Fiji's Coastline 'given to natives'

[Moo]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydispl...bsection=world

Is it just me, or did the herald completely miss the fucking boat about this 'law change' in Fiji? It sounds like a pathetic excuse to disinherit a few more Indians to me... Since ggherald compared it to the maori plight.. I'm going to compare it to Zimbabwe

[Wolf-age]

The seabed and foreshore belong to all of us, not just the Maori, they immigrated here too, as far as i'm concerned they can work for what they get, just like the rest of us.

[ForKoreaLove]

http://getoffmybeachyou.maori.nz

[Wolf-age]

Yeah, funny site.

[p-b]

"The newest registered user is Uma Rapiti"

[DigitalDroppings]

Originally posted by ForKoreaLove
http://getoffmybeachyou.maori.nz

Aaaahhhhh lovely racism.

[Synergist@]

Thank:

Jeremy Andrews
PO Box 27
Masterton
NZ
Email: [email protected]
Phone: +64-6-3777067

for the great website. If your reading this Jeremy, it's not going to be hard for someone else to do a lookup on your domain name when they are writing the article about you, and link it back to your business..

[Mabd]

Originally posted by Moo
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydispl...bsection=world

Is it just me, or did the herald completely miss the fucking boat about this 'law change' in Fiji? It sounds like a pathetic excuse to disinherit a few more Indians to me... Since ggherald compared it to the maori plight.. I'm going to compare it to Zimbabwe

Considering the recent history in Fiji, that's not an out of left field comparison.

But I agree, once again the NZH shows its depth of journalism talent. If you are going to do an editorial style piece, with tantamount to personal opinion of the journalist, then it should be marked as such, and the history exposed, not spout some populist crap.

[Boyd-Work]

There are times when I see a vague similarity between Zimbabwe and New Zealand, except of course that in some macabre ways the Zimbabwean reforms haven't been quite as criminal as much of New Zealand's history has been.

I love these people who say that just because Maori were immigrants too that it's okay to deny them restitution for what was stolen from them. How is that logic meant to work again?

Of course, if anyone dared to write something approaching this in the Herald, he should expect to receive death threats or some such treatment from honest, god-fearing, tolerant, decent Kiwis who just want to put their heads in the sand without all the hassle and complication of things like the truth. After all, how could anything we've done be nearly as bad as that tyrant nigger Mugabe? Hahaha.. of course not. Go back to sleep, children.

Obviously New Zealand isn't as much of a joke as Zimbabwe overall and obviously Mugabe is a deranged lunatic, but if you look at the structure of the reforms (leaving aside other issues such as economic collapse, starvation, electoral fraud, violent crime, etc), they're not actually so barbaric. The confiscations were focused on white farmers who owned many farms rather than just the one, and they were not stripped of everything they own. Of course, there are notorious cases where black marauders behaved violently, and cases where they took more than they were allowed to.

But let's be fair, here. Violence and theft took place here as well, and the European settlers in this country gave no such quarter to Maori as the Zimbabwean reforms did to white farmers. Do you think that when the settlers confiscated entire provinces of land here, that they only took lands from Maori who had more than they needed to survive?

And let's not forget that the Zimbabwean government is currently in the process of returning many white-owned farms to their rightful owners, that were taken beyond what was permitted by the reforms (in other words, beyond the conditions I already set out).

Compare that to the attitude in this very thread, and many others here, regarding restitution to Maori. Even in situations where only partial restitution is suggested, the reaction is virulent and worrying.

Food for thought.

Bah, forget about the past! Needless complications. Draw a line in the sand today! This is the way it is!

Uhh, no. The civilised world doesn't actually work like that. We have natural and statutory laws in this country and you don't get to ignore them just because it makes you feel all queasy inside to do what's right.

[Wolf-age]

So an innocent white person suffers today because of a deal that they legally made in the past?

No sorry, the Maoris can work for what they get just like the rest of us.

[Wuffle]

Argh worms all over me....noo i can't get them off.

[circa]

Originally posted by ForKoreaLove
http://getoffmybeachyou.maori.nz

BRO_GOTTA_FIDDY_BAG? and TUWHARE NIGGERSHOES are the only posters worth reading, ingnore all the rest with their incoherent racist cobswobble

[DigitalDroppings]

Originally posted by Wolf-age
So an innocent white person suffers today because of a deal that they legally made in the past?

No sorry, the Maoris can work for what they get just like the rest of us.

What deal?

[circa]

THREATY OH WHITARNGI BROH

[wizardofOz]

"innocent white person"

that just cracked me up. Don't you know you're a racist if you say that?



*s*

[PsyK]

What i can't get with our maori's is how they feel we are discriminating against them by not giving them the beaches that are supposd to be for everyone to use, so that they can kick everyone off.
They are pitiful, maori activists need to shut their mouths and get a job!!!!!!!!!

[cyc]

Originally posted by Wolf-age
No sorry, the Maoris can work for what they get just like the rest of us.

No, why don't you try to learn to facts before posting, just like...err...the rest of us? Opps, stupid me! IT IS COOL TO TALK OUT OF YOUR ASS.

Look kiddie, the lands stolen off Maori WERE NOT legally acquired. Regardless of the interpretational controversies and which version of the Treaty is to reign supreme, BOTH guaranteed Maori (at a minimum) some level of property rights and equality before the settlers' law. Now do you happen to think forced confiscation, "acquiring" of lands at below market value, coercion, and the various other bits of dirtiness that successive NZ government got up to from the mid 19th century to at least the 1970s happen to be legal? If you do, you're either out of your mind or stupid beyond words.

Similar issues apply to Zimbabwe. It might help if you realise that some of those lands the white farmers "lost" were actually stolen or forcibly confiscated from blacks duing the colonial years. Of course, none of this excuses Mugabe's violent streaks and other maniacal behaviour. But isn't it funny how everyone is so much more concerned when the whiteys get hit? I mean, historical injustice for niggers don't matter, right?

Do you really think shitting on the 500k+ people who identify themselves as Maori in a population of 4 million is a brilliant idea? Occasionally, you just need to get off your superior complexes and realise that people are complaining over heartfelt injustices, not because they happen to fit with your myriad of BS stereotypes for that particular group.

[cyc]

I'd just like to say that the "getting your facts straight... like the rest of us" comment was actually meant to be...well...sarcastic. Afterall, we all KNOW the Maoris are greedy, right? Jeremy knows and he's told us!

Let's keep feeling superior, boys!

[Wolf-age]

WizardofOz: Where did I ever say that I wasn't?

Cyc: We swapped things for the land that they are trying to claim back, muskets, food, alcohol etc. Ever take hisotry?

And it all comes back to the fact that these 'injustices' that you are raving on about, were commited by our ancestors...so lets get this straight, I should have my land force fully confiscated off my by the government and then given to a Maori, because i'm white and my ancestor swapped the Maoris ancenstor for his land with food, muskets etc. As far as i'm concerned the maoris agreed to the swap,also the past is the past, I shouldn't have to pay for it in this day and age when I had nothing to do with it.

I feel quite strongly about how NZ government is racist towards the whites of this country, so sue me.

[cyc]

Originally posted by Wolf-age
WizardofOz: Where did I ever say that I wasn't?

Cyc: We swapped things for the land that they are trying to claim back, muskets, food, alcohol etc. Ever take hisotry?

Whoppee!! Yeah, that sounds like quid pro quo and fair exchanges, man!

So, you haven't read about the forced confiscation of lands by successive NZ governments or did you just suffer from selective blindness when you read your history books? Perhaps you read the Selective History of New Zealand: The NZ First-voting White Men's Perspective, instead of a credible history book published by a publishing house like, say, the OUP? Here's a hint, buy a book by Keith Sinclair or James Belich and read it.

And it doesn't matter one fucking bit that the injustices happened a long time ago or whatever. This lovely society of ours (as well as our government) like to bang on about how we are all equal and so forth. And guess what this requires?

Answer: People must be able to start off in life without morally arbitrary disadvantages. Now if your culture is roundly assaulted and ridiculed, along with having lands that would otherwise have been passed down to you taken away, do you really think these people are getting a fair go? Moreover, whether you like it or not, YOUR legitimately elected government continues to nationalise lands that would otherwise have been legitimately owned by Maori as national parks and so forth - will you be happy for lands that should be in your hands taken away without compo for "public use"? "No" will be the answer, I take it? Well, good... now learn to remain morally consistent.

And where did this government ever claim that they want to extinguish your private land titles? Did you see this in the NZ edition of Mein Kempf or was it Talking Out of Your Ass, Bigot Style?

[drac0s]

cyc did u ever read animal farm ? since we quoting school text book references for everything. I just wanted to back up me saying man you a cock.

[cyc]

Originally posted by drac0s
I just wanted to back up me saying man you a cock.

Wonderfully perceptive, man. So good of you to ignore the context and to selectively read things. In my last post, only ONE book reference was real and that was included as an act of sarcasm. All those mock references were included because Wolf-Age decided that he'd give me a history lesson and I wanted to point out that unless he's very selective and had been existing in a parallel universe, his version of the events are at best incomplete and not entirely truthful.

Look, I realise it's hard to accept that we are not morally perfect and as sanctimonious as you might have hoped for. But it's the truth. Will you actually try to rationally argue why historical injustices shouldn't be addressed or are you be content with one-liners?

[Redneck]

Originally posted by cyc
morally arbitrary disadvantages

So you're saying morals themselves are arbitrary?

[Boyd-Work]

Originally posted by Wolf-age
So an innocent white person suffers today because of a deal that they legally made in the past?

The magna carta was penned before you were born too, do you think that means you shouldn't have the rights established within it?

I'm so sorry the government is racist towards you poor white men. I mean, it's a wonder that you even manage to make it through the day.

You MIGHT want to brush up on your own history before you start cracking wise at other people about the same. Even if paying people in muskets and blankets were acceptable (which it isn't, read British directives from the time.. Lord Norrie would disagree with you pretty starkly there), you're quite happily ignoring the massive seizures of land that took place with no compensation whatsoever.

Yes, of course restitution is due. Nobody's saying you should be booted off your land, and heaven forbid you poor oppressed white men of the country be made to suffer for even longer than you already have; it may come in many forms. The point is that even if the Treaty of Waitangi DIDN'T guarantee this wouldn't happen (which it did), it would still have been illegal under British law and therefore justice is due.

I don't understand the huge fuss. It's not like this is going to bankrupt us or put all the white people out on the street. It's just fairness. Don't you want to do the right thing? Yes it's awkward, yes it involves people being bigger men than their fathers were and admitting that huge, grave mistakes were made. But that makes it no less right, no more than it does to say that you should be able to magically wipe the slate clean.

I find it interesting how the oppressed white man can at once also be so eager to retain the status quo.

[Wolf-age]

Originally posted by Boyd-Work
Yes, of course restitution is due. Nobody's saying you should be booted off your land, and heaven forbid you poor oppressed white men of the country be made to suffer for even longer than you already have; it may come in many forms. The point is that even if the Treaty of Waitangi DIDN'T guarantee this wouldn't happen (which it did), it would still have been illegal under British law and therefore justice is due.

Boyd: I don't see why I should be denied things and have to pay the Maori of today, for something I had no control over and was not involved in in any way. Thats like me coming and finding you and kicking you in the teeth because your cousins uncles son called me a dick. It isn't related to me in any way, so therefore I couldnt give a fuck about them and would prefer that things would stay the same for me. I have had to work for what I have, I attended school, got an education, left school, work. The average Maori (and here comes everyone about to try and slam me for putting all Maori into the same bracket) attends school some of the time, gets a shit education, does drugs, leaves school (expelled commonly), goes on dole, gets a low paid job, commits crime (just look at the statistics for race crime rates), starts whining about how it's unfair and all the white people opressed him/her.

From my point of view, this is bullshit, they went to the same school as me and if they had knuckled down and got some sort of education they could have gotten a decent job and been able to do all the things I have done.

If things go horribly wrong and the Maoris do get the beaches, I hope they charge you to get on it, how would you feel about that?

Cyc: Not once did i mention that what i stated was a full and comprehensive review of New Zealand history, i merely stated some of the happenings.

Ever wonder why the Maori culture is continually assaulted and ridiculed? I believe it's because everyone is sick of them having oppurtunitys given to them (yes i believe attending school is an oppurtunity given to all kinds of people, including white) and they don't use it, instead they use the time to smoke drugs, beat up on people in groups and get expelled. Yup, no reason to disrespect them for that, right?
Why don't you get a group of your friends together (i'm assuming that you are white) and beat up an innocent person, we'll see if people still respect you. In short, I see that they aren't doing anything beneficial for NZ so are a waste of space, and if they keep claiming I think that they will get quite a big violent reaction from the working class whites.

:\

[cyc]

Originally posted by Wolf-age
The average Maori (and here comes everyone about to try and slam me for putting all Maori into the same bracket) attends school some of the time, gets a shit education, does drugs, leaves school (expelled commonly), goes on dole, gets a low paid job, commits crime (just look at the statistics for race crime rates), starts whining about how it's unfair and all the white people opressed him/her.

Yeah, bro! You've sussed me out, man.

Everyone knows that the "average" brownie amongst us is prone to crime, don't have no edumacati0n, do P for breakfast, and all the other shitz, yo! Now, why don't you hook this honkie up to some more P, yo?

Honestly, cockknob, do you really think that the "Average Maori" somehow just WANT TO be poorer or more exposed to the legal system because they are Maori? I know reductionist thinking is easier for the simple-minded, but at least try harder.

Why don't you get a group of your friends together (i'm assuming that you are white) and beat up an innocent person, we'll see if people still respect you. In short, I see that they aren't doing anything beneficial for NZ so are a waste of space...

I tell you what, I am actually a first generation immigrant to this country and if I were to adopt your line of thinking, I'd be a WAY bigger victim of this Maori Conspiracy than any one of you Poor White Men.

Since starting intermediate here, I'd tried my hardest to ignore every fact related to the Treaty that was within my pathetic powers to ignore and wanted to continue to bask in the glorious Light of Superiority of knowing that the Maoris were down ONLY because they were stupid and lazy. But after a while, I actually decided to hear the other side of the story and actually realised I was wrong all along. Stunning, huh?

This "Pro wealth redistribution, pro historical injustice restitution" guy has (theoretically) much to lose. I'll likely have a reasonably high income eventually and will have to meet a higher tax burden to do the right thing. And heavens forbid that when I could practically sit on my ass from now on and pretty much live for the rest of my life in reasonable comfort, due to familial circumstances, these Maoris are coming in and disturbing my peace! All of these facts apply to Boyd also... but we just decided self-delusion don't work for us. Honestly, that's all.

I know a few others that come from conservative and well-to-do families who have done the same thing and abandoned their families' Act Party lines and faced the facts -- try it sometime.

[Moo]

Originally posted by cyc

I tell you what, I am actually a first generation immigrant to this country and if I were to adopt your line of thinking, I'd be a WAY bigger victim of this Maori Conspiracy than any one of you Poor White Men.

Not really cyc, you just come across as a foreigner HERE TO FIX THINGS STRAIGHT!$@ with a serious case of white man's burden. It's very easy to spout politically correct ideas (they are pc for a reason - to argue against them puts one in the easy position of being labelled).

I also can see how an immigrant can have 20/20 vision on the subject. Instead of trying to bulldoze over the feelings of an entire country, maybe you should listen and mould your ideas with them. Yes some are illogical. Yes some are ill thought. Not everyone is an academic cyc. But remember these are the same people who have ultimate 'power' in these democracies you so aspire.

Listening will help achieve your goals as rubbing 75% of the population the wrong way will get you nowhere.

Will be posted by cyc
I'm not white my skin is yellow with a pink hue

I hate to break it to you cyc, you're as white as I am. I couldn't care if you were purple, you have been born and raised in the west, hell, I might be the lao wai but I bet I can speak more chinese than you.

[Boyd-Work]

I know this is a bit of a faux pas but I really can't be arsed typing this out again.

umm, me, this time last year
It's all too easy to claim that we aren't responsible for past wrongs, but it's wrong. If someone steals a car, the injustice continues until either the car is returned or the owner is duly compensated.

The descendents of European settlers who have become rich off land and possessions that were never rightly theirs in the first place continue to inflict an injustice on the just owners of those possessions, and will continue to do so until either the possessions are returned or the rightful owners compensated for their loss.

They entered into a legal agreement with our ancestors in good faith. Our ancestors abused the shit out of that agreement, and out of the Maori. Their descendents have profited hugely from those actions and continue to do so, while the people who should - in a just world - have reaped those benefits continue to languish in a society where they have been starved of any alienable capital.

The injustices continue, and it is us who are committing them.

I'd change a bit of the wording in that if I were gonna write it again now, mostly because that's just badly written there But the basic point remains the same. The 'equal' starting points people are so fond of in threads like this are actually incredibly far from equal. Until they're rectified, all we're doing is perpetuating a cycle that began with a flagrant disregard for human rights, our own word, and the law.

I ask again, what do you think this will cost? Nobody's going to lose their home over this. NZ is a wealthy country, it can be done without breaking anybody's back. And in the end, even if you look at it purely from an economic viewpoint, can we really continue to have an eighth of our population languish the way it does now? Especially with the way our white population is aging.

[cyc]

Originally posted by Moo
Not really cyc, you just come across as a foreigner HERE TO FIX THINGS STRAIGHT!$@ with a serious case of white man's burden. It's very easy to spout politically correct ideas (they are pc for a reason - to argue against them puts one in the easy position of being labelled).

Ideas that get labelled PC become so because:

(1) Most can't face the facts; and
(2) Some people, like yourself, think that calling someone or something PC is some knock-down argument.

If you are the "average white man", then I am afraid you do bear a rather terrible moral burden. It's sad but true. Afterall, most of "us" are happy to be morally inconsistent, hypocritical, and to apply selective morality in many different facets of life, be it free trade, race relations, historical injustice, or whatever.

And I am not trying to be some White Angel. I just think that something being morally right is a good enough reason to follow it. And, frankly, with some chance of my kids being raised here, I'd like them to be able to live in a just and decent society.

Like myself and Boyd have said on these Treaty threads again and again, if the majority want to convince people of the rightness of their position, offer some rational arguments. That you happen to be the majority or that you happen to strongly believe in whatever are not enough. Face it, most of "us" would cry like hell if the sorts of injustices done to Maori were done to us.

(Edit: Long posts are too hard during the festive season. Numerous mistakes corrected)

[Boyd-Work]

Originally posted by cyc
Like myself and Boyd have said on these Treaty threads again and again, if the majority want to convince people of the rightness of their position, offer some rational arguments. That you happen to be the majority or that you happen to strongly believe in whatever are not enough. Face it, most of "us" would cry like hell if the sorts of injustices done to Maori were done to us.

*cough* Zimbabwe *cough*

[Moo]

Originally posted by cyc

Like myself and Boyd have said on these Treaty threads again and again, if the majority want to convince people of the rightness of their position, offer some rational arguments. That you happen to be the majority or that you happen to strongly believe in whatever are not enough. Face it, most of "us" would cry like hell if the sorts of injustices done to Maori were done to us.

Why do the arguments have to be rational? It seems to me a contradiction - giving power to representatives of people who are elected on emotion, not rationality.

Allowing those elected to make judgements based upon the needs and ideas of those who elected them.

Then, critiquing said judgements based on logic. Surely it is more logical to critique such judgements in the same light (illogically) - how can you hold them to a higher standard than what you have already set out as an optimum form of government?

[cyc]

Originally posted by Moo
Why do the arguments have to be rational? It seems to me a contradiction - giving power to representatives of people who are elected on emotion, not rationality.

Err, do you read everyone's mind?

When I vote, I do look for rationally defensible evidence in the arguments by candidates. If you don't offer any, you won't get my vote.

For example, I won't vote for people who peddle minute taxcuts back to the taxpayers as a carrot, when in fact such rebates don't really add much to anybody's life and there's significant evidence to believe that even a 1% reduction in the coffers of the government will result in a great reduction of the quality of essential services. There are some things that are just objectively true and people who ignore them are irrational. Will you respect someone who claims that the earth is flat?

The whole new age "Why should we be rational and care about evidence" blah blah argument is tiresome and inane. If you ignore empirical evidence and other established methods of argumentation, you'll likely be wrong and people who do such things are often wrong. And I can bet my dollars that you don't respect them.

Yes, this argument of mine basically attempts to defend an inductive argument through an inductive argument and this isn't perfect argumentation, but I haven't seen anyone really solve this problem. There is also a whole lot of wank about the infinite regress of "proof" in arguments blah blah. However, I am frankly not interested.

[Moo]

Originally posted by cyc
Err, do you read everyone's mind?

When I vote, I do look for rationally defensible evidence in the arguments by candidates. If you don't offer any, you won't get my vote.

I roffle at the thought of cyc being comparable to an average nzer

[Boyd-Work]

Originally posted by Moo
optimum form of government

Perhaps 'optimum' is a bit of a misnomer there, and I mean in terms of cyc's outlook as well as in general. 'Best of a very bad bunch' might be more fitting.

We all know what mob rule can do. Then again we know what aristocracy can do as well. The ideal balance would be a democracy where everyone takes the time to consider their vote thoughtfully rather than just rolling into a polling station and ticking "TOUGHER PUNISHMENTS!!!1 " so hard it rips the ballot and leaves a mark on the desk, without even a second thought

That sounds a lot like your typical arrogant philosopher's argument I know, that is that you'd agree with me only if you were capable of rational thought; but I'm quite prepared to accept that different people will have different opinions on things, as long as people try - just a little - to think things through and also to consider that their viewpoint isn't quite cast in stone either.

For a kick I looked up some old threads on this very issue.. I found a couple of threads where I was on the diametrically opposite side of the argument to where I am now. It's interesting to me, because maybe there'll be a time when I switch back. Perhaps, perhaps not. But what I know is that back then, I was one of those people I'm appealing to now, someone who didn't bother thinking about anything; but rather someone who just wrote, said and thought whatever felt good. I know the things cyc and I say sometimes seem anal or picky, but to me it's at least a step in the right direction and it's a step I wish more people would take. Again, if that results in a fair disagreement then so be it. That is the spice of an ideal political system.

Obviously that ideal is impossible, otherwise it wouldn't be an ideal, it would just be the way things are. What we have is something between that and total mob lunacy, and it works well enough. Not optimally, but passably

[stryka]

Originally posted by p-b
"The newest registered user is Uma Rapiti"

lol, yeh i saw it too

[Wolf-age]

Originally posted by Boyd-Work
That sounds a lot like your typical arrogant philosopher's argument I know, that is that you'd agree with me only if you were capable of rational thought; but I'm quite prepared to accept that different people will have different opinions on things, as long as people try - just a little - to think things through and also to consider that their viewpoint isn't quite cast in stone either.

If that is really your point of view, then why do you have a problem with the opinions of most of NZ's white society, hate to tell you it, but everywhere I go, every white person I talk to, is sick of all this shit with the Maori, most of the old-timers even wish that instead of all this treaty nonsense, they had just taken the same route as the Aussies did with the Aboriginies. Which I have to say is a little harsh, but effective. I mean for fucks sake, it still comes down to the fact that I don't want to pay for some uneducated black boy to get land that they didn't work for. I mean, say I was born at the same time as him, work harder and get myself a well paying job, he slacks and gets fuck all, claims and there ya go. It's not right in my opinion.

[i]Originally posted by cyc/i]
Honestly, cockknob, do you really think that the "Average Maori" somehow just WANT TO be poorer or more exposed to the legal system because they are Maori? I know reductionist thinking is easier for the simple-minded, but at least try harder

Ever wonder why they get increased exposure to the legal system arsehole? I hope they rape your mother.

[Boyd-Work]

Originally posted by Wolf-age
If that is really your point of view, then why do you have a problem with the opinions of most of NZ's white society

Because, as you so ably demonstrate, most of NZ's white society exhibits exactly the kind of myopia that I'm talking about.

What you're saying is that just because something happened in the past, you should be able to bury it. What that effectively means is that I should be able to throw you off your land today, and as long as I can keep you quiet for a few years then your children will have no right to press the issue with my children.

Right?

And when my kids get rich off your land and your kids end up having to go and work in a factory making jandals at the age of 15, because their father - who died at the age of 50 because he couldn't afford private healthcare - couldn't leave them any assets and they can't make ends meet long enough to go to university, that's still just going to be tough shit.

Right?

What's more, if your children were to have the NERVE to complain about the situation, my kids would be well within their rights to complain about their greed and arrogance.

Right?

Maori had an entire country stolen from them, right before they were plunged into a totally foreign economic system in which they were systematically run down to its lowest rungs. It's a massive handicap which was imposed on them. In contrast, your fathers along with mine and the those of the rest of NZ white society had a huge advantage which was never deserved.

If you don't think that has trickled down and reflects itself in the current socio-economic situation throughout this country, then you are EXACTLY the kind of person who needs to sit back and have a real think about things; rather than simply throwing your arms in the air and spinning some bullshit about how it's actually white people who are oppressed in this country.

I mean, for crying out loud, can you even hear yourself when you say things like that? Are you really one of these thugs who honestly thinks that Maori are really just animals who are beneath you? Is that why they commit crime? You are a typical young man, who thinks with his ego rather than with his brain. Hopefully one day you'll open your eyes, although I wouldn't bet your children's house on it.

The reality is, that if those crimes were never committed, Maori people would have had far more means to live from both in the meantime as well as today. As it actually happened, they were denied those means while European settlers - and therefore their surviving children today - benefitted from blood money and stolen property.

The reality is that the land your house is built on should most likely never have been yours to begin with. And if you have even the slightest regard for civilisation and its laws, then you are by inference forced to agree that compensation is due. Just as it would be for your children in the situation I outlined above.

[Wolf-age]

But alas, being different from the Maori, I would have just kicked the shit out of you in the above mentioned situation, as if i'd let you get your hands on my stuff.

Not once did I state that I think Maori are animals that are beneath me, in fact I think I stated that they were people, given the same oppurtunitys as us (sometimes more) but didn't use them. Don't put words in my mouth, read what I say on comment on that, tool.

So here is another situation, lets leave New Zealand, shall we? All white, asian, indian (insert race other than Maori here) people, take evrything that we bought here and have created here and leave them the land that they so desperatly want, everything includes KFC, hydrophonics (Sp), cars etc. Then lets claim for the stuff that we traded them for as we are giving them back the land, have you any idea how much that stuff would be worth these days? Now lets be fair, we have returned the land, so of course we would like our trade items returned to us, right?
Even if the Maori could survive without everything we have bought here and developed, I still have a problem with the whole ownership of land issue, I mean originally Maori claimed not to own the land but to just live off it, they effectively didn't own anything until we came along, also the Moriori were here first, cannibilised and are now extinct. Shouldn't we be searching for ancient Maori feces to give the land to, because thats where we will find the Original inhabitants of NZ.

Think about that, you rightous prat.

[Torka]

I like and support the idea that a privileged group of society should do what it can to help a less privileged group, especially if they got their status as a result of injustice.

I hate and despise utterly the idea that the descendants of the perpetrators should feel responsibility and guilt for actions other than their own.

The white people against compensation for Maori seem to have trouble separating the two ideas, so they get mightily offended - but they ARE separate, people.

Sure, there are some people out there trying to say that you should feel shame for what someone else did. It's a viewpoint I find abhorrent as it's essentially identical to the Christian concept of original sin - a misdeed you're guilty of simply for being born. However, I don't think it's a view that the majority of pro-compensation people are advocating, regardless of what the media knows will make a good story, and I'm certainly not seeing it from BOYD and cyclonic in this thread.

You don't need to feel like you personally stole their lands in order to give a helping hand to someone in a weaker position than yourself. You just need to be a decent human being who feels a little compassion for his fellow man. The sort of help I support underprivileged Maori getting I'd support anyone getting, past injustices or not. But then, I am a filthy socialist hippy.

Relax.

[Wolf-age]

I would happily help another 'decent' human being, but through my life i've only ever met a few of these from that culture.