We’ve allowed the language of our law—the very framework that prevents chaos and ensures a predictable, fair society—to be infected by the unmeasurable. We are replacing hard, empirical, scientific reality with metaphysical abstractions. And it is a catastrophe in the making. It truly is.
Look at what’s happening right now with freshwater management. We are telling farmers, engineers, and local councils that they must "give effect to" a regulatory framework built around a specific, non-secular worldview. We have encoded concepts directly from Te Ao Māori [the Māori world]—traditional Māori metaphysics—into statutory law.
Now, think about that. Think about the sheer, unadulterated complexity of that demand.
We aren't just dealing with a single term. The legislation is packed with subjective, spiritual ideas. It demands the protection of the mauri [spiritual life force/essential quality] of the water. It mandates compliance with mahinga kai [traditional food-gathering practices/places], and forces councils to manage geographic areas based on spiritual concepts like wai tapu [sacred/forbidden waters], while operating under the principles of kaitiakitanga [guardianship/stewardship] and mana whakahaere [authority/governance over an area].
But how do you measure the "life force" of a river? How does a secular engineer calibrate a model to satisfy the spiritual sanctity of sacred waters? You can’t. You can measure nitrate levels. You can measure parts per million of bacteria. You can measure flow rates. That’s science. That’s empirical reality. It’s hard, it’s observable, and it’s the same for everyone regardless of what you believe.
When you write symbolic, meaning-based language into statutory law, you aren't creating a clear rule. You are creating an intentional black hole of interpretation. And who fills that black hole?
This is where it turns into a massive, state-sanctioned grift.
Because the average land user or local council cannot look at a spreadsheet and tell you if the "spiritual life force" of a stream is intact, they are forced to hire intermediaries. A whole industry of cultural specialists, advisors, and consultants has emerged out of the woodwork to sell you the translation of a concept that shouldn't have been codified in the first place. We are talking about assessment and consultation fees starting at $5,000 minimum, just to have a specialist come out to a water body, perform a ritual check, and sign off on a compliance box. It’s a protection racket disguised as environmentalism. It’s a toll booth erected on the road to basic productivity.
This isn’t an attack on protecting nature. It’s a defense of competence, fairness, and reality.
New Zealanders like to think we live in a secular state. We don't. A truly secular state does not compel its citizens to operate within, and financially subsidize, a specific spiritual framework. We are a nation of nearly 300 distinct ethnicities—atheists, Christians, secularists, Buddhists, Hindus—yet our central and local regulations are forcing every single one of them to submit to one preferred worldview. It is completely absurd.
The law is a tool of state compulsion. If you violate it, there are real-world, severe consequences for your livelihood and your freedom. Therefore, the law must be 100% secular.
If we want a system that is fair, predictable, and clean, we must demand that our legislation—both local and central—deals exclusively with the empirical and the secular. We must strip every single metaphysical and spiritual term from our statute books. Anything less is an invitation to total bureaucratic overreach and an ongoing financial grift.
■ Make New Zealand Secular
John Robertson is a patriotic New Zealander who frequently posts on Facebook.
Now, think about that. Think about the sheer, unadulterated complexity of that demand.
We aren't just dealing with a single term. The legislation is packed with subjective, spiritual ideas. It demands the protection of the mauri [spiritual life force/essential quality] of the water. It mandates compliance with mahinga kai [traditional food-gathering practices/places], and forces councils to manage geographic areas based on spiritual concepts like wai tapu [sacred/forbidden waters], while operating under the principles of kaitiakitanga [guardianship/stewardship] and mana whakahaere [authority/governance over an area].
But how do you measure the "life force" of a river? How does a secular engineer calibrate a model to satisfy the spiritual sanctity of sacred waters? You can’t. You can measure nitrate levels. You can measure parts per million of bacteria. You can measure flow rates. That’s science. That’s empirical reality. It’s hard, it’s observable, and it’s the same for everyone regardless of what you believe.
When you write symbolic, meaning-based language into statutory law, you aren't creating a clear rule. You are creating an intentional black hole of interpretation. And who fills that black hole?
This is where it turns into a massive, state-sanctioned grift.
Because the average land user or local council cannot look at a spreadsheet and tell you if the "spiritual life force" of a stream is intact, they are forced to hire intermediaries. A whole industry of cultural specialists, advisors, and consultants has emerged out of the woodwork to sell you the translation of a concept that shouldn't have been codified in the first place. We are talking about assessment and consultation fees starting at $5,000 minimum, just to have a specialist come out to a water body, perform a ritual check, and sign off on a compliance box. It’s a protection racket disguised as environmentalism. It’s a toll booth erected on the road to basic productivity.
This isn’t an attack on protecting nature. It’s a defense of competence, fairness, and reality.
New Zealanders like to think we live in a secular state. We don't. A truly secular state does not compel its citizens to operate within, and financially subsidize, a specific spiritual framework. We are a nation of nearly 300 distinct ethnicities—atheists, Christians, secularists, Buddhists, Hindus—yet our central and local regulations are forcing every single one of them to submit to one preferred worldview. It is completely absurd.
The law is a tool of state compulsion. If you violate it, there are real-world, severe consequences for your livelihood and your freedom. Therefore, the law must be 100% secular.
If we want a system that is fair, predictable, and clean, we must demand that our legislation—both local and central—deals exclusively with the empirical and the secular. We must strip every single metaphysical and spiritual term from our statute books. Anything less is an invitation to total bureaucratic overreach and an ongoing financial grift.
■ Make New Zealand Secular
John Robertson is a patriotic New Zealander who frequently posts on Facebook.
No comments:
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.