English didn’t. Mandarin didn’t. Hindi didn’t. They spread because people wanted them—because they were useful. Maori is the opposite. It is being stapled into schools and government offices because left to its own devices, it wouldn’t survive.
And deep down, everyone knows that. Kids are already overloaded. Many are bilingual at home. Chinese, Indian, Samoan, Tongan, take your pick. Forcing a third language on top of that? Completely unnecessary. It doesn’t open doors; it slams them shut.
The world runs on English, and if we’re serious about preparing kids for success, that’s where the focus should stay. Not on a language that’s little more than a political vanity project. Of course, the defenders trot out the same tired line: “But Maori children were once forced to speak English!” Yes—and a hundred years later, English is what gives them access to the world.
That argument collapses under its own weight. Today’s children need skills that will feed them, house them, and give them futures. Pretending that resurrecting a language solves historical grievances is nothing more than emotional blackmail. Mandatory Maori isn’t about education, it’s about control.
When people won’t pick something willingly, politicians make it compulsory. That’s what the Maori Language Act exists for: to force-feed the country something it would never choose on its own. Strip that Act away, and the entire revival project crumbles to dust overnight. And let’s deal with the inevitable smear: “If you oppose mandatory Maori, you’re racist.” Nonsense.
Refusing to waste time on something irrelevant isn’t racism—it’s reality. The “racism” card is nothing but a silencer, waved around by people who can’t win the debate any other way.
Source: Facebook
Taxpayers’ Wallets To The Rescue Again - Steven Mark Gaskell
Peeni Henare has delivered a gem on the campaign trail: Labour would “support” an iwi-led supermarket chain if elected. Now, support could mean clapping politely from the sidelines. But given Labour’s history, it usually translates to taxpayers opening their wallets loans at sub-commercial rates, maybe grants, maybe even buying the land. In other words: your money, their idea.
No one’s saying a third supermarket chain wouldn’t be welcome. Most New Zealanders would love to see the Foodstuffs/Woolworths duopoly broken. But here’s the rub: if private investors people who like turning a profit won’t touch it, what makes anyone think Wellington mandarins can make it fly? KiwiBuild was supposed to be the silver bullet too, remember how that ended?
The philosophical problem is obvious. Labour’s first instinct to every problem is more money, never fewer barriers. Instead of slashing red tape or unclogging supply chains, it’s “where’s the chequebook?” And the more they wave that chequebook around, the more it looks like vote buying dressed up as policy.
Peeni hasn’t clarified whether this little promise has the blessing of Chris Hipkins or if it’s another case of freelancing on the stump. Either way, the message to the country is clear: don’t worry, Labour will spend your money until the shelves are magically full and prices magically drop.
Spoiler alert: the shelves will stay the same, the prices will stay high, and the only thing lighter will be your pocket.
Source: Facebook
Councils Playing Treaty Settlements? What Could Possibly Go Wrong - Steven Mark Gaskell
The Gisborne District Council has just approved a plan to look at returning land to Ngāti Oneone without going through the Waitangi Tribunal or the Crown’s Treaty settlement process. In other words, they’ve decided to do their own version of Treaty negotiations at the local level, using ratepayer assets.
Sounds harmless? Think again. If councils can start bypassing the official system whenever they feel like it, then what’s the point of having a Tribunal at all? Why run two parallel systems one with legal checks and balances, and another decided by who shouts the loudest in a council chamber?
And it doesn’t stop there. Māori ward councillors are already wielding influence inside councils, shaping decisions that affect everyone. Today it’s land; tomorrow it could be rates, resources, or anything else. If this becomes the norm, we’ll have councils all over the country quietly hijacked by unelected interests working alongside Māori wards effectively creating shadow governments under the label of “partnership.”
Meanwhile, ratepayers foot the bill. Land swaps, funding packages, and “support” for iwi-led initiatives don’t come free. But you won’t see that on the glossy press releases just councillors congratulating themselves on being “brave” and “wise.”
If Treaty settlements are going to be done, they should be done properly through the established process, in the open, with legal safeguards. Otherwise, New Zealand is heading for a patchwork of backroom deals where accountability vanishes, and councils become bargaining tables instead of governing bodies.
But sure let’s call it partnership. Everyone loves a buzzword while the rates keep climbing.
Source: Facebook
Ethnicity-based governance, even framed as consultation, undermines equal citizenship and national unity. - Dean Melkesideck
Democracies succeed through shared identity and equal laws—not tribal division. Culture can be respected without dividing power along ancestral lines.
The idea that 'Pakeha' held all power ignores historical facts like guaranteed Māori seats since 1867. True equality means equal rights for all—not ethnic-based governance, which undermines national unity and liberal democratic principles.
No one’s banning conversation—just opposing race-based power structures. That’s equality. Forcing ancestral privilege into governance? That’s closer to feudalism
Group outcomes are shaped by many factors—culture, personal choices, and socio-economic norms. While disparities exist, attributing them to racism ignores a complex picture. Many Māori thrive, and some outlive non-Māori. So how do we define who qualifies as Māori? One ancestor? A percentage? Claims of racism in healthcare is often anecdotal or statistical without proving causation.
And even if disparities exist, race-based policy risks further harm. Treating citizens differently based on ancestry undermines national unity and equality before the law.
We should help those in need—Māori or not—through need-based support, not race-based bureaucracy. Equality isn’t treating everyone the same—it’s treating everyone fairly, without locking people into identity categories. History teaches us that dividing people by race leads not to justice, but to resentment and unrest.
Race-based healthcare is political, not scientific. Need—not ancestry—should guide policy. Division by race isn’t justice, it’s regression.
This reflects a move toward equal, needs-based healthcare. Race-based policymaking divides society and undermines national unity.
The Treaty of Waitangi promised equal rights and responsibilities, not separate systems, and improving Māori health should focus on broader social issues, not ethnic bureaucracy.
Source: Facebook
The world runs on English, and if we’re serious about preparing kids for success, that’s where the focus should stay. Not on a language that’s little more than a political vanity project. Of course, the defenders trot out the same tired line: “But Maori children were once forced to speak English!” Yes—and a hundred years later, English is what gives them access to the world.
That argument collapses under its own weight. Today’s children need skills that will feed them, house them, and give them futures. Pretending that resurrecting a language solves historical grievances is nothing more than emotional blackmail. Mandatory Maori isn’t about education, it’s about control.
When people won’t pick something willingly, politicians make it compulsory. That’s what the Maori Language Act exists for: to force-feed the country something it would never choose on its own. Strip that Act away, and the entire revival project crumbles to dust overnight. And let’s deal with the inevitable smear: “If you oppose mandatory Maori, you’re racist.” Nonsense.
Refusing to waste time on something irrelevant isn’t racism—it’s reality. The “racism” card is nothing but a silencer, waved around by people who can’t win the debate any other way.
Source: Facebook
Taxpayers’ Wallets To The Rescue Again - Steven Mark Gaskell
Peeni Henare has delivered a gem on the campaign trail: Labour would “support” an iwi-led supermarket chain if elected. Now, support could mean clapping politely from the sidelines. But given Labour’s history, it usually translates to taxpayers opening their wallets loans at sub-commercial rates, maybe grants, maybe even buying the land. In other words: your money, their idea.
No one’s saying a third supermarket chain wouldn’t be welcome. Most New Zealanders would love to see the Foodstuffs/Woolworths duopoly broken. But here’s the rub: if private investors people who like turning a profit won’t touch it, what makes anyone think Wellington mandarins can make it fly? KiwiBuild was supposed to be the silver bullet too, remember how that ended?
The philosophical problem is obvious. Labour’s first instinct to every problem is more money, never fewer barriers. Instead of slashing red tape or unclogging supply chains, it’s “where’s the chequebook?” And the more they wave that chequebook around, the more it looks like vote buying dressed up as policy.
Peeni hasn’t clarified whether this little promise has the blessing of Chris Hipkins or if it’s another case of freelancing on the stump. Either way, the message to the country is clear: don’t worry, Labour will spend your money until the shelves are magically full and prices magically drop.
Spoiler alert: the shelves will stay the same, the prices will stay high, and the only thing lighter will be your pocket.
Source: Facebook
Councils Playing Treaty Settlements? What Could Possibly Go Wrong - Steven Mark Gaskell
The Gisborne District Council has just approved a plan to look at returning land to Ngāti Oneone without going through the Waitangi Tribunal or the Crown’s Treaty settlement process. In other words, they’ve decided to do their own version of Treaty negotiations at the local level, using ratepayer assets.
Sounds harmless? Think again. If councils can start bypassing the official system whenever they feel like it, then what’s the point of having a Tribunal at all? Why run two parallel systems one with legal checks and balances, and another decided by who shouts the loudest in a council chamber?
And it doesn’t stop there. Māori ward councillors are already wielding influence inside councils, shaping decisions that affect everyone. Today it’s land; tomorrow it could be rates, resources, or anything else. If this becomes the norm, we’ll have councils all over the country quietly hijacked by unelected interests working alongside Māori wards effectively creating shadow governments under the label of “partnership.”
Meanwhile, ratepayers foot the bill. Land swaps, funding packages, and “support” for iwi-led initiatives don’t come free. But you won’t see that on the glossy press releases just councillors congratulating themselves on being “brave” and “wise.”
If Treaty settlements are going to be done, they should be done properly through the established process, in the open, with legal safeguards. Otherwise, New Zealand is heading for a patchwork of backroom deals where accountability vanishes, and councils become bargaining tables instead of governing bodies.
But sure let’s call it partnership. Everyone loves a buzzword while the rates keep climbing.
Source: Facebook
Ethnicity-based governance, even framed as consultation, undermines equal citizenship and national unity. - Dean Melkesideck
Democracies succeed through shared identity and equal laws—not tribal division. Culture can be respected without dividing power along ancestral lines.
The idea that 'Pakeha' held all power ignores historical facts like guaranteed Māori seats since 1867. True equality means equal rights for all—not ethnic-based governance, which undermines national unity and liberal democratic principles.
No one’s banning conversation—just opposing race-based power structures. That’s equality. Forcing ancestral privilege into governance? That’s closer to feudalism
Group outcomes are shaped by many factors—culture, personal choices, and socio-economic norms. While disparities exist, attributing them to racism ignores a complex picture. Many Māori thrive, and some outlive non-Māori. So how do we define who qualifies as Māori? One ancestor? A percentage? Claims of racism in healthcare is often anecdotal or statistical without proving causation.
And even if disparities exist, race-based policy risks further harm. Treating citizens differently based on ancestry undermines national unity and equality before the law.
We should help those in need—Māori or not—through need-based support, not race-based bureaucracy. Equality isn’t treating everyone the same—it’s treating everyone fairly, without locking people into identity categories. History teaches us that dividing people by race leads not to justice, but to resentment and unrest.
Race-based healthcare is political, not scientific. Need—not ancestry—should guide policy. Division by race isn’t justice, it’s regression.
This reflects a move toward equal, needs-based healthcare. Race-based policymaking divides society and undermines national unity.
The Treaty of Waitangi promised equal rights and responsibilities, not separate systems, and improving Māori health should focus on broader social issues, not ethnic bureaucracy.
Source: Facebook
Māori Data Sovereignty Because Even Algorithms Must Honour the Treaty - Steven Mark Gaskell
It seems there’s nowhere the Treaty can’t be stretched to fit. Now it’s not just land, water, and political seats it’s algorithms too. Yes, Māori data sovereignty is the new frontier, because apparently even artificial intelligence must pay homage to 1840.
The irony, of course, is golden. After warning us that AI could reinforce colonial power structures, the authors happily admit they used ChatGPT and Claude two very foreign, very corporate AI platforms to polish their piece. So while demanding sovereignty over data, they outsource their ideas to Silicon Valley and San Francisco. Ka pai.
At this rate, don’t be surprised when we’re told Word documents, Excel spreadsheets, or even the weather app on your phone must all be re programmed for “equity, justice, and cultural preservation.” Because nothing says progress quite like making sure your chatbot knows the Treaty better than the law courts.
Source: Facebook
Māori Values: The World According to Whānau - Steven Mark Gaskell
Apparently, some people now need a guide to life straight from a Māori worldview because our centuries-old “just wing it” method clearly isn’t cutting it. Whakapapa, mana, kaitiakitanga… sound impressive, right? Fancy words for “know your family, don’t trash the place, and respect your elders.” Revolutionary.
We’re told Māori values are about community, spirituality, and environmental stewardship, which is fine if your world revolves around marae meetings, river guardians, and endless discussions about balance. Meanwhile, the rest of us mere mortals keep paying taxes, sending kids to school, and occasionally recycling without a ceremonial blessing.
And now comes the kicker: are these values “better than the rest of us”? According to some, yes because they come wrapped in cultural mystique and ancestral authority. But in practice? They’re rules and priorities like any other culture, just with a stronger sense of drama and a cooler vocabulary.
So next time someone tells you Māori values are somehow superior, just remember: they’re guidelines for a particular community, not a universal upgrade pack. And no, you don’t need a PhD in te reo or a whakapapa chart taped to your wall to survive in the real world.
Source: Facebook
It seems there’s nowhere the Treaty can’t be stretched to fit. Now it’s not just land, water, and political seats it’s algorithms too. Yes, Māori data sovereignty is the new frontier, because apparently even artificial intelligence must pay homage to 1840.
The irony, of course, is golden. After warning us that AI could reinforce colonial power structures, the authors happily admit they used ChatGPT and Claude two very foreign, very corporate AI platforms to polish their piece. So while demanding sovereignty over data, they outsource their ideas to Silicon Valley and San Francisco. Ka pai.
At this rate, don’t be surprised when we’re told Word documents, Excel spreadsheets, or even the weather app on your phone must all be re programmed for “equity, justice, and cultural preservation.” Because nothing says progress quite like making sure your chatbot knows the Treaty better than the law courts.
Source: Facebook
Māori Values: The World According to Whānau - Steven Mark Gaskell
Apparently, some people now need a guide to life straight from a Māori worldview because our centuries-old “just wing it” method clearly isn’t cutting it. Whakapapa, mana, kaitiakitanga… sound impressive, right? Fancy words for “know your family, don’t trash the place, and respect your elders.” Revolutionary.
We’re told Māori values are about community, spirituality, and environmental stewardship, which is fine if your world revolves around marae meetings, river guardians, and endless discussions about balance. Meanwhile, the rest of us mere mortals keep paying taxes, sending kids to school, and occasionally recycling without a ceremonial blessing.
And now comes the kicker: are these values “better than the rest of us”? According to some, yes because they come wrapped in cultural mystique and ancestral authority. But in practice? They’re rules and priorities like any other culture, just with a stronger sense of drama and a cooler vocabulary.
So next time someone tells you Māori values are somehow superior, just remember: they’re guidelines for a particular community, not a universal upgrade pack. And no, you don’t need a PhD in te reo or a whakapapa chart taped to your wall to survive in the real world.
Source: Facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment