More Green's Bull Shi!

[Balance]

Take into account the Maori electorates and the total population of Maori, the numbers are higher, but still a small minority. Agree, a tiny cohort however wide the net is spread.

It seems a minority but well connected politically, Maori have seized the narrative. However frustrating that might be to anyone non-Maori and I suspect many Maori as well.

Still, they own the narrative right now and likely will face the consequences of being promoted by this now gone Labour, Greens and Labour government, into division, separatism and latent racism in our great country.

Look, the thing is, I've never felt as though I'm racist against any race, especially against Maori who are my fellow Kiwis, but now I'm apparently lumped into some group who don't agree with race based policies that the previous government have introduced, as a racist!

That's offensive to me, it really upsets and annoys me. I've never been racist and abhor it.

You are no racist. Nor are all the NZers who objected to the racist & divisive policies of the Labour government of Ardern & Hipkins.

Read Chris Trotter's piece here as to how Ardern & Labour masterminded the racism narrative to shut down any discussion or debate about their racist policies :

https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...ins-and-Labour

[BlackPeter]

Here's a hint for you BlackPeter. Governments make laws. If a government feels it has a mandate to legislate the Treaty to the bin of history, it can. Labour has just tried to incorporate a whole bunch of BS onto the NZ people due to Ardern selling her soul to the Maori caucus and in particular Mahuta.

Well guess what? Ardern and Mahuta have both been sent packing. There's a new sheriff in town and the brakes will be put on the separatist agenda.

Comprendez?

Sigh - so, you are proposing to disestablish our democratic and rule based system in order to follow the ugly, loud and shrill shouting crowd? Whats the next you propose to introduce - lynch justice?

Sounds like you, but lucky us - while NZ does not have a constitution, it still does have an independent judiciary. The idiocy you are proposing is inconsistent with our legal system and parliament can not retrospectively and unilaterally change a contract the crown entered into.

Apart from that - the small bunch of revoluzzers proposing to vote whether we want to honour the contract the crown signed or not does not have the numbers in parliament. Just compare - 11 ACT seats vs 110 decent and honest MP's who will follow legal principles.

Can you spot the larger number?

You clearly don't understand the principle of power separation in our western democracy neither the most basic legal principles.

You are an excellent example for why populism is so dangerous - people just give up their brains to follow the loudest shouter in their rabbit hole. Sure - too many populists can create a disgusting mess, but they never will solve any problem.

[jonu]

Sigh - so, you are proposing to disestablish our democratic and rule based system in order to follow the ugly, loud and shrill shouting crowd? Whats the next you propose to introduce - lynch justice?

Sounds like you, but lucky us - while NZ does not have a constitution, it still does have an independent judiciary. The idiocy you are proposing is inconsistent with our legal system and parliament can not retrospectively and unilaterally change a contract the crown entered into.

Apart from that - the small bunch of revoluzzers proposing to vote whether we want to honour the contract the crown signed or not does not have the numbers in parliament. Just compare - 11 ACT seats vs 110 decent and honest MP's who will follow legal principles.

Can you spot the larger number?

You clearly don't understand the principle of power separation in our western democracy neither the most basic legal principles.

You are an excellent example for why populism is so dangerous - people just give up their brains to follow the loudest shouter in their rabbit hole. Sure - too many populists can create a disgusting mess, but they never will solve any problem.

I haven't proposed anything. More comprehension issues.

It's a shame your fixation with populism wasn't a little more tuned to the skullduggery of the populist Ardern, your former paramour. Her woke populism has led to the backlash that is coming. Turns out selfies with the cool kids only works until the grownups showup.

[BlackPeter]

I haven't proposed anything. More comprehension issues.

It's a shame your fixation with populism wasn't a little more tuned to the skullduggery of the populist Ardern, your former paramour. Her woke populism has led to the backlash that is coming. Turns out selfies with the cool kids only works until the grownups showup.

Your memory seems to be as limited as your legal understanding ; I suggest you check my posts on Ardern and Labour before you keep spreading misinformation.

Based on the behaviour of our right wing trolls it feels however that NZ moved from the rain in the eaves. While I didn't particularly like most left wing posters either, they still had much higher standards and they acted based on facts instead of making things up.

Nothing worse than a bunch of bad winners ... (and no, I am not referring to the poster with this name ;

[jonu]

Your memory seems to be as limited as your legal understanding ; I suggest you check my posts on Ardern and Labour before you keep spreading misinformation.

Based on the behaviour of our right wing trolls it feels however that NZ moved from the rain in the eaves. While I didn't particularly like most left wing posters either, they still had much higher standards and they acted based on facts instead of making things up.

Nothing worse than a bunch of bad winners ... (and no, I am not referring to the poster with this name ;

How far back should we go with your love for Ardern? Before or after you came to your senses? At least you eventually saw the light!

[Daytr]

How far back should we go with your love for Ardern? Before or after you came to your senses? At least you eventually saw the light!

As I have said previously, your fixation / hatred of Ardern is concerning.
This is after all a Greens thread, but somehow again & again you turn the subject to your pet hate project Ardern.

So ACT want to relitigate the Treaty or in your words could consign the treaty to the bin of history.
A treaty the Crown has never honoured. It's very easy for the powerful majority to keep Maori in their place and ignore their obligations or even renege as you have suggested.
I didn't agree with co-governance, but much of the race baiting was purely about poor terminology.
Mighty Whitey is right huh?
Disgusting

[ithaka]

If two parties sign a contract, it is not possible for one of the signatories afterwards to just run a referendum whether they want to stick with their commitments, or whether they prefer to wiggle out - isn't it? Your understanding of law and order is sorely lacking.

It's important to understand that the proposed referendum is seeking clarification of the "Principles of the Treaty" which are a modern day reinterpretation of the original "Articles of the Treaty" which were signed in 1840. ACT is not proposing a referendum on the original signed Treaty document.

Two Treaties of Waitangi: The Articles Treaty and the Principles Treaty - by Elizabeth Rata who is a professor of education at the University of Auckland.

https://democracyproject.nz/2023/10/...ciples-treaty/

[BlackPeter]

It's important to understand that the proposed referendum is seeking clarification of the "Principles of the Treaty" which are a modern day reinterpretation of the original "Articles of the Treaty" which were signed in 1840. ACT is not proposing a referendum on the original signed Treaty document.

Two Treaties of Waitangi: The Articles Treaty and the Principles Treaty - by Elizabeth Rata who is a professor of education at the University of Auckland.

https://democracyproject.nz/2023/10/...ciples-treaty/

This is an interesting article ... and of course can a parliament change its own laws - be it by referendum or not - as long as is and stays compliant with the commitments the crown used to make.

But I guess this is the critical point. A referendum could only establish how one of the signatories (the crown) sees now its commitments according to the Treaty. It can't unilaterally change the interpretation of the 1840 document.

Latter could only be done by both signatories together and in agreement (which would be the ideal situation) or it could be done by the courts.

Anything else would only result in an endless court battle which the crown would lose (as we had related to unilateral law changes related to sea and foreshore legislation). The only winner would be the advocates - is this why ACT is proposing to bring our country into such a situation?

[jonu]

This is an interesting article ... and of course can a parliament change its own laws - be it by referendum or not - as long as is and stays compliant with the commitments the crown used to make.

But I guess this is the critical point. A referendum could only establish how one of the signatories (the crown) sees now its commitments according to the Treaty. It can't unilaterally change the interpretation of the 1840 document.

Latter could only be done by both signatories together and in agreement (which would be the ideal situation) or it could be done by the courts.

Anything else would only result in an endless court battle which the crown would lose (as we had related to unilateral law changes related to sea and foreshore legislation). The only winner would be the advocates - is this why ACT is proposing to bring our country into such a situation?

Radicals are currently reinterpreting the Treaty. Again, who wrote the thing? Both versions!

[BDL]

It's important to understand that the proposed referendum is seeking clarification of the "Principles of the Treaty" which are a modern day reinterpretation of the original "Articles of the Treaty" which were signed in 1840. ACT is not proposing a referendum on the original signed Treaty document.

Two Treaties of Waitangi: The Articles Treaty and the Principles Treaty - by Elizabeth Rata who is a professor of education at the University of Auckland.

https://democracyproject.nz/2023/10/...ciples-treaty/

This is long overdue as some maori "interpretations" are getting far removed from the simple, original treaty meaning.

Maori trying to "game" the treaty, to get more than everyone else, has to stop. It is dividing New Zealand.