Love how so many do it along with her. If something in the USA were tried by an indigenous population or Black legislators, I cannot imagine the backlash. Well, I can imagine it.
That seems controversial, at best, and disproven, to most.
“Since the early 1900s it has been accepted by archaeologists and anthropologists that Polynesians (who became the Māori) were the first ethnic group to settle in New Zealand (first proposed by Captain James Cook).[1][2] Before that time and until the 1920s, however, a small group of prominent anthropologists proposed that the Moriori people of the Chatham Islands represented a pre-Māori group of people from Melanesia, who once lived across all of New Zealand and were replaced by the Māori.[3] While this claim was soon disproven by academics, it was widely and controversially incorporated into school textbooks during the 20th century, most notably in the School Journal.”
You are a total genius at Wikipedia. Maybe use that expertise to read more than one page;
Early Moriori formed tribal groups based on eastern Polynesian social customs and organisation. Later, a prominent pacifist culture emerged; this was known as the law of nunuku, based on the teachings of the 16th century Moriori leader Nunuku-whenua.[14] This culture made it easier for Taranaki Māori invaders to massacre them in the 1830s during the Musket Wars. This was the Moriori genocide, in which the Moriori were either murdered or enslaved by members of the Ngāti Mutunga and Ngāti Tama iwi,[15] killing or displacing nearly 95% of the Moriori population.
There’s def a lot to this story of Polynesian ancestors on the Chatham Islands but the idea of a genocide on mainland New Zealand does not seem to be supported.
My favorite part about this is the knowledge that at literally any time shit can be completely derailed by a Haka.
I’m not trying to downplay the significance of this but imagine living in New Zealand: bill you don’t like? Haka. Want to get out of a shitty rom com your wife takes you too? Haka. Meeting that should have been an email going long? Haka.
Little known fact, that's how battles used to be decided. All sides would perform a relentless Haka until only their side remained standing. Whichever side still had combatants standing in the end was the winner.
Some severely dead-inside people in here who really don’t seem to get the idea of symbolism and showmanism.
This protests a bill which would change the founding document of the country away from the interpretation they’ve used for their entire history, and toward the interpretation used by the British Empire in the 1800s.
Native people do not want to be governed by a 19th century British document, for very good reasons.
Thus, by doing this they make a statement, and to many of us it is clearly powerful. Yet soulless people on the internet seem to see anything “cringeworthy” and instantly turn against it
TLDR: this is a statement which says “I prioritize my people, culture, and values, over the perceived civility of this court” which I should think most people can relate to. It’s raising an alarm
Edit: people don’t seem to get the difference between prioritizing one’s culture over simply decorum, and prioritizing it over other peoples well-being
I think it's as simple as it's cringe worthy to some because it's performative in a way foreign to them, not realizing how much of their own social behaviors are also performative but familiar.
I get it because I also kind of have that kind of "......ok" to it, but I also recognize this is a cultural demonstration of rage to colonial attitudes, and so I check myself and that instinctive "performance is cringe"
I think it's fucking awesome personally, not cringeworthy. I'm also in despair at this situation, because I thought for a long time that through rugby, the haka had become a unifying rallying cry of new Zealand identity for all new Zealanders, rooted of course in Maori tradition and form of expression, but proudly performed by all.
Turns out there are the same racist cunts and divisions there as there are everywhere else.
People can be so shit. They can be great too, but sometimes we can be so fucking shit.
Yeah. Everyone wants it to be a part of their identity when it's the All Blacks, but heaven forbid those awful radicals should use it for its actual purpose 🧐
They saw us severely fuck up so they don’t want to do the same thing, which I get. That MP had Mana when she did the Haka, and it’s been labelled a disruption because it doesn’t fit what is considered “polite” in a European style government.
I mean. It’s more accurate to say this would be a reinterpretation of the treaty that has defined Māori rights in broader terms since the 1970s. For most New Zealand’s history the Crown ignored the stipulations of this treaty.
From my understanding it’s that they want what was agreed to under the treaty in which there people had signed.
We screwed them over by making 2 documents and purposely wording them differently, then just going with the English version that benefit us more.
And even with the English version being so in our favour, we still couldn’t stick to it. Just look at how much of the population can speak Te Reo as an example. That was protected under the treaty instead we spent a good part of the last 100 years beating it out of the country.
We still have a lot to make right on this one. You need equity before you can have equality.
Thank you. I’ve been seeing this for days and people are just excoriating them like the keyboard warriors that they are. It’s the same reason Canadian indigenous are trying to get the church to denounce manifest destiny. For too long they have been under the boot of the white man’s ideologies and they’ve had enough. About time they started being loud and speaking up. People should listen.
It's not cringe worthy at all when youre standing Infront of someone violently chanting like they're about to die in glorious battle. Shits fuckn scary, you can tell when someone's never seen it person because they don't respect it. It's near impossible to not respect, it's so primal.
As a New Zealander I worry that we enjoy watching haka for entertainment. On the rugby field, during special events for celebrated people.
But when someone uses it in response to a governing body trying to take away their rights - then suddenly it’s too much.
Smart people understand context and dumb people don't. Anyone saying they shouldn't do a haka to intimidate a governing body trying to take away their rights is a fucking idiot.
Can someone who keeps talking about these rights tell me what they are and what are the differences between non Maori citizens instead of just saying all their rights over and over. It's exhausting
It's like the bit at the end of the "6 Months in a Leaky Boat" video. Yeah, Maori dude looks a bit silly, until you remember that little hand wiggle is probably topping your skull like an egg.
You say they don't want to be governed by a 19th century document - makes sense.
So you say that because of this, they tear up the bill - but the bill isn't the document. The bill is to amend the document.
If anything, the bill is doing exactly what you would expect them to want, based on what you said - they don't want to be governed by an outdated document, so surely they would want it amended?
It seems more like they do want to be governed by the 19th century treaty, and hence they are protesting it being amended?
Or perhaps they want it amended, but not in the way that the current bill would?
Either way, I feel like your comment is missing a lot of context, because as it stands I'm struggling to reconcile it with what I've read about the situation with the treaty.
they're mostly the same, but te tiriti agreed that maori would retain chieftainship of their whenua (lands) and taonga (loosely translated as treasured/valued things)
the treaty translated this slightly differently, because there was no equivalent word for what it was understood maori wanted, and the english understood it as queen victoria becoming paramount, while maori understood her as being on an equal footing.
so two versions, and in the 180 years since there have been all sorts of issues thrown up by it, and 99% of the time maori have come out worse off.
in 1975 the waitangi tribunal was established to hear claims from maori relating to breaches of the treaty. this has involved land issues (theft of land), cultural issues (suppression of language), and environmental issues (the pollution of land and waterways sacred to maori). the tribunal is staffed by judges and experts and has been quite successful at pointing out flaws in the government actions over those 180 years, but it's not legally binding. it also functions like SCOTUS, in that it interprets the treaty/te tiriti and advises on how it should be applied.
this bill has been tabled by a far right party that wants to prevent te tiriti or the treaty being used in this way, and is against the tribunal interpretating the documents in modern contexts. they in effect want to throw out the whole thing.
the problem is that this document is the only way maori have to get redress for what has occurred over the past two centuries.
edit: at the beginning of the video, you can hear her sing a line before the haka itself begins - it roughly translates to "you govern here only by my leave" and she's referring back to te tiriti in that
Thank you for taking the time to write out this explanation. I’m Canadian and don’t know much about the historical background to this. Very much appreciated.
Just to add on. There is a word that closely translates to sovereignty which was first used in the treaty, but was changed before it went live to a word that would translate to governorship. If the original word had been kept, it is unlikely it would have been signed. We knew exactly what we were doing when we made that change.
I think it's more that it's been argued and interpreted and challenged since the 19th century already.
It currently sits in a position they are relatively happy with (not perfectly happy but it's doing ok protecting their culture and interests compared to a lot of these types of colonial treaties)
The proposal to amend it is likely to strip away many of the rights and concessions fought for both in the initial treaty and the subsequent challenges to the interpretation.
It would perhaps be taken differently if the amendments were proposed by a more progressive party and with Maori representation in the bill formation process which I don't believe has happened so far. They are likely concerned by the wave of racism sweeping through at the moment, from usa anti immigration rhetoric to those over the pond in Aus voting out a voice referendum for their indigenous people.
This protests a bill which would change the founding document of the country away from the interpretation they’ve used for their entire history, and toward the interpretation used by the British Empire in the 1800s.
Native people do not want to be governed by a 19th century British document, for very good reasons.
Isn't she protesting in favour of the treaty? She's against changing it, from what I understand.
Were Swedes and Franks colonized by a more powerful invader, and consequently dealing with ongoing racial/ethnic and economic injustices towards the native population?
And the Viking invasion of Normandy doesn't apply here because France is not currently led by the Danes to the detriment of native French people.
France is overwhelmingly dominated by metropolitan French culture, which is a Latin culture with some Germanic influences. But there are parts of France where the culture is under reasonable threat… Brittany is a Celtic culture, parts of Nouvelle Aquitaine are Basque, etc. So indeed there are parts of France that CAN and DO act exactly like this.
The guy you’re responding to is obviously sounding a racist dog whistle that French culture is under threat from immigrants and blah blah blah… when actually many of the unique native cultures of France are under threat from metropolitan French culture itself far more than from immigration.
On that subject, can we retire the word "cringe"? It has, ironically, become cringeworthy. Every time I hear someone saying that something is cringe I just want to roll my eyes and tell them to grow some fucking skin.
It very much reminds me of the Norwegian Eurovision entry in 1980, which was a Sami song to protest the building of some dam that would ruin the Norwegian Sami
Their goal was to get people outside of Norway ans further in Europe to learn about the Sami people and get a look at what was happening, it mostly worked out for them iirc, and the song featured in the 2011 Thing prequel movie
Towards the interpretation used by the British Empire in the 1800s
Damn I had no idea the British empire was so pro-equality back then!
Native people
Close, but the Māori aren’t native to New Zealand. They invaded the islands in the Middle Ages and genocided (and apparently ate) the actual native population.
A Haka, not the Haka. There are many kinds. Sadly most outside NZ hear theHaka and automatically assume the version of one particular Haka, Ka Mate, as performed by the national rugby team.
Well Americans did genocide the Natives and then systematically attempt to destroy Native
cultures from those who remained. So really, that’s exactly what you should expect from Americans. There’s no respect for any culture but their own. Anything else is inferior and wrong
You can tell a lot of redditors come from a place of privilege and have never had to stand up against their oppressors. She was spoken over and disrespected multiple times before beginning the Haka, power to her.
We saw a ton of it after Trump won. I was astounded by the racism I saw on left leaning subs because they thought people of color are only allowed to vote one way.
Nah that's total bullshit. That's why you guys lost the election. You're in the minority of this country that believes everything you're told. Trump is not a White supremacist. POCs that vote for him certainly aren't and it's actually racist to say that. Keep it up though you'll continue to lose POC support. It's long been known white liberals are the biggest threat to black people. I used to consider myself a liberal but you guys have lost the plot.
Now now children, let the world have their conversations about their politics without you lot making it about you again. It’s rather tiresome. (Thats goes for BOTH sides of this conversation)
Trump is an open and avowed white supremacist, supported by white supremacists, putting white supremacists into positions of power. POC who voted for them will hopefully enjoy the leopard eating their faces.
Being a minority doesn't mean you can't be a bigot or a dumbass. It's racist for you to defend people for making a stupid, hateful choice just because they happen to not be white.
No I cut off friends and family because they disagree with my friends and myself health and civil rights. Once obergefell gets overturned I’ll ignore them. Once aca gets overturned turned and causes my friends to not get cancer treatment because of preexisting conditions. I’ll ignore them some more.
Nah I don't think voter turnout being abysmal means we're in the minority. All you had to say was "Trump is not a white supremacist" to let us know what you really think lmao. As a Hispanic person, I unfortunately see a lot of colorism in my community, which is racism.
And a lot of it is from assholes living here in New Zealand - including plenty of British expats. The MAGA mind virus had emboldened racists around the world.
They're doing that now in Canada too. Except they tend to ignore that the Reserves don't even get enough money to get clean water to their people but then they complain that we're somehow "privileged".
Well you need to realise that in many places according to law some minority can have preferential treatment in the sense they basically have the same rights to everything as the majority, but they have some priviledges in regard to doing something extra. If you just look at the law, they are treated better. In practice they often liver poorer lives though.
That headline is entirely inaccurate.
The bill does not attempt to redefine the Treaty of Waitangi, nor to change any of the settlements based on it. It is quite explicit about that.
It actually states that all NZers should be treated equally under the law.
It is in response to 50 years of the Waitangi tribunal inventing it's own principles, with no parliamentary oversight.
This has got to the point of health care based on race not need, racial quotas in education and government contracts.
Worse, the idea of "Treaty Partners " and "Co governance" have become active. This ideas are recent, not mentioned in the Treaty or any contemporary documents, and clearly not the intention of the Treaty. They result in different political and economic rights based on race.
Oh, and the bills sponsor David Seymour is Maori himself.
The Maori Party has stated it doesn't believe in democracy, and believes Maori are superior.
I'm not sure why you think screaming and tearing things up is parliamentary behavior.
Directly quoting from the bill:
The principles of the Treaty of Waitangi are as follows:
Principle 1
The Executive Government of New Zealand has full power to govern, and the Parliament of New Zealand has full power to make laws,—
(a)
in the best interests of everyone; and
(b)
in accordance with the rule of law and the maintenance of a free and democratic society.
Principle 2
(1)
The Crown recognises, and will respect and protect, the rights that hapū and iwi Māori had under the Treaty of Waitangi/te Tiriti o Waitangi at the time they signed it.
(2)
However, if those rights differ from the rights of everyone, subclause (1) applies only if those rights are agreed in the settlement of a historical treaty claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975.
Principle 3
(1)
Everyone is equal before the law.
(2)
Everyone is entitled, without discrimination
You’d be on the Māori side if they were Europeans whose native home was invaded by arabs and North Africans, changing the official language to Arabic and the religion to be Islam.
I am on all NZers side.
I am all for Maori (and anyone else) speaking Maori if they wish - Maori IS an official language, and supported by government.
I am against enforcement of any religion, be it Islam , Christianity or Maori beliefs that are now pushed by NZ schools and government agencies.
I am also strongly against people of different races having different political social and and economic rights. That is apartheid. That is the crux of this issue.
Wound you support, in the UK, people of Anglo Celtic descent having more political rights than other citizens?
The dominant Maori tribe (Ngai Tahu) in Christchurch did all of those things to establish their rule in the area, all after the arrival of Europeans, and still have the balls to complain about Europeans stealing their land. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ng%C4%81i_Tahu?wprov=sfla1
It is indeed. Some of the founders of the city were graduates of Christ Church College Oxford. Why do you see this as a bad thing?
They did not take over all the land.
And Māori were included in the political system, as members of parliament eight from the first parliament from 1868.
In any case, this was all done well over a century ago - the present day people are not responsible, and most of them are not descentants of the original settlers.
All countries have messy histories.
Do you think people of different ethnicities should have different political and economic rights?
The Maori Party has stated it doesn't believe in democracy, and believes Maori are superior.
Let me get this straight - immigrants (British people) showed up, fought a war over it, tried to decimate the local population, converted the country to majority English speaking Christians, and the superiority is the Maori people?
Don't conflate the Maori people with the Maori Party. Only a fraction of Maori voted for Te Pati Maori. The party did in fact claim that Maori are genetically superior - not just to whites but to all the citizens of NZ including asians, Polynesians, Arabs etc. Lots of Maori don't vote for them because of these insane fringe views they hold.
Yes indeed colonialism implemented a cultural, racial, and class hegemony at the hands the British empire but that was 200 years ago. Te Pati Maori are writing blood and soil manifestos like 2 years ago.
Let me get this straight - immigrants (British people) showed up, fought a war over it, tried to decimate the local population
No
The Musket Wars were primarily between Iwi and had little involvement from Europeans.
This even involved the Moriori Genocide where Ngati Tama and Mutunga sailed to the Chatham Islands on a hijacked ship and murdered and enslaved the Moriori.
Most of this happened BEFORE the Treaty of Waitangi (with some residual skirmishes going after).
The land wars were fought AFTER the treaty and started mostly between private purchasers of land and local Iwi, however, they escalated when the British Government officially stepped in, as well as Iwi who opposed some of the tribes involved in these skirmishes.
The British NEVER waged a war to decimate the Maori population. Certain Iwi did wage wars to decimate other Iwi, but the British did try to put a stop to some of that.
the superiority is the Maori people?
This is a reference to a line that TPM had on their website, which they have since removed.
Due to the British crown oppression of native populations and their violations of the Treaty of Waitangi in the following ways:
Land acquisition.
The British government bought Māori land cheaply and resold it to Europeans at a profit. The government also confiscated land, especially after the New Zealand Wars.
Native Land Court.
The Native Land Court undermined Māori tribal organization and made it easier to sell Māori land to settlers.
Settler actions
Settlers engaged in actions that violated the treaty’s promises to Māori, such as:
Foreshore reclamation
Timber floatage, which destroyed fish weirs on rivers
Colonization.
The British colonized Aotearoa through legislation, education, religion, diseases, and force.
Land-selling article.
The land-selling article of the treaty was in effect until 1862, but it had serious shortcomings in practice.
The Waitangi Tribunal was established in 1975 to consider claims by Māori against the Crown. The tribunal makes recommendations to the government to provide recompense and remove prejudice.
Since the claims by the Māori have not fully been redressed, it is too early to call for equality. The bill has come too soon.
I've seen my country's people making f'ing reels about this and making fun of her, and tbh It looked so badass to me, especially after I researched a little.
Because equality in David Seymores eyes is status quo and status quo is not addressing Māori health discripancies, state abuse of Māori children, over representation of Māori in prison etc. It is indeed a racist dogwhistle trussed up by notions of equality when Māori want equity based on a treaty they signed and expected to be honoured.
My workplace was forced to hire 3 Maori grads to meet the Maori quota. There were far more competent and qualified applicants. But we had to prioritize hiring Maori in order to continue getting projects from the government sector.
The Maori grads were underperforming and when one of them was refused to be given a payrise and a promotion to a senior position, she tried to sue the company for discrimination. (Noone was promoted that year. It was during the Covid lockdown. We were at a pay freeze.).
I am not saying competency has anything to do with race. I am just saying prioritizing race over competency in hiring is just bullshit.
If the idea of 'racial equality' means preferential treatment to certain groups to make everyone 'equal' then it's not really equality.
Is giving everyone $500 equality or is ensuring everyone gets an education equality? The first sounds fairer but it isn’t equality of opportunity.
David Seymour is very smart but he is very nasty. This is just about pandering to potential voters as he tries to increase from 7% to 12% of Parliament.
the first article is something new for the crown - right to govern
Second article is reaffirming what Māori already had - sovereignty.
The third is that the Māori get rights of British subjects. NOT that everyone has the same political rights.
The treaty is a relationship agreement between Māori and the settlers, especially knowing that more were coming, specifically designed to prevent a situation where they would become a powerless minority in their own country.
Preferential treatment to a people based on race is the definition of racism, i don't get how people don't understand this. You cant say you want equality but want one people be preferred over another.
This doesn't mean the guy pushing the bill isn't a racist. Both things can be true.
I have no idea how this bill actually works in NZ, but in general these are facts people need to recognize or you just sound like you are liking the 'right' thing.
I have not read the bill myself. The current treaty does not give preferential treatment for Māori. There is nothing to fix
The author of the bill believed that Māori having their own Health system was preferential treatment, and therefore racist, so he got rid of it. Now Māori in New Zealand have to go through the European health system that was brought here by the colonists. As a European living in New Zealand, I get preferential treatment when I visit the doctor, because the system is designed for Europeans like me. This is just one example of the oppression that Māori in New Zealand face every day.
Great thing, wrong sub. If you were a Kiwi or knew anything about the history of their parliament it'd be posted elsewhere. It was brave and made a point, yes. Wrong sub.
Didn’t this MP do just the same thing some time back recently ?
She performed a haka during her maiden speech to parliament back in December 2023. I looked it up because I remember she looked familiar.
https://youtu.be/7ZOIIk9A6-8
Love how so many do it along with her. If something in the USA were tried by an indigenous population or Black legislators, I cannot imagine the backlash. Well, I can imagine it.
Remember the tan suit controversy
I mean they were there before Europeans, but genocided the actual indigenous people of NZ.
That seems controversial, at best, and disproven, to most.
“Since the early 1900s it has been accepted by archaeologists and anthropologists that Polynesians (who became the Māori) were the first ethnic group to settle in New Zealand (first proposed by Captain James Cook).[1][2] Before that time and until the 1920s, however, a small group of prominent anthropologists proposed that the Moriori people of the Chatham Islands represented a pre-Māori group of people from Melanesia, who once lived across all of New Zealand and were replaced by the Māori.[3] While this claim was soon disproven by academics, it was widely and controversially incorporated into school textbooks during the 20th century, most notably in the School Journal.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-M%C4%81ori_settlement_of_New_Zealand_theories
You are a total genius at Wikipedia. Maybe use that expertise to read more than one page;
Early Moriori formed tribal groups based on eastern Polynesian social customs and organisation. Later, a prominent pacifist culture emerged; this was known as the law of nunuku, based on the teachings of the 16th century Moriori leader Nunuku-whenua.[14] This culture made it easier for Taranaki Māori invaders to massacre them in the 1830s during the Musket Wars. This was the Moriori genocide, in which the Moriori were either murdered or enslaved by members of the Ngāti Mutunga and Ngāti Tama iwi,[15] killing or displacing nearly 95% of the Moriori population.
There’s def a lot to this story of Polynesian ancestors on the Chatham Islands but the idea of a genocide on mainland New Zealand does not seem to be supported.
https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/s/pqDYytoBs1
They aren't different people - Moriori and Maori are both descended from the exact same group. Your allegation is long proven false.
It’s “performed a haka” there are multiple hakas
I’m watching it again just because I can!
It’s her main gimmick
"Ma'am, you can't wear pajamas to work. We've discussed this"
performs a Haka
My favorite part about this is the knowledge that at literally any time shit can be completely derailed by a Haka.
I’m not trying to downplay the significance of this but imagine living in New Zealand: bill you don’t like? Haka. Want to get out of a shitty rom com your wife takes you too? Haka. Meeting that should have been an email going long? Haka.
People are literally powerless against a Haka.
You have no way of knowing this, but I'm so incensed at your post that I'm doing the Haka as I'm typing this post.
Powerless in the face of a Haka?
I’m going to counter Haka. Now we are stuck in an endless Haka from which neither of us can escape.
Little known fact, that's how battles used to be decided. All sides would perform a relentless Haka until only their side remained standing. Whichever side still had combatants standing in the end was the winner.
All wars should be fought like this
Now it’s a battle of attrition
Devs really need to nerf this shit, it's insane that the Maori people get an insta win button
I propose we do this in America but instead it's belting out My Way by Frank Sinatra.
The British empire had some tricks to beat it
Some severely dead-inside people in here who really don’t seem to get the idea of symbolism and showmanism.
This protests a bill which would change the founding document of the country away from the interpretation they’ve used for their entire history, and toward the interpretation used by the British Empire in the 1800s.
Native people do not want to be governed by a 19th century British document, for very good reasons.
Thus, by doing this they make a statement, and to many of us it is clearly powerful. Yet soulless people on the internet seem to see anything “cringeworthy” and instantly turn against it
TLDR: this is a statement which says “I prioritize my people, culture, and values, over the perceived civility of this court” which I should think most people can relate to. It’s raising an alarm
Edit: people don’t seem to get the difference between prioritizing one’s culture over simply decorum, and prioritizing it over other peoples well-being
Worth noting that the performance absolutely accomplished what it set out to do. They got the eyes of the world.
observation pause bag violet party employ hospital tan plough quicksand
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
Canada uses the same system.
The appointment process for the Senate (equivalent to House of Lords) is a joke.
All traditions can seem dumb from the other side I guess
Sounds like you’ve learned a bit about the House of Lords (UK upper house) and the State Opening of Parliament 🙂
Just to be clear, standard business attire is normal in both houses outside of State Occasions
I think it's as simple as it's cringe worthy to some because it's performative in a way foreign to them, not realizing how much of their own social behaviors are also performative but familiar.
I get it because I also kind of have that kind of "......ok" to it, but I also recognize this is a cultural demonstration of rage to colonial attitudes, and so I check myself and that instinctive "performance is cringe"
I think it's fucking awesome personally, not cringeworthy. I'm also in despair at this situation, because I thought for a long time that through rugby, the haka had become a unifying rallying cry of new Zealand identity for all new Zealanders, rooted of course in Maori tradition and form of expression, but proudly performed by all.
Turns out there are the same racist cunts and divisions there as there are everywhere else.
People can be so shit. They can be great too, but sometimes we can be so fucking shit.
FWIW, I'm an American from an Irish lineage, and I too would not want to be ruled by a 19th century British colonialist document.
Also, doing the haka is fucking dope.
it's always a treat to randomly come across a haka on my social media feed. I will absolutely stop whatever I'm doing to watch the whole thing
Ain't it? I wish my people got together in unison to voice their concerns. Shiiiit, and is such an awesome way.
Yeah. Everyone wants it to be a part of their identity when it's the All Blacks, but heaven forbid those awful radicals should use it for its actual purpose 🧐
Literally zero cringe about it, mate.
It's moving actually. I cry
I think the way Americans have bachelor parties at strip clubs is cringy. The Haka is beautiful.
lol because we all know Americans weighing in on this will really carry a lot of sway…
No, but the Kiwis don't want to have the same issue as us Aussie with the White Australia policy.
So, they're going to fight against and be encouraged as well as supported by the international community.
They saw us severely fuck up so they don’t want to do the same thing, which I get. That MP had Mana when she did the Haka, and it’s been labelled a disruption because it doesn’t fit what is considered “polite” in a European style government.
Nah, we too fucked up over here to weigh in on anything and we know it.
I will be positive... Hmmm
I mean. It’s more accurate to say this would be a reinterpretation of the treaty that has defined Māori rights in broader terms since the 1970s. For most New Zealand’s history the Crown ignored the stipulations of this treaty.
Can you explain why there are Maori and non Maori rights? And what they are/how are they different?
The interpretation of the treaty of Waitangi was written by the British though, so this is a document already assisting to govern the country.
Please read "LordHussyPants" comment explaining the situation better.
From my understanding it’s that they want what was agreed to under the treaty in which there people had signed.
We screwed them over by making 2 documents and purposely wording them differently, then just going with the English version that benefit us more.
And even with the English version being so in our favour, we still couldn’t stick to it. Just look at how much of the population can speak Te Reo as an example. That was protected under the treaty instead we spent a good part of the last 100 years beating it out of the country.
We still have a lot to make right on this one. You need equity before you can have equality.
Who’s funding this “national” party ?
Mostly property investors and mining industries.
The ACT Party, the ones introducing this bill, are funded by the Atlas group.
T. I'm a kiwi.
Decorum is an expectation by the powerful of the weak. Fuck decorum
People are just dogshit, good for her and others for standing with the Maori
Thank you. I’ve been seeing this for days and people are just excoriating them like the keyboard warriors that they are. It’s the same reason Canadian indigenous are trying to get the church to denounce manifest destiny. For too long they have been under the boot of the white man’s ideologies and they’ve had enough. About time they started being loud and speaking up. People should listen.
It's not cringe worthy at all when youre standing Infront of someone violently chanting like they're about to die in glorious battle. Shits fuckn scary, you can tell when someone's never seen it person because they don't respect it. It's near impossible to not respect, it's so primal.
As a New Zealander I worry that we enjoy watching haka for entertainment. On the rugby field, during special events for celebrated people. But when someone uses it in response to a governing body trying to take away their rights - then suddenly it’s too much.
Smart people understand context and dumb people don't. Anyone saying they shouldn't do a haka to intimidate a governing body trying to take away their rights is a fucking idiot.
Can someone who keeps talking about these rights tell me what they are and what are the differences between non Maori citizens instead of just saying all their rights over and over. It's exhausting
It's like the bit at the end of the "6 Months in a Leaky Boat" video. Yeah, Maori dude looks a bit silly, until you remember that little hand wiggle is probably topping your skull like an egg.
I'm quite confused reading this comment.
You say they don't want to be governed by a 19th century document - makes sense.
So you say that because of this, they tear up the bill - but the bill isn't the document. The bill is to amend the document.
If anything, the bill is doing exactly what you would expect them to want, based on what you said - they don't want to be governed by an outdated document, so surely they would want it amended?
It seems more like they do want to be governed by the 19th century treaty, and hence they are protesting it being amended?
Or perhaps they want it amended, but not in the way that the current bill would?
Either way, I feel like your comment is missing a lot of context, because as it stands I'm struggling to reconcile it with what I've read about the situation with the treaty.
there are two versions of the document:
the treaty of waitangi, written in english
te tiriti o waitangi, written in te reo maori
they're mostly the same, but te tiriti agreed that maori would retain chieftainship of their whenua (lands) and taonga (loosely translated as treasured/valued things)
the treaty translated this slightly differently, because there was no equivalent word for what it was understood maori wanted, and the english understood it as queen victoria becoming paramount, while maori understood her as being on an equal footing.
so two versions, and in the 180 years since there have been all sorts of issues thrown up by it, and 99% of the time maori have come out worse off.
in 1975 the waitangi tribunal was established to hear claims from maori relating to breaches of the treaty. this has involved land issues (theft of land), cultural issues (suppression of language), and environmental issues (the pollution of land and waterways sacred to maori). the tribunal is staffed by judges and experts and has been quite successful at pointing out flaws in the government actions over those 180 years, but it's not legally binding. it also functions like SCOTUS, in that it interprets the treaty/te tiriti and advises on how it should be applied.
this bill has been tabled by a far right party that wants to prevent te tiriti or the treaty being used in this way, and is against the tribunal interpretating the documents in modern contexts. they in effect want to throw out the whole thing.
the problem is that this document is the only way maori have to get redress for what has occurred over the past two centuries.
edit: at the beginning of the video, you can hear her sing a line before the haka itself begins - it roughly translates to "you govern here only by my leave" and she's referring back to te tiriti in that
Thank you for taking the time to write out this explanation. I’m Canadian and don’t know much about the historical background to this. Very much appreciated.
Edit - a word
Just to add on. There is a word that closely translates to sovereignty which was first used in the treaty, but was changed before it went live to a word that would translate to governorship. If the original word had been kept, it is unlikely it would have been signed. We knew exactly what we were doing when we made that change.
We didn't, we weren't there.
I think it's more that it's been argued and interpreted and challenged since the 19th century already.
It currently sits in a position they are relatively happy with (not perfectly happy but it's doing ok protecting their culture and interests compared to a lot of these types of colonial treaties)
The proposal to amend it is likely to strip away many of the rights and concessions fought for both in the initial treaty and the subsequent challenges to the interpretation.
It would perhaps be taken differently if the amendments were proposed by a more progressive party and with Maori representation in the bill formation process which I don't believe has happened so far. They are likely concerned by the wave of racism sweeping through at the moment, from usa anti immigration rhetoric to those over the pond in Aus voting out a voice referendum for their indigenous people.
There's also the whole "C'mon and try us,if you think you're hard enough" aspect of it.
Isn't she protesting in favour of the treaty? She's against changing it, from what I understand.
what was the bill and was it really giving preferential treatment in some way?
They get it, they just don't have to care.
In my culture, this is a lack of decorum, and clear intimidation; making me take them less seriously. Get over it.
They're just edgelords. Or shameless bootlickers who support colonizers, from their mother's basement.
Is this ok to say for anyone? Can Swedes or Franks say this?
You're leaving out the rest of the sentence though. "I prioritize my people, culture, and values over the perceived civility of this court"
They're not saying they prioritize their people, culture, and values over anyone else's.
Prioritizing them over something as petty as decorum? Yes they can
Prioritizing them over other things? Depends on what they are
Were Swedes and Franks colonized by a more powerful invader, and consequently dealing with ongoing racial/ethnic and economic injustices towards the native population?
And the Viking invasion of Normandy doesn't apply here because France is not currently led by the Danes to the detriment of native French people.
Imagine the audacity of French and British people complaining about immigrants from countries they've destroyed.
It's really quite obnoxious yet on-brand.
Agreed 100% with you.
France is overwhelmingly dominated by metropolitan French culture, which is a Latin culture with some Germanic influences. But there are parts of France where the culture is under reasonable threat… Brittany is a Celtic culture, parts of Nouvelle Aquitaine are Basque, etc. So indeed there are parts of France that CAN and DO act exactly like this.
The guy you’re responding to is obviously sounding a racist dog whistle that French culture is under threat from immigrants and blah blah blah… when actually many of the unique native cultures of France are under threat from metropolitan French culture itself far more than from immigration.
Honestly as fascism creeps in to the west, I really do hope more swedes and Frank's recognize civility in the face of oppression gets very little
As a German I wonder.
After what happened in the US we will see more and more of those people out in the open in the mainstream.
I thought it’s filibuster
Very well said!
On that subject, can we retire the word "cringe"? It has, ironically, become cringeworthy. Every time I hear someone saying that something is cringe I just want to roll my eyes and tell them to grow some fucking skin.
This podcast is great for understanding the situation in which the treaty was written. Plenty of politics, misunderstandings, misinterpretations. https://halfarsedhistory.net/2024/02/04/episode-293-the-treaty-of-waitangi/
You’re on Reddit. This was never going to be understood.
The old-style haka was a challenge to a fight, so entirely appropriate. I was impressed, and hope they carry the day.
It's definitely a thing we could stand to learn in America. Decorum will be the death of us.
You wrote just a long text but I still have no idea what the change is or means.
It very much reminds me of the Norwegian Eurovision entry in 1980, which was a Sami song to protest the building of some dam that would ruin the Norwegian Sami
Their goal was to get people outside of Norway ans further in Europe to learn about the Sami people and get a look at what was happening, it mostly worked out for them iirc, and the song featured in the 2011 Thing prequel movie
Your post is as cringey as the haka.
Damn I had no idea the British empire was so pro-equality back then!
Close, but the Māori aren’t native to New Zealand. They invaded the islands in the Middle Ages and genocided (and apparently ate) the actual native population.
A Haka, not the Haka. There are many kinds. Sadly most outside NZ hear theHaka and automatically assume the version of one particular Haka, Ka Mate, as performed by the national rugby team.
Here are some others:
https://youtu.be/lt6GRghrmaU?si=h-9E6vK81AyC5BKb
https://youtu.be/M6Qtc_zlGhc?t=30&si=t2wro9nZm-7rdjWP
Love me a Kapa O Pango when the All Blacks are feeling extra spicy
Tika Tonu, performed at a wedding
“E tama, te uaua ana - E tama, te maaro - Roa ina hoki ra te tohe o te uaua naa e taau nei”
This one hits hard.
Wouldn't that be A Haka?...
There's more than one.
Really funny how these (very clearly) Americans in this comment section think the Haka is a dance or showtune made for entertainment.
This is not the case.
So true. America bad😡 Even when it’s not about Americans, America bad😡
Well Americans did genocide the Natives and then systematically attempt to destroy Native cultures from those who remained. So really, that’s exactly what you should expect from Americans. There’s no respect for any culture but their own. Anything else is inferior and wrong
I suppose you live in a country that didn't commit heinous crimes and therefore have any respect for cultures besides your own?
Wow, the racism in these comments is insane.
You can tell a lot of redditors come from a place of privilege and have never had to stand up against their oppressors. She was spoken over and disrespected multiple times before beginning the Haka, power to her.
But it's not surprising. Reddit is overall racist and intersects with every other bigotry with it
I keep seeing people say after the US election that Reddit is a left leaning bubble, so which is it?
We saw a ton of it after Trump won. I was astounded by the racism I saw on left leaning subs because they thought people of color are only allowed to vote one way.
If you vote for a proud and open white supremacist, you're a racist whether you're a person of color or not.
Nah that's total bullshit. That's why you guys lost the election. You're in the minority of this country that believes everything you're told. Trump is not a White supremacist. POCs that vote for him certainly aren't and it's actually racist to say that. Keep it up though you'll continue to lose POC support. It's long been known white liberals are the biggest threat to black people. I used to consider myself a liberal but you guys have lost the plot.
Now now children, let the world have their conversations about their politics without you lot making it about you again. It’s rather tiresome. (Thats goes for BOTH sides of this conversation)
Fair enough. I don't even particularly care for Trump.
Trump is an open and avowed white supremacist, supported by white supremacists, putting white supremacists into positions of power. POC who voted for them will hopefully enjoy the leopard eating their faces.
Being a minority doesn't mean you can't be a bigot or a dumbass. It's racist for you to defend people for making a stupid, hateful choice just because they happen to not be white.
He's not though. Your singular close minded way of thinking is why the Democrats lost.
Imagine defending the guy who claimed Haitian immigrants were eating people's pets a few weeks ago.
Imagine cutting off friends and family, killing your self and your family members because you're so upset you didn't win the election.
Whoa that escalated quickly. Do you need a hug or something? Just saying trump was using racist dog whistles during the last Presidential debate.
No I cut off friends and family because they disagree with my friends and myself health and civil rights. Once obergefell gets overturned I’ll ignore them. Once aca gets overturned turned and causes my friends to not get cancer treatment because of preexisting conditions. I’ll ignore them some more.
Nah I don't think voter turnout being abysmal means we're in the minority. All you had to say was "Trump is not a white supremacist" to let us know what you really think lmao. As a Hispanic person, I unfortunately see a lot of colorism in my community, which is racism.
And a lot of it is from assholes living here in New Zealand - including plenty of British expats. The MAGA mind virus had emboldened racists around the world.
I mean, it’s not surprising.
I stand with the Maori. I think this was awesome
“Claiming it’s racist” oh yeah I can understand that was a backhanded treaty
“Gives preferential treatment to maoris” ffs they fought a war over this document and it wasn’t because they were given preferential treatment
When you’re used to privilege equality feels like oppression.
Claiming that the colonized people in a settler-colonialist state get preferential treatment is the pinnacle of white supremacist brain rot.
They're doing that now in Canada too. Except they tend to ignore that the Reserves don't even get enough money to get clean water to their people but then they complain that we're somehow "privileged".
Yeah... You can't make that up.
It's literally the same people. David Seymour was Atlas Network in Canada, now he's in NZ, they're doing this shit everywhere.
They do that in Palestine right now as well.
Well you need to realise that in many places according to law some minority can have preferential treatment in the sense they basically have the same rights to everything as the majority, but they have some priviledges in regard to doing something extra. If you just look at the law, they are treated better. In practice they often liver poorer lives though.
Unless u need surgery and arent Maori. Then u get put in line behind every Maori (including any who schedule after you) unless urs is life threatening
Every time my bosses want to meet with me I wish I could just shut that shit down with the Haka.
This is how my wife acts when she sees my credit card bill after work trips
Sokka-Haiku by 33TLWD:
This is how my wife
Acts when she sees my credit
Card bill after work trips
Remember that one time Sokka accidentally used an extra syllable in that Haiku Battle in Ba Sing Se? That was a Sokka Haiku and you just made one.
good bot
Thank you, MokcingJay, for voting on SokkaHaikuBot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. You can view results here.
Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!
bad bot, 6 syllables in the last line
Yes, that's what triggered the bot, it's a Sokka haiku
That headline is entirely inaccurate. The bill does not attempt to redefine the Treaty of Waitangi, nor to change any of the settlements based on it. It is quite explicit about that. It actually states that all NZers should be treated equally under the law. It is in response to 50 years of the Waitangi tribunal inventing it's own principles, with no parliamentary oversight.
This has got to the point of health care based on race not need, racial quotas in education and government contracts.
Worse, the idea of "Treaty Partners " and "Co governance" have become active. This ideas are recent, not mentioned in the Treaty or any contemporary documents, and clearly not the intention of the Treaty. They result in different political and economic rights based on race.
Oh, and the bills sponsor David Seymour is Maori himself.
The Maori Party has stated it doesn't believe in democracy, and believes Maori are superior.
I'm not sure why you think screaming and tearing things up is parliamentary behavior.
Directly quoting from the bill: The principles of the Treaty of Waitangi are as follows: Principle 1 The Executive Government of New Zealand has full power to govern, and the Parliament of New Zealand has full power to make laws,— (a) in the best interests of everyone; and (b) in accordance with the rule of law and the maintenance of a free and democratic society. Principle 2 (1) The Crown recognises, and will respect and protect, the rights that hapū and iwi Māori had under the Treaty of Waitangi/te Tiriti o Waitangi at the time they signed it. (2) However, if those rights differ from the rights of everyone, subclause (1) applies only if those rights are agreed in the settlement of a historical treaty claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975. Principle 3 (1) Everyone is equal before the law. (2) Everyone is entitled, without discrimination
Which of the above do you object to?
Reddit loves to simp for native supremacists.
Unless they are European
You’d be on the Māori side if they were Europeans whose native home was invaded by arabs and North Africans, changing the official language to Arabic and the religion to be Islam.
Right?
I am on all NZers side. I am all for Maori (and anyone else) speaking Maori if they wish - Maori IS an official language, and supported by government. I am against enforcement of any religion, be it Islam , Christianity or Maori beliefs that are now pushed by NZ schools and government agencies.
I am also strongly against people of different races having different political social and and economic rights. That is apartheid. That is the crux of this issue.
Wound you support, in the UK, people of Anglo Celtic descent having more political rights than other citizens?
Did Māori people sail all the way to the UK, take over all of their land, imposed their way of life for over a century?
Like the third largest city in Māori land is called CHRISTCHURCH for heavens sake.
Aotearoa* not Māori land if we wanna be accurate.
The dominant Maori tribe (Ngai Tahu) in Christchurch did all of those things to establish their rule in the area, all after the arrival of Europeans, and still have the balls to complain about Europeans stealing their land. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ng%C4%81i_Tahu?wprov=sfla1
It is indeed. Some of the founders of the city were graduates of Christ Church College Oxford. Why do you see this as a bad thing?
They did not take over all the land. And Māori were included in the political system, as members of parliament eight from the first parliament from 1868.
In any case, this was all done well over a century ago - the present day people are not responsible, and most of them are not descentants of the original settlers.
All countries have messy histories. Do you think people of different ethnicities should have different political and economic rights?
Lmao bro you’re publicly trying to justify apartheid 💀
Let me get this straight - immigrants (British people) showed up, fought a war over it, tried to decimate the local population, converted the country to majority English speaking Christians, and the superiority is the Maori people?
Don't conflate the Maori people with the Maori Party. Only a fraction of Maori voted for Te Pati Maori. The party did in fact claim that Maori are genetically superior - not just to whites but to all the citizens of NZ including asians, Polynesians, Arabs etc. Lots of Maori don't vote for them because of these insane fringe views they hold.
Yes indeed colonialism implemented a cultural, racial, and class hegemony at the hands the British empire but that was 200 years ago. Te Pati Maori are writing blood and soil manifestos like 2 years ago.
The Māori did the exact same thing to the native people of New Zealand. You’re mad because what the Māori did to others, happened to them later on
No
The Musket Wars were primarily between Iwi and had little involvement from Europeans.
This even involved the Moriori Genocide where Ngati Tama and Mutunga sailed to the Chatham Islands on a hijacked ship and murdered and enslaved the Moriori.
Most of this happened BEFORE the Treaty of Waitangi (with some residual skirmishes going after).
The land wars were fought AFTER the treaty and started mostly between private purchasers of land and local Iwi, however, they escalated when the British Government officially stepped in, as well as Iwi who opposed some of the tribes involved in these skirmishes.
The British NEVER waged a war to decimate the Maori population. Certain Iwi did wage wars to decimate other Iwi, but the British did try to put a stop to some of that.
This is a reference to a line that TPM had on their website, which they have since removed.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/09/13/kbwu-s13.html
Due to the British crown oppression of native populations and their violations of the Treaty of Waitangi in the following ways:
Land acquisition.
The British government bought Māori land cheaply and resold it to Europeans at a profit. The government also confiscated land, especially after the New Zealand Wars.
Native Land Court.
The Native Land Court undermined Māori tribal organization and made it easier to sell Māori land to settlers.
Settler actions
Settlers engaged in actions that violated the treaty’s promises to Māori, such as:
Foreshore reclamation
Timber floatage, which destroyed fish weirs on rivers Colonization.
The British colonized Aotearoa through legislation, education, religion, diseases, and force.
Land-selling article.
The land-selling article of the treaty was in effect until 1862, but it had serious shortcomings in practice.
The Waitangi Tribunal was established in 1975 to consider claims by Māori against the Crown. The tribunal makes recommendations to the government to provide recompense and remove prejudice.
Since the claims by the Māori have not fully been redressed, it is too early to call for equality. The bill has come too soon.
I've seen my country's people making f'ing reels about this and making fun of her, and tbh It looked so badass to me, especially after I researched a little.
I read the bill text and it literally just says equal rights for all
What's the problem with that?
Because equality in David Seymores eyes is status quo and status quo is not addressing Māori health discripancies, state abuse of Māori children, over representation of Māori in prison etc. It is indeed a racist dogwhistle trussed up by notions of equality when Māori want equity based on a treaty they signed and expected to be honoured.
My workplace was forced to hire 3 Maori grads to meet the Maori quota. There were far more competent and qualified applicants. But we had to prioritize hiring Maori in order to continue getting projects from the government sector.
The Maori grads were underperforming and when one of them was refused to be given a payrise and a promotion to a senior position, she tried to sue the company for discrimination. (Noone was promoted that year. It was during the Covid lockdown. We were at a pay freeze.).
I am not saying competency has anything to do with race. I am just saying prioritizing race over competency in hiring is just bullshit.
If the idea of 'racial equality' means preferential treatment to certain groups to make everyone 'equal' then it's not really equality.
Is giving everyone $500 equality or is ensuring everyone gets an education equality? The first sounds fairer but it isn’t equality of opportunity.
David Seymour is very smart but he is very nasty. This is just about pandering to potential voters as he tries to increase from 7% to 12% of Parliament.
That’s not what the treaty of waitangi says.
the first article is something new for the crown - right to govern
Second article is reaffirming what Māori already had - sovereignty.
The third is that the Māori get rights of British subjects. NOT that everyone has the same political rights.
The treaty is a relationship agreement between Māori and the settlers, especially knowing that more were coming, specifically designed to prevent a situation where they would become a powerless minority in their own country.
How to say “go fuck yourself” in dance
It was the act Party who won 8% of th vote last election who tabled the Bill Khunts
Hell yeah
Theater kid government.
I’ve watched this so many times and I get chills. An incredible display of culture and solidarity.
quiet teeny quack jar compare axiomatic act marble wipe dependent
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
Preferential treatment to a people based on race is the definition of racism, i don't get how people don't understand this. You cant say you want equality but want one people be preferred over another.
This doesn't mean the guy pushing the bill isn't a racist. Both things can be true.
I have no idea how this bill actually works in NZ, but in general these are facts people need to recognize or you just sound like you are liking the 'right' thing.
I have not read the bill myself. The current treaty does not give preferential treatment for Māori. There is nothing to fix
The author of the bill believed that Māori having their own Health system was preferential treatment, and therefore racist, so he got rid of it. Now Māori in New Zealand have to go through the European health system that was brought here by the colonists. As a European living in New Zealand, I get preferential treatment when I visit the doctor, because the system is designed for Europeans like me. This is just one example of the oppression that Māori in New Zealand face every day.
The colonists didn't bring any health system. What about the system itself makes it a disadvantage based on race?
Today I learned that if you are holding a hat while performing a Haka it goes from 'war cry' to 'jaunty dance routine' very quickly.
How is the treaty of Waitangi racist?
[deleted]
Makes Pelosi look like a bitch when she tore up Trump's thing.
Reddit loves Haka almost as much as they like petting video game dog.
It feels like everything Māori do is a haka. I know it’s not right, but the amount of hakas featured in the media is astonishing.
Great thing, wrong sub. If you were a Kiwi or knew anything about the history of their parliament it'd be posted elsewhere. It was brave and made a point, yes. Wrong sub.
Hell yeah.
So they're arguing that a treaty drawn up by Victorian Nazis to benefit themselves was racist towards white people and benefited Maori.
That's like Germans suing Holocaust victims for hurting their feelings.
No it's not and you sound super ignorant
Pathetic, childish and incredibly racist of them.
NZ wants this debate. The political class mainly don't.
The Maori Party have no response to the bill, only harassment and intimidation.
People of NZ... you mean the colonial remanence?
I seriously am waiting for someone to throw some metal guitar to this woman chanting
The band you are looking for is called Alien Weaponry
The most elaborate "Nay" ever.
Haka is the definitive solution to all
Keeping up Reddit’s “32.6 Haka posts on my front page per day” average.
There are people who call this a funny little dance, these same people support a small handed man who also has a lil funny dance
But it is and it does…
As an Australian with a parent from nz, I fully support the Maori here.
Fuck the British I say. Stupid poms.