking up tertiary education and there were more Pacific Islanders in high levels of the public sector.
"The patterns for the future are looking good."'
- from the same article.
It is a good thing that more Pacific Islanders are choosing to further their education, as this will help rectify the problem Clydesdale was worried about.
To enjoy a decent standard of living in the future, we will need a robust economy. That will partially depend on invention and innovation.
The people who gain higher education may be from any race. The greater good of the country requires a certain amount of technical skill to abound.
It could be any part of society that was lagging behind. For the greater good, that part of society should be given a wake-up call to do what they can to help.
Clydesdale sounded perfectly reasonable on the Kim Hill interview.
http://podcast.radionz.co.nz/sat/sat-20080607-1005-Greg_Clydesdale_Immigration,_The_Beatles_and_Bach-048.mp3It's a pity so many people will not listen to a challenge.
There was a NOFX song that said, "Freedom of expression is a load of shit, just another farce in American politics." Interpolate New Zealand instead of American and we could sing along.
Jon Stewart said on C4 last week: "You can't criticise Israel's foreign policy and still get elected president."
If he was a Kiwi he may have said, "You can't criticise Pacific Islanders without being personally attacked." For the few who have debated Clydesdale on the facts, well done.
For all those who have attacked his motives and had a field day writing personal insults and trashy put-downs, you only serve to give the impression that there are no real arguments against what he said.
To those who said that PI unemployment is only 5%, and that many are now taking up tertiary education; and those who stated that PIs contribute in other ways too, such as sports and the performing arts, you are debating fairly, and your points have been duly noted.
Kim Hill would have done better to have said such things.
However, the personal attacks on Clydesdale from many media outlets and online blogs are shameful. Those writers should read "The Guide to Baloney Detection" in Carl Sagan's The Demon-haunted World. It lists many flawed forms of argument. Of them, the main kind visible online against Clydesdale would be termed: ad-hominem.
Apparently Sweden has banned smacking like us, and has the world's worstrate of child-abuse. Indicating perhaps that the police are wasting their time on minor offences, and having few resources to pursue more serious complaints.
Similarly, even though China and other countries have gone back to nationalised testing for schools, after finding that letting each school run their own show was failing miserably, we are going ahead with a curriculum that lets schools teach whatever they want, and test whatever they want, however they want.
We are a nation of imbeciles.
It's like how the Austrailians conducted a study that proved that smoking marijuana made people drive dangerously, yet New Zealand politicians said we couldn't ban driving stoned, because we did not have enough research on the matter. Couldn't we have just cited the Australian study?
In the words of Bad Religion: "We are all ignorant fools."
As long as everyone continues to think whatever their group tells them to, we have no hope of rediscovering our intellects.
Satan Bless. Good night.
-
If I couldn't handle a debate?
I would have done something else rather than chat to you guys all weekend.
Funny to accuse someone of not handling a debate, when that person has joined a discussion forum and argued with everyone else on it.
Jeez, I must be a pussy.
-
Just you you all know,
My complaints about the Thought Police began with Kim Hill interrupting Clydesdale and not letting him make his point, because it was so 'offensive' and controversial.
I get that his report has flaws, however, a lot of people have attacked him primarily for criticising the wrong people.
Someone made a good point on Kiwiblog: if he was attacking white middle class men you wouldn't be so up-in-arms about what he said.
You people want equality yet you support our quota for letting Pacific Islanders into the country. If they are equal to English peope, why do they need extra help getting in?
And why would we drop the standards for letting them in? If they have so much to offer, surely that wasn't necessary.
I get that this is the Anti-Clydesdale forum; the Kiwiblog apparently is the pro-Clydesdale one. If I was so offended by your lame personal attacks on me, I wouldn't have kept posting here.
For an explanation of the Thought Police comment, for those who will never ever read Bruce's book: there is a scary movement in the world in which people no longer restrict being offended to what a person says or writes: they get offended by what they were thinking.
The thing that makes you so mad about Clydesdale is that you believe he is being racist.
If his report is flawed, it will receive the appropriate criticism from his peers; apparently that is already happening.
You can thank Kim Hill for me wanting to come on here and give you guys an entertaining weekend of debating. I like listening to her, and will continue to doing so. She was more polite to Henry Rollins though.
She tried the same thing she did with Clydesdale on John Pilger: he ripped into her for it on live TV. At least Clydesdale was polite about it.
For the record: all people are of equal value, and should be treated by equal standards. Giving special treatment for a race implies that race must be inferior. I don't think Polynesians are inferior, nor do I think they need special treatment. Your statement that Pacific unemployment is only 5% is proof that Pacific Islanders don't need special treatment. Maybe we should have a quota for bringing English people here instead. It sounds like they need more help, if what you say is right.
Hate speech laws are effectively terrifying people out of even thinking something bad about another sector of society. We need more of that here, for your sake: prohibit people saying anything disparaging or critical of anyone else. Then you could have silenced Clydesdale effectively; and I could use the same laws against you guys for your personal attacks on me. That'd be fun.
It seems like your methods are working, so keep going. Persecute anyone who says something you don't like, then no one will ever do it again. Who needs debate anyway.
As much as you enjoy ripping into me for what I'm saying, you would have had a boring weekend if I wasn't here. No one else on this site is arguing with you.
Good night, and God bless.
-
Dub- if you simplify economies: we all need a certain amount to survive. Food, water, shelter, etc. And we all know there is a hierarchy of needs. luckily, in New Zealand, we are all doing well, compared with many countries at least.
It's not a Western idea.
Hypothetically:
If we supported too many people financially who were unable to repay us, or worse, who turned to crime thus making our standard of living worse, it would be a bad idea.
If you agree with that, then it's logical to question who gets to move to New Zealand.
Especially if one criteria applies to most of the world, but a small select group get in on a quota, without the criteria being applied to them.
Your inability to debate this so far belies your lack of an answer to this problem.
-
Two comments form The Thought Police book:
1. When OJ Simpson went to trial for the murder of his ex-wife, women's rights activists got into bed with the Civil Rights movement in brandishing the trial as an attack on a role-model for you black men, rather than calling it justice for a murderer;
2. The LA Riots were not a Black Uprising, the media just made it out to be one. The majority of the participants were Hispanic. Also, that guy who got pulled out of his truck and attacked was helped first by some black people who saw it happen.
Someone's making a lot of money out of propagating this myth that brown/black people are being persecuted.
Yet crime's not a racial thing.
Many talk about the problems in South Auckland, yet Christchurch comes a close second when it comes to crime, and the problem there (people say) is the 'White Trash", not the Polynesians.
-
What happened to free thought:
1. Multiculturalism told people to go back to their heritage. I am not part of this scene. I rejected my Christian upbringing and reject the idea that I have to do anything because it is my culture to do so.
2. The PC Thought Police told us that if we even thought anything negative about another group is society, we would be hung out to dry.
3. People chose a camp, either Left or Right wing; then from then on, just thought whatever the rest of their group thought.
You guys are all anti Clydesdale because you have to be.
The people on the Kiwiblog site appear to all be pro Clydesdale, once again, because they have to be.
I'm the only one debating with anyone, and you assume I must be a right wing nut.
I've been left wing all my life. Although, you come to a point where you realise you need to think for yourself.
I will not be told what to think by a group.
Use your minds, lazy people.
If we have an immigration problem, let's discuss it and solve it, rather than calling the person who draws attention to the issue a racist.
Sweeping problems under the carpet won't make them go away.
-
And Sofie, we do the same.
We allow many refugees in, but are biased in favour of Pacific people.
Why?
-
So Steve,
Neighsayer doesn't win the argument.
What do you think, that it's fair we have a quota of Pacific Islanders coming in, even to the detriment of their own countries, who lose workers and customers because of the amount of people moving to NZ?
The Them and Us argument is invalid too. We are part of a democracy, and should debate these issues, and vote on them.
Are you debating the issue, trying to prove that the quota is a good idea, or just lambasting anyone who dares question your opinions?