Wax wrote: back in Tauranga the majority of my friends are Maori, and ive met more than a few of these guys visting thier western whanau, ive even spent a weekend staying on a marae near Ruatoria, and playing rugby one morning i met more barely veiled racism directed at me, than id like to ever again, but these guys are a negative avatar of Maori rights activists and not an accurate representation, sure theres more than a few of em, but they spoil it for the peaceful Maori. unfortunatly i let some silly predjudices eclipse the real issue, and found myself on the wrong side in an argument i believe quite strongly about; the fairness that was spoken of. just remember however, not everyone who opposes the treaty is racist, i know many Maori who do.
Tena Koe Phil Robey of Clova - please excuse me for seeming to pick apart your post here, but I just wanted to discuss the event you described above.
I think both sides suffer from letting predjudices clouding their judgement. I know this goes on in Ruatoria - it was particulary bad in the 80s when the Rastafarians were getting carried away with the church burnings and it culminated in the beheading of one of them. Up there alot of people have suffered from colonialism so they, quite rightly in my opinion, have a deep hatred and mistrust of anything that resembles their supposed enemy. I don't like this as at all, but there isn't alot of constructive activity going on to change it. You gotta understand that people have become so mistrustful, it is difficult for them to work through those hurdles.
Yes, there are alot of Maori who oppose the Treaty or simply can't be bothered with these issues. I think these people need to decolonise themselves and take a look at what it really means to Aotearoa as a nation. I firmly believe that we should be fighting oppression wherever we see it, not peddling misinformation about our past to confuse people.
Wax wrote:but i digress, i just want it all to end, so that these things can be looked into, i didnt pick up on it at the time, but Ost made the same asertion, wait til the treaty process is resolved (to Samina) then we may see...
I can't see any Treaty issues being resolved, even with the incoming foreshore legislation. All the Crown are doing is dictating to Maori what they can and can't have, when they never had the right to do that in the first place. And we certainly didn't sign that over.
Wax wrote:so what is the issue im dodging here Phil O'Cameron? i think calling these pseudo-historians racist is issue dodging, i dont really believe the celts are involved in this whole thing at all, except for celts like Mel. and perhaps whoever is credulous enough to believe the wild theories.
I don't think calling these pseudo-historians racist is issue-dodging at all. I've already said many times before in this thread that their motivations for writing trash like this IS RACIST. They want to discredit Maori, now that the Moriori/Maruiwi story is a proven colonial fallacy. This is to gain some kind of moral equivalency with Maori. That is the whole issue behind the wild theories. There is also nothing to stop me from saying that, quite possibly, these 'celts', the patupairehe, the turehu, the Moriori ARE MY ANCESTORS.
Everyone seems to think that one people came here and then they stopped. Then the Maori came here and they stopped. No-one gives any credit to intermarriages (like the many made between Irish, Scottish, Dutch, Ngati Porou, Te Whanau a Apanui, Whakatohea, Nga Puhi etc) between these peoples. Everyone thinks of these 'races' (I prefer the term culture) as FINITE. No-one thinks that maybe a culture came here perhaps over a thousand years ago and developed into what we now know as New Zealand Maori.
Cultures and people are not static. They do not merely stop and end - they keep on reproducing, changing and growing. Culture is a dynamic thing, not something you can mark as beginning and ending by certain arrangements of stones.
Don't forget that history is a political tool, just like science, art, business, religion and money. You can leave out certain facts to make anything seem credible. These people who wrote those sites have done just that. As Joey Normal noted earlier, they have no credible sources backing their theories. Why is that? There are many notable historians in New Zealand. I notice people like Doug Sutton haven't touched this one.
Everything seems so obvious to me and straightforward that I haven't been bothered to explain much in this thread. People can write to their MPs all they want but you gotta ask yourself why are they doing this? To discredit and undermine the Maori of Aotearoa as First Peoples? Does anyone know how disrespectful that is? Thats almost as bad as saying all Moriori are extinct or there are no full-blooded Maori left (remind me to discuss the Blood Quantum at a later date) !!
Anyway - I've typed out a bit, but above all I did appreciate your post Phil Robey of Clova and I am fucking loving the signature bit too
Phil Robey of Clova wrote:Robey of Clova
Loving that reprazentin' \m/