You don’t have to search very hard to find plenty of articles on the net that will quite plainly quote stats saying Maori are very disadvantaged. Here is one I found on the E-Tangata site:
* Maori make up 51% of the prison population, but just 15% of the general population.
* 46% of Maori apprehended are prosecuted, compared to 9% of Pakeha.
* The Maori unemployment rate is 9%, while it is 4.5% for Pakeha.
* White advantage is maintained in many ways: through intergenerational wealth, discretionary decision-making, and everyday racism.
* Racism has helped to sustain colonisation over time and is still present.
Sounds pretty grim, doesn’t it?
But those types of stats do beg the question: how much is systemic and how much is down to personal choices?
Now I am not going to make any claim either way on this issue today, but a friend sent me an article he wrote recently that raises some thought-provoking points on the subject of Maori disadvantage.
My friend is a retired nationally renowned medical specialist, a recipient of two Royal Honours: a Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit, and an OBE. He is also a company director and a person who has given many, many hours back to the community with his community service.
So he is not some Joe Blow conspiracy theorist or an angry old white man with an axe to grind about Maori privilege.
His article reads:
The position in New Zealand is really quite simple.
“Maori” are said to be 16% of the population – but this is entirely incorrect – because, almost without exception, those people who say they are ‘Maori’ have less than 50% Maori genetic background.
However, let’s be overly generous here and say that perhaps one-eighth of these people have more than 50% or more Maori genes in their makeup.
That means that only 2% of our population has the right to call themselves Maori.
The other 14% illogically deny the majority of their genetic background.
This is simply irrational and could not stand up in a balanced debate.
Why do these people then deny the majority of their genes?
I am 1/4 Scottish, 1/4 English, and say 1/16 French, but I do not call myself French, Scottish or English. I am simply a New Zealand citizen who has one vote, in what until very recently was one of the great democracies in the world – and a country where females were first to be given the vote.
There can be only one reason for that 14% of the population, who dishonestly call themselves Maori, in having less than a preponderance of Maori genes – and that is that they wish to be part of a society that for some dishonest reason gives them advantages that the vast majority of New Zealanders do not have:
• Their group get special seats in Parliament – Interestingly, the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform that introduced MMP voting, said should be abolished
• Their so called ‘Maori’ businesses and properties get privileged tax and rates reductions: often they pay NO TAX or RATES !
• They get privileged entry to university where in a competitive situation, the % marks gained in entrance examinations are set at an unjust lower level.
For instance, a set number of people with much less than 50% Maori generic background (as low as 1% if established) can gain entry to Medical School with only 70% marks!
Compare this with, where recently a third-generation non-Maori who wanted to follow in his Fathers and Grandfathers footsteps as a surgeon, [he] was denied entry to the Medical School with marks not of 70% but in excess of 94%!
• In a disgraceful situation where English is the Official International Language (to pilot an aircraft landing in Croatia you can’t talk Croatian, you must speak fluent English) we have, unbelievably, in New Zealand 50% (perhaps more) of school leavers who have inadequate abilities in spoken or written English.
Yet this present government intends, laughably, to make the teaching of Te Reo Maori a compulsory subject, and is spending countless $millions of taxpayer money on this project.
This is so irresponsible and irrational, but the presently ‘woke’ and inaudible National Party, as the Government’s official ‘opposition’, seemingly does not ever want to dispute this situation.
The only way for people to progress in the world and to benefit New Zealand is to be able to speak, write, and read English – to a high standard.
At this present time, this corrupt government is creating a Health Service where ‘so-called’ Maoris will get preferential treatment ahead of all other New Zealand citizens.
This is immoral, irrational, ‘racist’, and against all the principles of Hippocrates.
And so the list goes on – where so-called disadvantaged “Maori”, with as little as 1% of Maori genetic background, become one of the most privileged groups of people in the world.
How could any average, honest, hard-working New Zealander possibly tolerate this situation?
So, are Maori really that disadvantaged in New Zealand? What do you think?
Seems to me you could make a case that there are advantages in being disadvantaged!
John Porter is a citizen, deeply concerned about the loss of democracy and the insidious promotion of separatism by our current government. This article was first published HERE
5 comments:
I can see on MYheritage the DNA results of some 'Maori' cousins. They have no Pacifica/Maori DNA at all - it's all European. Their family tree goes back to a Maori woman in the 1800s who slept with a passing sailor, and they claim several generations further back with birth and death dates in the 1700s. Maori had no knowledge of dates back, so how accurate can this be?
They do have advantages as co-owners of Maori land.
Is this really fair on the real Maori?
So many of us bemoan this situation day after day, but what can we DO? I have just been reading about the Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993. It doesn't look too promising to me - quite risky - needs a really, really strong organiser to get consensus, and put that against the time before the next election, the weak alternative and?
David Seymour asks for a referendum, but he hasn't achieved much support, it seems. I am surprised this situation has received so little attention overseas - hmmm-thinks - maybe not - might get worse.
I don't think the 17% (or 15% or 16%, whatever the figure might be) who identify as part-Maori are being dishonest.
Most, very likely tick multiple boxes on their census forms (or any other form you have to fill in these days!) and the boxes don't ask for a %, which you probably couldn't provide anyway.
It's the way this government and the Maori Caucus choose to interpret and apply those statistics that is dishonest.
It's in their interest to get Maori represented in the population as much as possible, so they can claim as much funding for whatever service they assert is riddled with systemic racism and has disadvantaged them.
Past governments, largely National, have encouraged this approach or at the very least not opposed it and they are just as much to blame.
It's NOT in their interest to explain that virtually all who tick Maori are more than 50% something else. NZ has been making its own race-based bed for over 40 years and now the sheets are really starting to stink.
On RNZ a.m. 8th it was noted Police photos in some cases were 50% of maori. I wonder what the % of ram raiders is? 15%? It is surprisng that security camera pictures are permitted as evidence. It is absurd to handicap already overwhelmed police.
Your taxpayer health dollars are now funding a Maori Allied Healthcare Workers Union.
https://archive.aweber.com/newsletter/awlist6333709/MTU2NDkzNTM=/nga-pou-mana-update.htm
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.