What exactly has she done? Since entering Parliament, the only time most New Zealanders have seen Hana make headlines was when she stood up, screamed, and tore David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill in the debating chamber before breaking into a haka. Wow, so inspirational!
Imagine for a moment if a member of National, ACT or NZ First did the same thing in reverse, ripped the Treaty of Waitangi, screamed across the chamber and then performed a gay little dance. The outrage would be deafening. The media would melt down, the Speaker would be forced to intervene, and the MP would likely be forced to resign. When it’s a Te Pāti Māori MP, it’s called “influential” and “courageous.”
This isn’t about race or heritage. It’s about maturity and credibility. When we start sending 23-year-olds with no real-world experience and no proven life skills into Parliament, something has gone seriously wrong. Politics is not a playground. A political mind takes years to develop. Hana might have potential, and she may well grow into a strong representative for her people, but she’s not there yet.
Let’s not forget how she got there either. After her infamous “ramraids” on the campaign trail, it felt like some voters took pity on her and handed her their vote out of sympathy rather than confidence. That’s not democracy at its best, that’s emotional manipulation disguised as empowerment.
If Hana wants a real future in politics, she’ll need to think beyond the Te Pāti Māori playbook. Right now, it’s all noise and no delivery. The party is far better at performance than progress. And if she doesn’t break from that mould, she risks being remembered as yet another grifter posing as a revolutionary.
I genuinely hope she matures politically and learns to represent all New Zealanders, not just a select few. Let’s not confuse tantrums with leadership. Time magazine might, but the rest of us shouldn’t, aye bro?
Imagine for a moment if a member of National, ACT or NZ First did the same thing in reverse, ripped the Treaty of Waitangi, screamed across the chamber and then performed a gay little dance. The outrage would be deafening. The media would melt down, the Speaker would be forced to intervene, and the MP would likely be forced to resign. When it’s a Te Pāti Māori MP, it’s called “influential” and “courageous.”
This isn’t about race or heritage. It’s about maturity and credibility. When we start sending 23-year-olds with no real-world experience and no proven life skills into Parliament, something has gone seriously wrong. Politics is not a playground. A political mind takes years to develop. Hana might have potential, and she may well grow into a strong representative for her people, but she’s not there yet.
Let’s not forget how she got there either. After her infamous “ramraids” on the campaign trail, it felt like some voters took pity on her and handed her their vote out of sympathy rather than confidence. That’s not democracy at its best, that’s emotional manipulation disguised as empowerment.
If Hana wants a real future in politics, she’ll need to think beyond the Te Pāti Māori playbook. Right now, it’s all noise and no delivery. The party is far better at performance than progress. And if she doesn’t break from that mould, she risks being remembered as yet another grifter posing as a revolutionary.
I genuinely hope she matures politically and learns to represent all New Zealanders, not just a select few. Let’s not confuse tantrums with leadership. Time magazine might, but the rest of us shouldn’t, aye bro?
After all, this is the same Time that once named Adolf Hitler as “Man of the Year 1938” and plastered Jacinda Ardern, arguably New Zealand’s most divisive leader, across its cover. That tells you everything you need to know about what their awards really mean today - absolutely whāk all.
Matua Kahurangi is just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes. He blogs on https://matuakahurangi.com/ where this article was sourced
10 comments:
Time Magazine is now super-woke rubbish. Cancelled my sub. years ago.
Time magazine have just completely blown any credibility they might have had.
The so called “influential leadership” was NOT leadership by any intelligent stretch of imagination. It was a petulant childish tantrum.
"Let’s not confuse tantrums with leadership. "
Oh wow. That could be applied all round the country.
Anon @4.35am I’m doing a study on wokeification for a university paper and am only just now learning that there is a special degree of woke called super-woke. Can you please tell me how to tell regular woke from super woke? I’m only just starting on my research and I think this is a key finding
Time.com is no longer a bookmark for me.
Having only just learned that Time magazine exists and despite not being someone who buys magazines, I am going to boycott and never buy Time magazine again. Unless they name Trump person of the year. Then I dunno what I’ll do.
In reply: these are not formal categories - more a figure of speech. As you know, "woke" denotes people who have been indoctrinated by the cultural marxist discourse of identity politics and label any disagreement with their views as " racist" (without clear supporting evidence ). Super-woke denotes people or entities - often famous and influential - which take this ideology to extreme lengths and take drastic action against any opposing views - usually by employing the " cancel" or bullying strategy because they are in positions of authority or control. In NZ, the overreach of the Supreme Court and the BSA are such examples. Debate with woke and super-woke is impossible. Often the woke are babbling "useful idiots". In contrast, the "super woke" form a highly trained and aggressive uber-class which zealously pushes the cultural marxist agenda to the limit and brutally eliminate any counter views.
I thought woke meant alert and aware of people with different perspectives or coming from different places or backgrounds. If we can’t agree on that as a common definition, or at least take steps to get our point across without hyperbole, then I don’t think I’ll be able to use your input in my paper. Sorry about that. But I did enjoy this well reasoned debate with you, good to see there are still some grounded people on the internet.
And yikes 4.35am sounds like you’re committed to the cause, but if not then I hope your insomnia/new baby/shift work/meth spree/marathon training/trip overseas is going well. Kia kaha.
Anon @ 2.38: well said. This means Chloe is beyond categorisation.
Chloe and the rest of her tribe masquerading as politicians
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.