Focusing on White
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-08-2016, 09:36 PM
RE: Focusing on White
(26-08-2016 07:58 PM)Stevil Wrote:  But getting back to my OP.
Could you imagine the uproar if we had a White's only rugby team, or whites only parliament seats, or an article in the national rag about the White perspective on something?

Why do no one get in an uproar when we do the Maori thing?

I’m not quite sure what the question is Stevil. If it has to do why the Maori are a bit sensitive to race issues could it be that the Maori as the indeginous peoples were colonized, subdued and then turned into a minority?

I found this after a quick search. Similar to the North American indians there’s still much resentment, and rightfully so, with the way the Europeans have gone about things.

"Land as the issue

Until the late 1850s, the government managed to purchase enough land to meet settler demands. But many Māori became increasingly reluctant to sell their land, which tribes owned collectively. The Māori King movement, under the leadership of Wiremu Tāmihana, grew in part out of Māori resistance to land sales. Pōtatau Te Wherowhero was elected the first Māori King in 1858.

War in Taranaki and the Waikato

The flashpoint was Taranaki. The refusal of Wiremu Kīngi Te Rangitāke to sell land at Waitara led to war in 1860. The efforts of Māori to retain their land were depicted by the settlers as a challenge to British sovereignty. Māori resistance was effectively crushed after Governor George Grey took war to the Waikato in 1863–64.

Two chiefs, Te Kooti and Tītokowaru, prolonged war through the 1860s, but by 1872 the wars over land had ended. Large areas of land were confiscated from ‘rebellious’ tribes. A Native Land Court gave land titles to individual Māori, to facilitate sales to Pākehā.

After the wars, many Māori drew back from contact with the European settlers. Most lived in isolated rural communities. Māori land continued to pass into Pākehā hands, usually by sale through the Native Land Court. In the 1870s the village of Parihaka became the centre of a peaceful protest, led by the prophet Te Whiti-o-Rongomai, against occupation of confiscated land in Taranaki. In 1881 government forces invaded Parihaka in an attempt to crush this resistance.”

http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/history/page-4

If I misunderstood your point my apologies.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2016, 10:14 PM
RE: Focusing on White
(26-08-2016 07:58 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(26-08-2016 06:39 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Perfect example, the flag referendum. That was a perfect opportunity for us as a nation to take the first step in uniting but nope, Maori leaders and shit pushed hard for people to vote to keep our flag because they simply didn't like John Key. If that was the Maori Party or even Labor putting that forward we would have a new flag right now.
The Maori already have their flag
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSQYrGE8KeGM4wWQsJRnMK...QfyVWCmlpK]

I didn't vote for the change of flag because their was no significance for the change. It was just a whim.
If we get rid of the treaty, that would be something to celebrate and would need a new flag.

But getting back to my OP.
Could you imagine the uproar if we had a White's only rugby team, or whites only parliament seats, or an article in the national rag about the White perspective on something?

Why do no one get in an uproar when we do the Maori thing?

Another example of the divide they've created I might add.
Also, why the fuck do we need a reason to change the flag?? The current one's a piece of shit. It was well overdue for a change. If you want a reason how about it's not the 1800's any more? Or, we're not a colony any more?? Or, Britain is hardly capable of being our parent nation when it can't even take care of itself (Brexit) so why should we keep a symbol of those times?
Or how about this racial divide between White and Maori?

We needed to change that fucking flag but everyone had their heads up their asses.

But yes, back to the OP.
Because they pull the race card. Its just the way shit is.
I never stole anybodies land, neither did you. Nobody still alive today never had their land stolen. And yet rather than looking at themselves for their issues they view John Key as the sole reason why they're lining up at the dole line for their cigarette and meth money.

Quote:Who was there first?

Not the Maori. There was people before them. But the Maori ate them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like earmuffs's post
26-08-2016, 10:16 PM
RE: Focusing on White
(26-08-2016 09:36 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(26-08-2016 07:58 PM)Stevil Wrote:  But getting back to my OP.
Could you imagine the uproar if we had a White's only rugby team, or whites only parliament seats, or an article in the national rag about the White perspective on something?

Why do no one get in an uproar when we do the Maori thing?

I’m not quite sure what the question is Stevil. If it has to do why the Maori are a bit sensitive to race issues could it be that the Maori as the indeginous peoples were colonized, subdued and then turned into a minority?
Yeah, no, not quite.

I understand that some Maori may have some gripes about perhaps their ancestors running NZ and now we find that the traditional Maori traditions and culture are not the predominant culture of NZ.
I can understand that to some degree, by somewhat imagining how I might feel if the Chinese came to NZ in great numbers, become the dominate race and then start running the media and govt and what not. It would be quite an unsettling change, and it would be forced upon me.

But that is not my gripe in this thread.
My issue is that we seem tolerant of segregation and in particular race based articles, groups etc, as long as they are not white.

If we had a white rugby team we would be seen as racist, if we had an article in the newspaper about the White perspective on something then there would be an almighty uproar. So why do we have this double standard? Why do we tolerate having a Maori rugby team, a Maori perspective in the newspaper?

When I went to school, we had an award for the top student, an award for the top female student and an award for the top Maori student. So I got to challenge for one award were a Maori female got to challenge for three awards.
I don't know why we accept sexist and racial things as long as it isn't White male.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2016, 12:00 AM
RE: Focusing on White
@Stevil

There is no specialised White male newspaper, because White male percpective dominates the media by a landslide. Hell, even on internet you need to be especially good to avoid white men editorialists, comics or political analysts. There is no White male rugby team because white male dominate this sport by a landslide, most player, professionnal or otherwise are white. Why would we need to make a special niche for them? There is a Maori and female student award to encourage and pressure Maori and women (and especially Maori women) to perform in higher study because historically these people were denied or had limited access to higher study unlike white men (thus created a system to break this cycle). On the other hand, White men who, despite being less numerous than women since the mid 90's for the first time in history, represent around 70% of all university professors and still represent a short majority of post graduates in many first world countries (I coudn't find for New-Zeland).

We are very tolerent of White men over representation in pretty much every single sphere of society (with a few exception when it comes to nursing, child and elderly support and incarceration). While it irritates many, we live with it pretty peacefully. In resume we accept plenty of «sexist» and «racist» stuff (I wouldn't use those terms personaly), because men and women aren't equal neither are white and non whites. They can and should be equals. We want them equals. We strive to make them equals. We are getting, closer and closer to this objective and real equality might be achieve within our lifetime which would be tremedous, but we are still not there yet. This progress has to come from somewhere and it takes the form of initiative directed to enhance the social, economical, cultural and political representation and powers of those «lower» groups.

Could we create initiatives and programs directed at helping white men achieve a greater level of representation and power in the few domains where they are not in control? Yes, sure, I would propose grants offered to male students in traditionnaly women domains, more generous paternity leave, grant for white students studying non-white cultures or languages (like maori for exemple). This sort of thing.

I know for many white men who value equalitarianism this seems counter intuitive or even insulting (how can they have priviledges I don't have access to?), but considering someone has an equal doesn't necessarly make it so in the social arena. Sometimes there is centuries of systematic oppression and cultural traits and beliefs that needs to be changed for equality to become a reality.

Does it help a bit?

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like epronovost's post
27-08-2016, 12:53 AM
RE: Focusing on White
(26-08-2016 03:14 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(26-08-2016 03:06 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Don’t forget you also have 'Muffs.

BTW what or who exactly is “white”?
Well, apparently in NZ if you have a drop of Maori blood then you are Maori.
Me, I don't even know what I am made up of. I'm pretty sure there is no Maori, but possibly some Indian. Actually, we are all African aren't we?

Hi,

Back in the day, a drop of non white blood was called 'A touch of the tar brush'.

The Nazis went back at least two generations to screen pure bred Aryan bloodlines. I can't imagine a world in which a drop of Aryan blood would put you in a death camp. That's how deep this particular rabbit hole goes.

D.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2016, 12:58 AM
RE: Focusing on White
(26-08-2016 10:14 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  If you want a reason how about it's not the 1800's any more? Or, we're not a colony any more?? Or, Britain is hardly capable of being our parent nation when it can't even take care of itself (Brexit) so why should we keep a symbol of those times?
Because we are a commonweath country. We fall under the sovereignty of Britain. The Treaty is between Maori and Britain.

But the thing is, NZ has grown up. We are a country and our people are much more that ex-Brits and Maori. We have people from most countries, many Chinese, many Fiji, many Samoa and Tonga, many Aussies, Brits, South Africans, you name it we probably have it. A Brit and Maori model is outdated it does not reflect NZ. To move forward as a country, to treat people as equals we need to rid ourselves of Britain and Maori, rid ourselves of that old treaty. We need to be a one peoples. All treated equals.

(26-08-2016 10:14 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
Quote:Who was there first?

Not the Maori. There was people before them. But the Maori ate them.
I think the past is irrelevant. We need to treat all as NZers, not Maori vs non Maori.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2016, 01:10 AM
RE: Focusing on White
(27-08-2016 12:00 AM)epronovost Wrote:  There is no White male rugby team because white male dominate this sport by a landslide, most player, professionnal or otherwise are white.
I can tell you don't watch NZ rugby.

(27-08-2016 12:00 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Why would we need to make a special niche for them?
We don't. There is nothing inherenty white or maori about rugby. It's a game. People can play as equals. There is no need for segregation.
Maoris are not disadvantaged when it comes to rugby.

(27-08-2016 12:00 AM)epronovost Wrote:  There is a Maori and female student award to encourage and pressure Maori and women (and especially Maori women) to perform in higher study because historically these people were denied or had limited access to higher study unlike white men (thus created a system to break this cycle).
Nope. It encourages people to be racist. I for one resented the fact that they had special treatment. The top award, the one I was allowed to contest for in encouragement for everyone, for males, females, whites, maoris, chinese, indians, all.

(27-08-2016 12:00 AM)epronovost Wrote:  On the other hand, White men who, despite being less numerous than women since the mid 90's for the first time in history, represent around 70% of all university professors and still represent a short majority of post graduates in many first world countries (I coudn't find for New-Zeland).
I am all for those who are best qualified to get the job, I don't care what their race is.


(27-08-2016 12:00 AM)epronovost Wrote:  We are very tolerent of White men over representation in pretty much every single sphere of society (with a few exception when it comes to nursing, child and elderly support and incarceration).
If they are qualified then their representation is appropriate rather than "over representation". If Maori are not getting those jobs, then what is the core reason? Are they getting good grades at school? If not, then why not? Is the issue that parents at home are not encouraging their kids to learn and apply themselves? IDK. But the answer isn't to create special awards for them or to hire less qualified people of a specific race.

In Malaysia, the native Malay's don't need such high qualifications to become a doctor. The consequence is that seek people seek out the Chinese doctors and avoid the Malay doctors because they know the Chinese have a higher bar to qualify and are hence more likely to be better qualified.

Special treatment of races causes much issues, much racism, much resentment.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
27-08-2016, 02:26 AM
RE: Focusing on White
IIRC Maoris, and some Pacific races, share a genetic heritage with "Europeans". Which is why their features are more "Caucasian" than "Mongoloid".

Indians are also of the "Caucasian" racial group. "Aryan", and also "semitic", originally referred to language groups.

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2016, 03:57 AM
RE: Focusing on White
(27-08-2016 12:00 AM)epronovost Wrote:  @Stevil

There is no specialised White male newspaper, because White male percpective dominates the media by a landslide. Hell, even on internet you need to be especially good to avoid white men editorialists, comics or political analysts. There is no White male rugby team because white male dominate this sport by a landslide, most player, professionnal or otherwise are white. Why would we need to make a special niche for them? There is a Maori and female student award to encourage and pressure Maori and women (and especially Maori women) to perform in higher study because historically these people were denied or had limited access to higher study unlike white men (thus created a system to break this cycle). On the other hand, White men who, despite being less numerous than women since the mid 90's for the first time in history, represent around 70% of all university professors and still represent a short majority of post graduates in many first world countries (I coudn't find for New-Zeland).

We are very tolerent of White men over representation in pretty much every single sphere of society (with a few exception when it comes to nursing, child and elderly support and incarceration). While it irritates many, we live with it pretty peacefully. In resume we accept plenty of «sexist» and «racist» stuff (I wouldn't use those terms personaly), because men and women aren't equal neither are white and non whites. They can and should be equals. We want them equals. We strive to make them equals. We are getting, closer and closer to this objective and real equality might be achieve within our lifetime which would be tremedous, but we are still not there yet. This progress has to come from somewhere and it takes the form of initiative directed to enhance the social, economical, cultural and political representation and powers of those «lower» groups.

Could we create initiatives and programs directed at helping white men achieve a greater level of representation and power in the few domains where they are not in control? Yes, sure, I would propose grants offered to male students in traditionnaly women domains, more generous paternity leave, grant for white students studying non-white cultures or languages (like maori for exemple). This sort of thing.

I know for many white men who value equalitarianism this seems counter intuitive or even insulting (how can they have priviledges I don't have access to?), but considering someone has an equal doesn't necessarly make it so in the social arena. Sometimes there is centuries of systematic oppression and cultural traits and beliefs that needs to be changed for equality to become a reality.

Does it help a bit?

This looks like another version of Black Lives Matter/All Lives Matter "dichotomy". I don't know Maori that well, but enough to know they probably endure some institutionalized disadvantages. Institutionalized racism seems like a more difficult concept to grasp than one would initially assume.

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning ~ Werner Heisenberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes tomilay's post
27-08-2016, 05:56 AM
RE: Focusing on White
We have a similar race divide in Australia, initiated and perpetrated by our Aborigines, usually by confrontational social means, white-shaming, and playing the black victim card. The Australian taxpayers have allocated literally billions of dollars towards aboriginal health, housing, childcare, and education in the last four decades for little or no positive returns for the recipients of those dollars.

Our aboriginals loudly and repeatedly claim white suppression, racism, denials of health and education, workplace discrimination, social isolation, and availability of white-supplied alcohol and illicit drugs in aboriginal communities.

Last week at an Aussie Rules (football) game in Melbourne, a young woman threw a banana at an aboriginal player at the boundary line. I kid you not; this has blown up into a raging nation-wide debate about racism that's dominated the front pages of all our dailies for the past week. A fucking banana!

Aborigines are by far a tiny minority of footy players here (unlike NZ) but they attract far more favourable media attention than any white player. We've had numerous aboriginal players jailed for drug offences, assaults, theft, rape etc over the years, but it's invariably reported by a blacks-sympathetic, politically-correct media as being the fault of whities (somehow!) rather than any personal shortcomings of the individuals concerned.

The pro-rata rate of wife beating, incest, assault, murder, and paedophilia is far, far higher than in any white community—which once again is somehow the fault of the whitey!

It's also a fact that aboriginals in Australia—collectively—own more freehold land than any/all whites, and certain of their lands ban the entry of whites without a government-issued permit. One can be fined for failing to comply.

And something our aboriginals conveniently refuse to acknowledge: If it wasn't for the whitey, they'd be speaking Japanese today—or more than likely would've been totally wiped out by the black-hating Japanese, who despised them and viewed them as little more than animals. Remembering that the Japanese attacked Darwin in our north, and Sydney in our southeast during WWII. And that the British under Churchill had effectively abandoned any defence of Australia below the so-called "Brisbane Line".

—I'm a fifth-generation Aussie of Scottish ancestry, and proud to be white.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: