That’s, one
person, one vote. EQUALITY!
Being afforded that licence, conveys a duty and responsibility to honour and protect the legacy of New Zealand’s democracy. Individuals participating in a democratic society are obliged to agree to the rule of law and the regulations that govern the society in which they live in.
In exchange,
democracy bestows on the citizenry the protection of their democratic rights.
Every single person has an equal opportunity to benefit. EQUALITY!
The odd
thing about democracy and freedom is that those who
enjoy it — as all of us in New Zealand do, fail to understand its importance. Democracy
and freedom are like oxygen. You only realize its importance when you don’t have
it!
Democracy is
like an elevator. There are only two directions it can go. It can move upwards toward
greater individual freedom or it can move downwards toward an authoritarian
society that survives by limiting freedom of choice.
“Democracy is susceptible to being led astray
by having scapegoats paraded in front of the electorate.” (Frank Herbert)
But equality
in itself fashions a conflict whereby there are actually two classes of
equality and they contradict each other. There is the equality of rights, which
we strive to maintain and there is the equality of results. Which some are now
endeavouring to assert are the most important.
Both are not
able to coexist. We can’t have both.
Because our
battle to protect our democracy and the equality of our citizens equality blurs
and stumbles when the equality construct is skewed by
maori sovereignty activists via their of transposing of equity in place of
equality.
Equality of
rights is a regime of individual liberty while equality of results requires
regulation and regimentation and thus the suppression of certain liberties.
People enjoying equal freedom will use freedom differently and the results are
inevitably, going to be unequal.
A simple
example is; Imagine giving 10 people $10,000 each on Friday; Chances are they
will have unequal wealth by the following Friday.
The choices they made will change their
results!
And this is where maori activist demands are now concentrated.
Incorrect choices are now judged to be inequities requiring to be remedied by
way of preferential treatment, financial assistance and a host of separatist
legislation.
Equity not equality is their catch cry!
Māori are deemed to have been largely dispossessed of their lands and natural resources, faced the consequences of social and economic injustice, injustice that is claimed to be rooted in colonisation. Activists assert racism is still present and has helped to sustain colonisation over time. White advantage is maintained through intergenerational wealth, discretionary decision-making and majority rule.
There is no doubt many of the māori
population inhabit our lower socioeconomic classes, unemployment rates are
twice as high as the national average and life expectancy of Māori is some
eight years shorter.
How much is systemic and how much is
down to personal choices?
Labour, the Maori Party and the
Greens, through their policies, pronouncements and coupled with the belief it
will garner votes are all too quick to espouse the ideology that maori in New Zealand
are being treated as second-rate citizens,
are being relegated backwards, and are extremely concerned the government is
repealing policies and programmes implemented for the exclusive benefit of māori.
All too often policies and programs that
have confirmed and quantified positive outcomes that require politicians and
public servants to work hard implementing them are found to be simply far too
complicated.
Then we witness politicians take the
easy way out and address real inequity by doing less “lifting up” and default
to the easier “tearing down” option.
Equality of results or in their
parlance, equity, can be easier achieved by confiscating wealth. This is the
Green Party mantra and is now being tentatively advocated by Chippy as he sees
his and the Labour Party’s ratings continue to slide.
Of course, in the process of creating
equity a new economic elite is created! Politicians, civil servants with power
and control, and, of course, those with the special interests in the “tearing
down” favours!
In 2017 Ngai
Tahu commissioned BERL to report on maori
inequity. The purpose of the report was – “To create an evidence
base, quantifying some aspects of inequity in Aotearoa”.
·
Equality
with Pākehā is not the final destination but one of many navigation markers
upon the journey to a world where all Māori can live and succeed as Māori.
·
Equity
means fairness, in contrast to equality which simply means sameness.
·
Māori
have had and continue to have unequal opportunities to access to education and
better incomes.
·
Currently,
one third of the working age Māori population have no qualifications.
·
Historically,
recessions had a disproportionately negative impact on Māori compared to
non-Māori due to where Māori have been concentrated in the labour market.
I say well
done to Ngai Tahu for their efforts to lift their people’s lives but, again,
what proportion of said inequity lies with personal choices?
You know,
there is a huge incongruity in this equality/equity debate.
If the
personal choices of recipients of inequity rebalancing measures are, to some
degree, to blame, perversely, then the only real solution to this problem of
inequality is to strip said beneficiaries of their
rights to make choices!
Therefore, the unavoidable fact is that for equality of results, equity, to be achieved, freedom must be reduced! The goal of equity will require the use of undemocratic or repressive measures.
The result of this process is simply a crude equality at the lowest levels and for this personal freedom was sacrificed!
John Porter is a
citizen, deeply concerned about the incremental loss of democracy and the
insidious promotion of separatism.
10 comments:
>"Equity means fairness, in contrast to equality which simply means sameness."
Hm...... actually, 'equity' refers to equality of outcomes between arbitrarily designated social groups, whereas 'equality' as in 'equality of opportunity' is invoked by 'fairness'.
The role of the State is what we need to focus on here. Equality of opportunity involves the provision of means, primarily educational, by which people can improve themselves. It is then up to individuals to avail themselves of those opportunities. Equity involves the State imposing rules to ensure an artificial sameness between the aforesaid groups through quota systems and downright reverse discrimination such as DEI. Equity is anti-meritocratic and thereby anti-democratic.
One of my favourites.
Aristotle.
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."
Equality is equal status and rights for all members of society.
EQUITY is equal outcomes for all members of society.
Equity basically means a handicap system, favoring less successful citizens.
My take on it is that seeking equity simply takes everything down to to its lowest common denominator as opposed to equality which tries to raise everything to its highest common factor. That may not be mathematically pure but it sounds good and I like it. The transposition of equality and equity is so blatantly Marxist it makes me feel sick - I peered over the Berlin Wall at Bernauer Strasse in the 1970's/80's and anyone who wants that is welcome to it, just leave me alone.
Maori culture and society is tribal based. The chiefs are at the top with absolute power and there are various classes below such as the warrior class. Aside from the elite chiefly class, there is and can be NO personal freedom of choice except in very very limited spheres. In the end, if you are not a member of the elite class, you do what you are told, or else! I've actually spent a lot of time in these tribal societies in small remote Pacific Islands so I, in contrast to many urban Maori activists and their woke European fellow travelers, know that Polynesian tribal life for the ordinary tribal member is not a wonderful Nirvana, unless of course you are in the elite class.
Tribal culture is deeply anti-Democratic and totally incompatible with modern concepts of personal freedom.
Equity, per Black's Law dictionary, is “in its broadest and most general signification, this term denotes the spirit and the habit of fairness, justness, and right dealing…”. Equity then, can be understood as fairness, justness, and a sense of making things “right”.
This is the corporate state and corporate Iwi’s preferred strategy of using “Equity” over Equality, where “right” is anything, they say it is. This “Equity strategy” has created a divided, racist, apartheid country.
Equality on the other hand, per Black's law dictionary, is summed up as follows “like, uniform; on the same plane or level with respect to efficiency, worth, value, amount, or rights.” Equality is 50-50, 2 to 2, etc. It can be understood as exactly the same.
New Zealand became an independent colony on the 3rd May 1841, under one flag and one law for ALL, irrespective of race, color or creed.
Equality, not Equity is our right.
Equity means fairness, as provided by equal opportunity . By considring fairness of outcome, equity is now commonly stretched to imply equality of outcome. Certainly not equitable if thei nputs are vastly different.
I have found this article and all comments extremely helpful since I am considering writing a personal perspective on NZ literacy history and need to look into where everything in education has gone so wrong over the decades until now, we have shamefully one of the longest tails of underachievement in the developed world. For me this has definitely impacted Maori lack of achievement and selectively discriminated against them since they feature disproportionately amongst the lowest SES. They are not only at the bottom of the heap but so far down along with all others who have low SES. No chance of social mobility if you can't read.
My blame is on our rotten education system which has ineffective teaching methods particularly in the absolutely crucial areas of numeracy and literacy. Higher SES children can make up for deficiencies in the system with resources at home or with tutors unavailable to the poor.
Social justice, early last century centered on the practice and ideal of Universal Literacy and Numeracy. Then along came clever clogs Beeby-Fraser with cunning rhetoric about reorientation of the education system and free text books. Their seductive and clever theories resulted in schooling with students failing to achieve literacy and numeracy at Primary School. Their egregious ideology has resulted in the decline and educational fiasco that we now have. Focus had sneakily shifted to using schools as an agency for social engineering and producing socialism. Diabolical.
For me, to achieve equality ( everyone able to read and compute at least at the same age level at Primary School) of opportunity we need to get back to traditional teaching which also happens to be supported by recent science. That is how equity (fairness) is arrived at. I observed this in classes in the 1950s in mid SES state schools with classes of 50 students.
I still believe Thomas Sowell best summed this issue up here:
https://youtu.be/8WYi-64MejU
While the terms used are a little different, I challenge anyone to explain it better or disprove what he says?
Thank you for your insightful contribution Hazel. I look forward to your plan of action to get us all back on track. But I suggest you have a nice cup of tea and a little lie-down before leading us to the sunlit uplands - it helps clarify the mind and bring down the blood pressure. You seem in urgent need of both at present.
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.