Have a look at the NZ Secondary Education Curriculum Renovation.
The Ministry of Education states –
“It is critical our education system continues to evolve and remains focussed on delivering equitable and excellent outcomes for all Aotearoa New Zealand’s children and young people.”
“A five-year program to refresh the New Zealand Curriculum and redesign Te Marautanga o Aotearoa is underway, aimed at ensuring all ākonga experience rich and responsive learning.”
“These changes will also honour our past and obligations to Te Tiriti o Waitangi.”
“…we released the updated curriculum content for Years 0 to 10 English, Te Reo Rangatira, Mathematics and Statistics, and Pāngarau.
Pangarau is mathematics. But the Ministry of Education show their ethnic bias by using Maori language! Why? It is He Puapua in action!
There will also be –
- the draft wāhanga ako for Te Marautanga O Aotearoa – Pūtaiao, Te Ao Māori, Waiora, Toi Ihiihi, Hāngarau, Ngā Reo, and Te Reo Pākeha
- the draft framework for Te Marautanga o Aotearoa.
Matauranga Maori is an important plank in Maori’s agenda for self governance. Matauranga Maori invades and pervades our governance structures with the education and science disciplines being prime targets!
Our children are being brainwashed and we say nothing!
Using education to influence and change thoughts or actions can be described as employing soft power.
Power is the ability to affect others to get the outcomes one prefers or desires. That can be accomplished by coercion and payment or attraction and persuasion.
Soft power employs persuasion and attraction to obtain the preferred outcomes.
The opposite to soft power, hard power, is achieved through military threat or use, coercion, and by means of economic menace or reward.
Joseph Nye, an American political scientist, described education as soft power – i.e. the ability of a state to influence the actions of another state or persons through persuasion or attraction. This has similarities to brainwashing.
By the highly significant date of 2040, the impact and consequence soft power, come brainwashing, is going to be huge.
A country’s soft power, according to Nye, rests on key resources; Its culture and its political values.
As a learned colleague once observed – “This is propaganda on a giant and very sophisticated scale…. a blatant power grab that will occupy the centre space, delivering immense, long term, influence and control.” “The consequences of not challenging and ceding the centre space are irreversible.”
A future book will be written – “Coup by Apathy”.
Pee Kay writes he is from a generation where common sense, standards, integrity and honesty are fundamental attributes. This article was first published HERE
14 comments:
And naive politicians can’t see it. What hope is there? I used to respect Māori and happily learnt a few words, but to have it rammed down my throat with made up words to suit the English meaning is just a step too far.
The interpretation of the Treaty is causing this present day education response. Obviously scholars and educationists born in the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s didn't have the IQS to interpret the document. Although Einstein, born circa 1879 had a pretty high I Q. I see a written document as being decipherable. Like the Magna Carta or the American Constitution. Archaeology and Geology are a bit different as new discoveries change peoples viewpoint.
It was my understanding that the Coalition had agreed to moderate te reo and, if used, place the English word first Presumably the Mister of Ed has influence over communications from the Ministry of Ed. I simply cannot understand the communication as it stands. Equitable means fair. The equal outcome interpretation has led to the race to lower standards for all to match maori common achievement abiity. The degree to which the maori control insurgents have infiltrated the public service is formidable.
I asked Copilot to do a linguistic analysis of the language patterns in the above statement from the Ministry of Education. Here is the response:
Absolutely — the Ministry’s statements contain several classic Milton Model patterns. These patterns are common in political, organisational, and strategic communications because they create agreement, soften resistance, and imply consensus without making falsifiable claims.
Below is a breakdown of the patterns present in each excerpt.
🧠 Milton Model Patterns Identified
1. “It is critical our education system continues to evolve…”
🔹 Cause and Effect
• “It is critical our education system continues to evolve…” Implies that failing to “evolve” would cause negative outcomes, without specifying how or why.
🔹 Unspecified Verb
• “continues to evolve” “Evolve” is vague — it can mean anything from minor adjustments to radical reform.
🔹 Nominalisation
• “equitable and excellent outcomes” “Outcomes” is an abstract noun with no concrete definition.
🔹 Universal Quantifier
• “for all Aotearoa New Zealand’s children and young people” “All” creates the appearance of universal benefit.
🔹 Value laden but Undefined Adjectives
• “equitable”, “excellent” These sound positive but have no operational definition.
2. “A five-year program to refresh the New Zealand Curriculum… is underway…”
🔹 Presupposition
• The program exists.
• It will take five years.
• It is already underway.
• It will “refresh” and “redesign” — both assumed to be necessary.
🔹 Unspecified Verb
• “refresh”, “redesign” Both imply improvement without describing what will change.
🔹 Lost Performative
• “aimed at ensuring all ākonga experience rich and responsive learning.” Who decided what “rich and responsive” means? The authority is unstated.
🔹 Complex Equivalence
• Implies that curriculum changes = “rich and responsive learning.”
3. “These changes will also honour our past and obligations to Te Tiriti o Waitangi.”
🔹 Mind Read / Cause and Effect
• Assumes the changes will honour the past and obligations — a prediction presented as fact.
🔹 Nominalisation
• “our past”, “obligations” Both are abstract and undefined.
🔹 Unspecified Referential Index
• “our past” — whose past?
• “obligations” — which obligations?
🔹 Presupposition
• That honouring the past and Te Tiriti obligations is part of the purpose of the changes.
4. “…we released the updated curriculum content for Years 0 to 10…”
🔹 Presupposition
• The update was necessary.
• The update is an improvement.
🔹 Unspecified Noun
• “updated curriculum content” “Updated” does not specify what changed or why.
🔹 Deletion
• No explanation of the nature, scope, or rationale of the changes.
Erica Stanford doesn’t seem to be interested in reversing the maori march through our education system. Like Luxon, I believe Erica must be pro- maorification. Yes, she is doing much to improve the curriculum, standards and student achievement and that is to be applauded. She is working very hard and making substantial improvements. But stopping the maori indoctrination emanating from the still bloated Ministry of Education and via teacher education? Yet to see it. If you weren’t pro- maorification I doubt you'd choose to be a teacher or join the ministry. The scrum remains well and truly screwed.
I then asked Copilot to show how the original phrasing influences public perception.
Absolutely — and this is where things get interesting. The Ministry’s original phrasing isn’t just “formal government language.” It uses several rhetorical devices that subtly guide how the public interprets the reforms. None of this is sinister on its own — it’s simply how institutional communication works — but it’s worth understanding the effects.
Below is a clear breakdown of how the wording shapes perception.
🎯 How the Original Phrasing Influences Public Perception
1. Creates a sense of urgency and inevitability
“It is critical our education system continues to evolve…”
• Words like critical and continues to evolve imply that change is not optional.
• This frames the reforms as necessary and responsible, rather than debatable.
• It positions anyone who questions the changes as resisting “progress.”
Effect: People are nudged to accept the reforms as the only reasonable path forward.
2. Uses positive but undefined values
“equitable and excellent outcomes” “rich and responsive learning”
• These are feel good terms with no concrete meaning.
• Because they are vague, the audience fills in the blanks with their own preferred interpretation.
• This creates broad agreement without specifying what is actually being promised.
Effect: The language generates support without committing to measurable standards.
3. Implies consensus and shared identity
“for all Aotearoa New Zealand’s children and young people” “our past and obligations”
• The use of our and all creates a sense of unity and shared purpose.
• It subtly suggests that the reforms reflect collective values, not the decisions of a specific group.
Effect: People feel socially aligned with the message, reducing resistance.
4. Frames the reforms as already underway and therefore legitimate
“A five-year program… is underway” “…we released the updated curriculum content…”
• Presenting actions as already in progress signals that the decision has been made.
• This reduces the perceived space for public debate or alternative proposals.
Effect: People are more likely to accept the changes as settled and official.
5. Connects the reforms to respected cultural or historical principles
“honour our past and obligations to Te Tiriti o Waitangi”
• Linking policy to Te Tiriti invokes moral authority.
• It frames the reforms as fulfilling ethical or historical duties.
• This can make criticism feel socially or culturally uncomfortable.
Effect: The reforms gain moral legitimacy, discouraging opposition.
6. Avoids specifics, which reduces scrutiny
Across all statements, key details are missing:
• What exactly is being changed?
• Why these changes?
• What evidence supports them?
• What alternatives were considered?
By focusing on values rather than specifics, the messaging:
• reduces opportunities for the public to question the substance,
• shifts attention from the content of the reforms to the intentions behind them.
Effect: The audience is guided toward emotional agreement rather than analytical evaluation.
🧩 Overall Impact
The combined effect of these rhetorical patterns is to:
• Frame the reforms as necessary, positive, and morally aligned with national values.
• Reduce the perceived legitimacy of dissent.
• Encourage acceptance without providing detailed information.
• Create a sense of unity and inevitability around the changes.
This is classic strategic communication: not deceptive, but carefully crafted to shape interpretation.
Finally, I asked Copilot to show me how to how to rewrite those Ministry of Education statements to encourage genuine public debate.
Absolutely — if the goal is to invite genuine public debate, the language needs to shift from persuasive, value laden framing toward wording that:
• states facts plainly
• acknowledges uncertainty
• identifies trade offs
• invites alternative viewpoints
• clarifies what is known and what is still being decided
• avoids implying consensus or inevitability
Below are rewrites that open the door to discussion rather than steer people toward agreement.
🗣️ Rewriting the Statements to Encourage Genuine Public Debate
1. Original
“It is critical our education system continues to evolve and remains focussed on delivering equitable and excellent outcomes for all Aotearoa New Zealand’s children and young people.”
Debate friendly version
“We are proposing changes to the education system because we believe they may improve fairness and learning outcomes. We recognise that people may have different views about what ‘fair’ and ‘effective’ education looks like, and we welcome public feedback on whether these changes move us in the right direction.”
Why this works: It removes inevitability, acknowledges differing perspectives, and explicitly invites critique.
2. Original
“A five-year program to refresh the New Zealand Curriculum and redesign Te Marautanga o Aotearoa is underway, aimed at ensuring all ākonga experience rich and responsive learning.”
Debate friendly version
“We have begun a five year project to revise the New Zealand Curriculum and Te Marautanga o Aotearoa. The goal is to improve how students learn, but there are several possible approaches. We are seeking input on what changes people think are necessary, what should stay the same, and what outcomes matter most.”
Why this works: It acknowledges alternatives and invites the public to shape the direction.
3. Original
“These changes will also honour our past and obligations to Te Tiriti o Waitangi.”
Debate friendly version
“One intention behind these changes is to reflect New Zealand’s history and our responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi. We understand that people interpret these responsibilities differently, so we are asking for views on how the curriculum should address them.”
Why this works: It avoids presenting one interpretation as the only valid one.
4. Original
“…we released the updated curriculum content for Years 0 to 10 English, Te Reo Rangatira, Mathematics and Statistics, and Pāngarau.”
Debate friendly version
“We have published draft curriculum material for Years 0–10 in English, Te Reo Rangatira, Mathematics and Statistics, and Pāngarau. These drafts are open for public review, and we encourage people to comment on what works, what doesn’t, and what needs further development.”
Why this works: It frames the release as part of a process, not a final decision.
🧩 What These Rewrites Achieve
They:
• remove presuppositions
• avoid vague value claims
• acknowledge uncertainty
• recognise differing viewpoints
• invite scrutiny rather than discourage it
• treat the public as partners, not an audience to be persuaded
This is the kind of language that supports democratic engagement rather than passive acceptance.
Surely there are names to the people pushing this propaganda relentlessly ?
Why are they getting away with this anonymously ?
What's in it for them ?
Why aren't our National MPs doing something about it ?
Meanwhile our Asian ethnic population are mostly unaware of what's happening, and those that do are intimidated into saying nothing.
If only they knew.
Thank you Barrie Davis for doing all that boring stuff for the rest of us - and the intelligent, objective policy-wonks at Education (who will be out of a job as AI proceeds apace)
The AI analysis intriguing. But the last thing the insurgency infiltrators in the Education system desire is recogniton of different viewpoints. and invite of scrutiny. Incidentally what is Pangarau and te Reo Rangatira? Is te reo kuki taught?
While I agree it is important to understand the history of our own country, there are so many many other cultures and history that is equally if not more important to form a well rounded and grounded view of life and the world.
The current view of academics will in the long run (already?) make our living standard lower than other equal countries.
It is nothing new for such emotive language to be foisted by the ministry onto schools. Last century mature and discerning secondary principals consigned this garbage to the waste paper basket.
Such rhetoric is the language of Progressivism and right from the days of its initiation by Peter Fraser this has been the method of hoodwinking the population into accepting ineffective teaching methods, lack of discipline, socialist values and social engineering into schools .
What most people have failed to grasp is that our education is not the least interested in actual education as we know it but ideology . This is particularly socialism which has seamlessly morphed into Marxism and consequently Critical Race Theory . Marxism's highest priority is destruction of the West - all its values and traditions including classical and Christian ones.
Marxism doesn't care about Matauranga Maori but just uses it to undo Western Culture which is its target for destruction. Useful idiots lap all the ideas up. The novel '1984 ' by George Orwell warned us but we didn't relate it to education where socialism has actually concentrated its efforts.
Orwell did a survey of children from a poor
area in England in 1940, who could read Dickens , Chesterton and Stevenson novels as 12-15 year old olds . Now English subject majors at University just can't read them because they are too difficult for them , a survey found . Dumbing the population down has also
been a major strategy.
Gaynor
To Anon at 8.33 am. Minister Stanford stated during a Q+A interview that "Iwi are our major partners". When yielding to the strong lobby to remove reference to the "Te Ao" vision from the ETAB 2 Bill, she remarked that protesters were " racist." She has done good work on reading, writing and maths but the power of the Education Ministry has not been harnessed. Her pro - Maori stance seems clear - but she is a rising National star, has appeal for the youth vote and holds a large majority in her electorate.
The stigma of apartheid has permeated every political party except Act and NZ First and every government department from the Ombudsman down. The power of the bureaucracy has transcended the power of the political wing. For a classic example, I refer you to NZS 8134:2021 Nga Paerewa Health and Disability Service Standards, The membership of the committee was approved by the New Zealand Standards Approval board and appointed by the New Zealand Standards Executive under the Standards and Accreditation Act 2015. The Preface to the Standard was written(?) and signed by the then Director-General of Health, Dr Ashley Bloomfield who was subsequently knighted by the then Labour Government. It defines how te Tiriti, ie Maori, shall be treated differently - but better - than the 'People'.
How can a document, ie the Treaty, that Parliament has voted, does not say the government has the power to govern, does not say all people are equal before and under the law, does not protect property ownership, be spoken - and believed, to be a 'foundation' document of New Zealand??????
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.