|
|
Post by GO30 on Dec 17, 2022 7:34:02 GMT 12
Are you calling me racist because I don't agree with you? Nope, he's doing it because he's ignorant and just doing what everyone does theses days blames any and everything on some isum.
If only he listened to what the mayor said. He wants everyone to have equal rights not just one race. So as the Maori are so insistent in keeping alive their victim mentality he's said fine have your K thing but then everyone else is entitled to have there own thing as well.
So the Mayor is now being called a racist as he is calling for equal rights exactly, as the Treaty very clearly states, for everyone no matter what their race, sex, blaa blaa blaa are.
As a KDC rate payer I'd far prefer they get some fucking work done rather than sit there flapping their jaws about shit 99% of ratepayers don't give a flying fuck about.
As for those call him a racist, they are just making themselves look like selfish self entered dumbarse fuckwits.
|
|
|
|
Post by GO30 on Dec 17, 2022 7:44:36 GMT 12
You're just racial gas lighting now. The BBQ at Waitangi is not a cultural norm by an opppressed and disadvantaged race. Christian prayers before a meeting is neither cultural norm nor a normal activity carried out by Christian and nor are Christians an oppressed minority. So to answer your question directly, you cannot say Christian Prayers at the start of a council meeting because it is neither the norm or culturally accepted.If on the other hand you proposed the following context: Christians are a disadvantaged minority. Christians have been saying prayers at the beginning of meetings since Jesus was crucified It's part of the Christian Culture and that culture is protected by law. Council meetings have had Chirstian Prayers said at the beginning for the last 25yrs And now some white guy from a majority has come along and banned it. Then that would be discrimination. And if Christians were all from the same race, then it would be racismBut of course those facts don't apply to Christians. But they do apply to Maori. You seem to think there is a threshold of when racism kicks in. So sticking with the answer a question theme: What if the Mayor decided tomorrow to ban all Maori signage in council offices. Would that reach the threshold for Racism or is that also just a procedural matter? What if the Government decides to ban all Maori signs in the country. Does that make the threshold? What if the Government decides to ban the speaking of Maori in all Government buildings, after all, I am yet to meet a Maori that cannot speak English - Does that reach the threshold? Or is that also a procedural matter? If you go to Spotlight and I have seen them in some supermarkets, you can buy extra large straws.
As you are desperately grasping they will be far easier for you to catch. |
|
dp
Full Member
Posts: 135
|
Post by dp on Dec 17, 2022 8:07:50 GMT 12
Gee, I was one of the thousands of kids in the 60's that was converted from being left handed to being right handed.
When do I get my apology and payout?
|
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 17, 2022 8:23:40 GMT 12
Are you calling me racist because I don't agree with you? Nope, he's doing it because he's ignorant and just doing what everyone does theses days blames any and everything on some isum.
If only he listened to what the mayor said. He wants everyone to have equal rights not just one race. So as the Maori are so insistent in keeping alive their victim mentality he's said fine have your K thing but then everyone else is entitled to have there own thing as well.
So the Mayor is now being called a racist as he is calling for equal rights exactly, as the Treaty very clearly states, for everyone no matter what their race, sex, blaa blaa blaa are.
As a KDC rate payer I'd far prefer they get some fucking work done rather than sit there flapping their jaws about shit 99% of ratepayers don't give a flying fuck about.
As for those call him a racist, they are just making themselves look like selfish self entered dumbarse fuckwits.
You're coming in a bit late. That's the compromise he has now decided is OK after first outright banning it. White man forcing Maori to compromise to his way of doing things. I think that's still called colonization. Or also known as institutional racism. He only made that compromise because of the enormous public backlash to his original decision. |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 17, 2022 8:36:11 GMT 12
Gee, I was one of the thousands of kids in the 60's that was converted from being left handed to being right handed. When do I get my apology and payout? In this thread you're just racial gas lighting. By all means start a valid conversation about your treatment as a leftie. With all your white privilege you've got way more chance of getting a payout than any Maori does. Just don't compare your treatment to what Maori has suffered. |
|
|
|
Post by fish on Dec 17, 2022 9:44:05 GMT 12
Gee, I was one of the thousands of kids in the 60's that was converted from being left handed to being right handed. When do I get my apology and payout? In this thread you're just racial gas lighting. By all means start a valid conversation about your treatment as a leftie. With all your white privilege you've got way more chance of getting a payout than any Maori does. Just don't compare your treatment to what Maori has suffered. FuzzyDuck, you've used this term racial gas lighting a couple of times. Could explain what you mean by it? I have a vague understanding of what gas lighting means, but don't really get it in the context of racial gas lighting. I don't want to assume what you mean and we have some ding-dong when we have different interpretations of the meaning of a statement. As far as I can tell, it is a denial that the racism is happening. Taken from medical gas-lighting, there is nothing actually wrong with you? Which is basically the same as denying the Mayors actions are racist. |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 17, 2022 10:35:01 GMT 12
Without just taking a copy and paste off the Internet. I will try and do it in my own words.
Racial gaslighting is a form of verbal manipulation. It belittles the original complaint by comparing it to something else. Forcing the person who suffered the racism to think if what they suffered was actually racism.
Eg,
Black person says, 'I got kicked out of the pub because I was black'
White person says, 'are you sure it's cause you were black? I got kicked out last week because I was drunk'
Black person is manipulated to question if it was because of skin colour. So he has been racially gaslighted.
Eg,
person 1: 'black lives matter'
person 2: 'no, all lives matter'
Well of course all lives matter, but white people aren't being hunted down in the street and murdered by police at the same rate as black people.
person 1 is manipulated to question the validity of the black lives matter movement, because let's face it, all lives do matter.
In the op, were obviously talking about the systemic racism that Maori have suffered. DP compares that to his treatment of leftie conversion. The language he uses is manipulative. The reader is manipulated to think, that this treatment is just normal everyone suffers it and we should accept it all as normal behaviour and move on.
Had he said something in this thread like: "I grew up being converted to a righty. The treatment I received was disgusting, nothing like what maori experienced, but I should be compensated for that." that would not be gaslighting.
If he started a whole new thread and said "I grew up being converted to a righty. The treatment I received was disgusting, I should be compensated" then that would also be fine.
But in the context of a discussion about Maori racism the way he said it was gas-lighting. The language was very muchly, well this happened to me, I got nothing, so they should suck it up.
While the reality is both actions are terrible. But neither action makes the other right or minimises the effect. Dps experience doesn't minimise the effect of racism on Maori and most certainly the sistemic racism that maori have suffered does not minimise the effect of leftie conversion that do suffered.
DPs experience being indoctrinated to a right handed child is a terrible action that the Government took. And he should be compensated for any harm that caused him. But the fact that this compensation hasn't been forthcoming, isn't a reason to belittle the systemic racism that Maori suffer or begrudge them the compensation they have received.
I am sure if you googled "what is racial gaslighting" you'd find far better examples and explanations.
|
|
|
|
Post by fish on Dec 17, 2022 12:13:28 GMT 12
Without just taking a copy and paste off the Internet. I will try and do it in my own words. Racial gaslighting is a form of verbal manipulation. It belittles the original complaint by comparing it to something else. Forcing the person who suffered the racism to think if what they suffered was actually racism. Eg, Black person says, 'I got kicked out of the pub because I was black' White person says, 'are you sure it's cause you were black? I got kicked out last week because I was drunk' Black person is manipulated to question if it was because of skin colour. So he has been racially gaslighted. Eg, person 1: 'black lives matter' person 2: 'no, all lives matter' Well of course all lives matter, but white people aren't being hunted down in the street and murdered by police at the same rate as black people. person 1 is manipulated to question the validity of the black lives matter movement, because let's face it, all lives do matter. In the op, were obviously talking about the systemic racism that Maori have suffered. DP compares that to his treatment of leftie conversion. The language he uses is manipulative. The reader is manipulated to think, that this treatment is just normal everyone suffers it and we should accept it all as normal behaviour and move on. Had he said something in this thread like: "I grew up being converted to a righty. The treatment I received was disgusting, nothing like what maori experienced, but I should be compensated for that." that would not be gaslighting. If he started a whole new thread and said "I grew up being converted to a righty. The treatment I received was disgusting, I should be compensated" then that would also be fine. But in the context of a discussion about Maori racism the way he said it was gas-lighting. The language was very muchly, well this happened to me, I got nothing, so they should suck it up. While the reality is both actions are terrible. But neither action makes the other right or minimises the effect. Dps experience doesn't minimise the effect of racism on Maori and most certainly the sistemic racism that maori have suffered does not minimise the effect of leftie conversion that do suffered. DPs experience being indoctrinated to a right handed child is a terrible action that the Government took. And he should be compensated for any harm that caused him. But the fact that this compensation hasn't been forthcoming, isn't a reason to belittle the systemic racism that Maori suffer or begrudge them the compensation they have received. I am sure if you googled "what is racial gaslighting" you'd find far better examples and explanations. Thanks for the explanation. Nice to have a name for it. Put everything into a category. Kind of makes it a little hard to discuss the issue and compare it to other forms of discrimination though. |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 17, 2022 12:35:01 GMT 12
There is a related issue in my kids schools (and all schools as far as I can tell). In classrooms they are saying 4 karakia a day. Now, I thought schools were supposed to be secular. That is why they can't have religious studies any more. Or worse, Bible instruction. Having Christianity in schools caused all sorts of issues. My boy currently thinks the world was created by a tree pushing his parents apart. I've discussed the school karakia issues with a teacher friend, and they are all just super pro Te Reo, mainly because the MoE says they have to be. She thought the majority of their karakia were not to gods. I'm not sure that is the entire point. They say one to give thanks for their lunch. i.e. to some nebulus being for providing them food. They really need to be saying thanks to their mother for making their fucking lunch. That is where the food comes from. I want my kids to learn personal responsibility. Study hard, get a good job so you can afford to by nutritious and yummy food. Don't expect to be given food by saying some mumbo-jumbo... Damn muzled, you've triggered me.... I wanted to loop back round on this. As it is an interesting conversation. The traditional karakia that is used to open and close ceremonies is not a Christian prayer, it is a ritual chant, a set form of words to state or make effective a ritual activity. It's not religious in nature. New Zealand courts have said that religion involves belief in a supernatural being, thing or principle as well as canons of conduct that give effect to that belief. Traditional Karakia is spiritual not religious. While certainly Maori hold beliefs that the tops of mountains are their ancestors and that someone fished the south island out of the sea, I believe these are spiritual beliefs not religious ones. So, depending on your definition of religion, karakia can be defined as religious observations for the purposes of the Education Act. Or, depending on your definition of religion, karakia are not religious and won’t count for the purposes of the Act. On either reading, karakia are still cultural practices. Karakia that are a cultural ritual without religion, ought to be entirely safe for use within the primary school environment. But culturally bastardised prayers which are masquerading as karakia, fall foul of the law. Any Karakia which is actually a Christian prayer spoken in Maori is is not secular and your children should be able to opt out of this. |
|
|
|
Post by muzled on Dec 17, 2022 13:19:56 GMT 12
DM - if the lady had asked to say the same prayer in say, Spanish, and got told, no she couldn't, would that be racist? What I want to know is what you call it? That's a good question. My first thought was that I'd call it brave. But I like fish's explanation of 'prodedural'. That's exactly how I view it. Nothing more, nothing less. IMO it was done in a disrespectful way. But ultimately councils should exist to get shit done. Not to fark around with prayers, be they Maori or any other religion. Religion and their sky wizards can far koff, the less of it in the world the better. And it was a religious karakia if my understanding is correct. |
|
|
|
Post by muzled on Dec 17, 2022 13:23:11 GMT 12
I wanted to loop back round on this. As it is an interesting conversation. The traditional karakia that is used to open and close ceremonies is not a Christian prayer, it is a ritual chant, a set form of words to state or make effective a ritual activity. It's not religious in nature. New Zealand courts have said that religion involves belief in a supernatural being, thing or principle as well as canons of conduct that give effect to that belief. Traditional Karakia is spiritual not religious. While certainly Maori hold beliefs that the tops of mountains are their ancestors and that someone fished the south island out of the sea, I believe these are spiritual beliefs not religious ones. So, depending on your definition of religion, karakia can be defined as religious observations for the purposes of the Education Act. Or, depending on your definition of religion, karakia are not religious and won’t count for the purposes of the Act. On either reading, karakia are still cultural practices. Karakia that are a cultural ritual without religion, ought to be entirely safe for use within the primary school environment. But culturally bastardised prayers which are masquerading as karakia, fall foul of the law. Any Karakia which is actually a Christian prayer spoken in Maori is is not secular and your children should be able to opt out of this. My understanding was the requested karakia was religious. (I stand to be corrected on that) Was reading about it the other day and the religious karakia were introduced post 1900 from memory. |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 17, 2022 13:44:26 GMT 12
I wanted to loop back round on this. As it is an interesting conversation. The traditional karakia that is used to open and close ceremonies is not a Christian prayer, it is a ritual chant, a set form of words to state or make effective a ritual activity. It's not religious in nature. New Zealand courts have said that religion involves belief in a supernatural being, thing or principle as well as canons of conduct that give effect to that belief. Traditional Karakia is spiritual not religious. While certainly Maori hold beliefs that the tops of mountains are their ancestors and that someone fished the south island out of the sea, I believe these are spiritual beliefs not religious ones. So, depending on your definition of religion, karakia can be defined as religious observations for the purposes of the Education Act. Or, depending on your definition of religion, karakia are not religious and won’t count for the purposes of the Act. On either reading, karakia are still cultural practices. Karakia that are a cultural ritual without religion, ought to be entirely safe for use within the primary school environment. But culturally bastardised prayers which are masquerading as karakia, fall foul of the law. Any Karakia which is actually a Christian prayer spoken in Maori is is not secular and your children should be able to opt out of this. My understanding was the requested karakia was religious. (I stand to be corrected on that) Was reading about it the other day and the religious karakia were introduced post 1900 from memory. I don't know if it was a religious karakia or not. In all fairness Maori have been saying religious Karakia since Christianity arrived. Which was before the signing of the Treaty. The question of if religious Karakia should or should not be treated as taonga and given protection under the treaty is outside my ability to comprehend. I know treaty is to protect all maori rights now and in the future. I would therefore assume that as the maori culture evolves the treaty would cover that evolved culture. But that is an assumption... |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 17, 2022 14:50:27 GMT 12
As a KDC rate payer I'd far prefer they get some fucking work done rather than sit there flapping their jaws about shit 99% of ratepayers don't give a flying fuck about. Mayors are not elected to dictate. Their most important role is to provide positive leadership in bringing their diverse councillors and communities together so they can work effectively on the full range of issues facing them. What is astonishing, is that he seemed unaware, that refusing karakia at the start of the meeting, something which is becoming a cultural practice, would cause controversy and more. Where has he been the last 20 years? Your mayor has sabotaged any progress that could of been made for the next 3 years. Parts of council and the community will now be actively working against him. Your rates are going towards the funding of managing the fallout from this astonishing decision. I suspect his denial of Maori cultural input at the start of his meeting is rooted in deeper antipathies which will probably be shared by others in the area. Bottom line is it's not his role to parade his prejudices after the election and leave voters, in particular mana whenua, angry and bewildered. Karakia before meetings are a simple expression of cultural respect. Pakeha are still largely ignorant of the colonial history of Aotearoa and the impact on Maori. There are a lot of good books available and I’d recommend “The Great War for New Zealand” by Vincent O’Malley if you want a good place to start. |
|
|
|
Post by fish on Dec 17, 2022 17:14:32 GMT 12
It is completely lost on me why people expect the Council to be cultural ambassadors.
I've always expected the Council to administer the local infrastructure and look after / enhance public amenities.
To say this issue is a distraction is an understatement.
|
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 17, 2022 17:26:58 GMT 12
It is completely lost on me why people expect the Council to be cultural ambassadors. I've always expected the Council to administer the local infrastructure and look after / enhance public amenities. To say this issue is a distraction is an understatement. Because it's there job. It's one of the reasons they exist. Local Government Act 2002, section 10 (1) To promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future. |
|
