The Treaty Principles Bill has done exactly what its champion David Seymour intended; it has sparked a national conversation. And that conversation has been eye-opening to say the least. Never could I have ever predicted that ‘equality’ would be treated as such a dirty word.
The immortal words of Dr Martin Luther King Junior’s I have a dream speech, treasured for decades after his death, are now out of fashion according to certain sections of our society and Nelson Mandela would today perhaps be condemned for the ideals he said he would die for:
“the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities.”
In fact, I am old enough to remember when Te Pāti Māori President John Tamihere was himself a champion of equality in our Parliament. I daresay he would prefer it if his speeches about the Foreshore and Seabed legislation disappeared. Nowadays he leads the party that ran Lady Tureiti Moxon as a candidate at the last election.
Equality is not simply flawed in Te Pāti Māori’s dystopian idealised future of our country, it is irrelevant, unimportant, and an obstacle to overcome. Lady Moxon deplores that the Regulatory Standards Bill “mirrors the identical flawed thinking that was in the Treaty Principles Bill by placing undue emphasis on “equality”.”
One of the greatest triumphs of the twentieth century was the West’s determined shift to place human rights and equality at the very heart of governance and democracy. It is our commitment to equality, and the simple idea that we should be treated the same before the law and have access to the same opportunities, that has allowed for the dismantling of discriminatory systems and laws.
No doubt there will be those who read this and quibble about the definition of ‘equality’ in order to excuse Lady Moxon’s disdain for it. Helpfully, she herself included her own definition of the word in her article. This is the equality she considers the government to be placing “undue emphasis” on:
“Equality = being treated the same, having the same opportunities, rights, or resources, regardless of any differences. It implies that everyone has access to the same resources and opportunities, regardless of their race, gender, financial position or background.”
Lady Moxon referred to Māori life expectancy being lower than other New Zealanders’ as evidence of the failings of equality. Context tells a different story.
In 1891, the life expectancy for Māori was 25 for men and 23 for women. In the century and a bit since, this expectancy has steadily climbed so that 2019 statistics have Māori men at 73.4 years and Māori women at 77.1. Statistical trends show a trajectory of continued improvement in Māori life expectancy can be expected.
Notably, Statistics New Zealand says “increases in [Māori] life expectancy were highest in the late 1980s to early 2000s.” This period was one of intense focus on equality in New Zealand. Our Human Rights Act was passed in 1993 and Bill of Rights Act in 1990. It was a time of progress for women and minority groups.
I have been advocating for a New Zealand that treats each of us equally under the law for decades now and I know better than most how aggressively this concept has been resisted by those who promote a system where who one’s ancestors are determines their rights. Racial separatism is explicitly advocated for by Te Pāti Māori, and its proxies, and some of the ugliest of their messages have sadly gained traction with a new generation of activists if social media is anything to go by.
The idea that anyone who does not have Māori ancestry is merely a visitor to these lands can be seen in videos online, in the comment sections of articles, and in vox pops in the media. No matter if a person is a sixth generation New Zealander, according to the new Māori activist doctrine, they are manuhiri (a visitor) and Māori are only allowing their presence out of reluctant goodwill.
This way of thinking is a recipe for disaster. It is a sure way to destroy social cohesion and distract us all from the immense economic challenges that we all face. We must start with equality as our baseline.
It is extraordinary that needs to be said, but equality is not racist.
Sources:
https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/growth-in-life-expectancy-slows/
https://teara.govt.nz/en/death-rates-and-life-expectancy
Dr Don Brash, Former Governor of the Reserve Bank and Leader of the New Zealand National Party from 2003 to 2006 and ACT in 2011. Don blogs at Bassett, Brash and Hide - where this article was sourced
The idea that anyone who does not have Māori ancestry is merely a visitor to these lands can be seen in videos online, in the comment sections of articles, and in vox pops in the media. No matter if a person is a sixth generation New Zealander, according to the new Māori activist doctrine, they are manuhiri (a visitor) and Māori are only allowing their presence out of reluctant goodwill.
This way of thinking is a recipe for disaster. It is a sure way to destroy social cohesion and distract us all from the immense economic challenges that we all face. We must start with equality as our baseline.
It is extraordinary that needs to be said, but equality is not racist.
Sources:
https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/growth-in-life-expectancy-slows/
https://teara.govt.nz/en/death-rates-and-life-expectancy
Dr Don Brash, Former Governor of the Reserve Bank and Leader of the New Zealand National Party from 2003 to 2006 and ACT in 2011. Don blogs at Bassett, Brash and Hide - where this article was sourced
7 comments:
Could someone please tell me how much his race based nonsense costs our country each year? How many millions for the seperate government departments, agencies etc. It is probably a few billion. Line by line Nicola.
Not a dirty word at all - portrayed as such by the cultural Marxist police.
Rather, equality is an admirable outcome of effort which is afforded by democracy.
Equity is the real danger - this is the tenet of cultural Marxism. Exact same outcomes are achieved through social engineering and thus meritocracy is banished and buried.
Could a really tough leader could right matters - i.e. clear out the judiciary, the public service, the universities, police and the media? Doubtful as very little time remains. 2026 will be the year - after that, the He Puapua tribal rule agenda based on equity will prevail.
Excellent as usual Don. Scary that the real racists are not willing to accept equality any more. They are undoing decades and decades of work to try and Implement apartheid.
I'm happy going without equality. It should be those who work, support themselves and pay tax can vote. Those who retire after 40 working can as well. Otherwise, sorry, you're only manuhiri. In other words, why should anyone decide how tax is used when it isn't their tax?
Excellent article, Don.
You have described the situation very clearly and accurately. The push for apartheid in New Zealand is well under way.
This false argument that "equity" is somehow fair and preferable to equality is a favourite of the racist Left.
In current NZ usage there is confusion between equity, equality of opportunity, and equality of outcome. Equity means fairness but it is routinely used especially by maori to mean equality of outcome. (possibly due artful confusion with the accounting term for realisable assets) So much so that many now accept that as the direct meaning. In colonist derived tradition, equality of opportunity represents equity. Manipulation to ensure equality of outcome irrespective of input does not represent equity. Maori now object to equality of opportunity; presumably an admission that their capability often reduced. They strive for equality of outcome (at least) by whatever means.
There are several programmed fixedly pro maori go tos regularlry given free rein on RNZ; Sykes, Henry, Motu, Packer, Tait, Moxom. (The Lady confection is acquired from her husband.) Most interviews by fixedly pro maori Mah?? Forbes or the likes.
Yes. This so-called "apartheid " is based on the superior rights and power of a minority. Totally different from the Black majority which justified apartheid in Sth Africa. Identity politics and cultural Marxism support power/superiority to a minority.
It seems NZers will be given no opportunity to vote on this view - and their loss of rights. Very telling.
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.