I was a damningly critical voice over Dame Susan Devoy’s appointment as the Race Relations Commissioner, but her righteous condemnation of Jamie Whyte’s farcical statement that Maori somehow have the same legal privilege of French Aristocracy is such a courageous stance I have to retreat from that criticism and give respect where it is due.
“Equating Maori New Zealanders to French aristocrats, who were murdered because of their privilege, is a grotesque and inflammatory statement,”
“Accusations of Maori privilege are not borne out by Maori socio-economic statistics.”
“Treating everyone exactly the same, as Dr Whyte was arguing for, will not necessarily make everyone exactly the same and anyone who thinks so is incredibly naive”.
This is the first time for me that she has earned the title ‘Dame’. She has used her voice to stand up for those who don’t have the same power, and that is to be admired.
The vileness of Whyte’s argument is disappointingly sad from a politician who promised to keep away from ACTs redneck dog whistling racist ways, and yet here he is not only flirting for the racist vote, he is now demanding the removal of the entire role of the Race Relations Commissioner.
Just pause on that and allow the enormity of it to sink in. If Whyte has his way, not only will he abolish the Maori seats, he will remove the Race Relations Commissioner. How would such an astoundingly racist move committed without the acceptance or agreement of the indigenous peoples who use those rights and see their up holding as vital for the peace of the country going to react? I would suggest fairly violently.
If you thought Maori were angry over the Foreshore and Seabed confiscation by Labour, just imagine how they will react to Jamie Whyte not only abolishing their Maori electorates, but ending the Race Relations Commissioner they would immediately go to to complain over the loss of their electorate seats.
So what Mr Whyte is actually going to end up generating by these policy is a civil war?
Whyte’s absurdity is the reason why we need a Race Relations Commissioner, to step in and tell politicians when they have crossed the line.
Whyte is claiming Maori have the same legal privilege as French Aristocracy, what did he expect from Devoy? Cake?
And as ignorant , cruel and best of all , loony this is ? Look into the deep , dark shadows ? Down in there , were there is decay and disease ? See those Golems ? roger douglas et al . Still there . Slithering around in the dim dross that what was once our country . As unimaginably insane as anything creepy jamie whyte can cough up , those old fiends , who fucked us over , stole our shit and created an entire sub class are still there , seeping toxins like the lost drum of paraquat into the mountain stream .
Thank God the ACT creatures are so outwardly mad , we can see them coming now . But that’s not enough for me . I want to see those bastards in prison . jamie whyte should shut his yap , get a real job and hope to Christ he goes un noticed .
Key go’s on about unholy alliances but he’s willing to risk setting race relations back years buy jumping into bed with that nutter
Well said. ACT are on 0.5% for a reason yet Mr Key would have these views in parliament for the sake of his own skin.
Listened to Dr Whyte on the radio this afternoon and even Larry Williams was dumbfounded, and that is saying something!
This twat might have been born in Auckland, but that is not Auckland’s fault. He sounds like a jumped up Pom dictating crypto-philosophy speak to colonials. To back up his ludicrous claims about the RRC position being one which must create race conflict to survive, he said “there have been essays.”
Do us all a favour and fark off back to England Dr Jamie Whyte.
ACT was founded to promote a false ideology, extremist neoliberalism and radical free market voodoo economics, which it still pursues. As if that was not bad enough, they have now taken on the mantle of the most redneck party in politics, which actually is not exactly compatible with their neoliberalism. They are now just mealy-mouthed opportunists, scratching around in the political sewers, for a cute gimmick in a desperate attempt to ward off the oblivion that is about to, deservedly, overtake them.
Which is absolutely and utterly not libertarian, so I think Jamie Whyte does not even know what he is
He has effectively proved just exactly why we need a Race Relations Commissioner. Idiot.
*18th century French aristocracy, but indeed it is good to see Dame Susan doing the job properly. No doubt Collins is flummoxed and regretting the decision to appoint her already.
At last we have some clarification of why Whyte thought incest was a pretty good idea: the rest of his ideas are on the whole a good deal worse.
It also clarifies the natural alliance with the Key government: like Bill’s ludicrous economic policies, like the asset thefts, the do-nothing housing policies and not even Gerry-built Christchurch, like the Afghan campaign and Novopay, Whyte is just fucking stupid. Which makes him a natural member of #Teamkey.
@ Stu Munro, You are so right that Whyte is just fucking stupid. He exemplifies that level of the self appointed “intelligentsia” who believe their own bullshit logic. Maybe if he were to become an unemployed forestry worker of Kawerau or some other economically blighted spot his logic might take on a more realistic basis. All I hear is Jamie Marie Antoinette….pavlova anybody?
Thank you for the support – but please don’t besmirch the humble pav with the desperate racist rhetoric of neo-liberalism – I make them often for my friends here in Korea – and I suspect that Whyte means to break eggs without producing anything whatsoever.
In the perfect libertarian world (which, incidentally, is libertarian left, as far as I am concerned) Jamie Whyte would be right, we would not need any of this stuff.
We do not, however, live in a perfect libertarian world, so we do.
Wait, what are we patting Devoy on the back for? This country is violating the following Human Rights laws; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article 1, Article 2, Article 3, Article 4, Article 8, Article 9, Article 10, Article 11(2), Article 12, Article 17(2), Article 18, Article 19, Article 20(1)&(2), Article 21(1), Article 22, Article 23(1),(2)&(3), Article 25(1), Article 26(2), and Article 28. The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990; Section 8, Section 9, Section 14, Section 15 and Section 16. And yet all the Human Rights Commission do with their time is deal with PETTY racism. How about we deal with the root causes of racism? How about we deal with all these Human Rights abuses that our government is guilty of? What the fuck is wrong with this country?!
What the fuck is wrong with this country?
Well, quite a lot actually, but where do you want to start?
I reckon we should set up a committee and go from there.
How are the people going to react to Whyte’s wash?
Well the Epsom ones won’t change from doing what they’re being told – they’ll vote for the ACT candidate.
I love the hypocritical people like Whyte and his party with their talk about privilege and unequal rights when they determinedly try to establish a world where some have the privilege. Them
The Maori seats are racist. They represent an electoral privilege based solely on race. Maori have exactly the same enfranchise rights as non-maori by voting in general electorates, and that’s exactly how it should be.
Ignorant twat – Maori seats are self-selected and perfectly neutral. Even you can go on the Maori roll if you choose. It doesn’t give you another vote.
It’s true that they tend to concentrate a community of interest – but so do the geographical borders of other seats. Only when you protest more strenuously about the geographical issues will you begin to redeem your racist position on Maori seats.
“It doesn’t give you another vote.”
No, it segregates voting on the basis of race. That’s apartheid, and should not be permissable in a modern democracy with proportional representation.
Apartheid was imposed by the state and enforced by police, paramilitaries, and secret police including a campaign of assassinating black leaders.
While you provide strong evidence that the gene pool would be improved by assassinating RWNJ, thus far Maori have not chosen that path for the redress of historic grievances and glaring contemporary disadvantages.
The seats are more like catholic schools than apartheid: if you don’t like them you’re not obliged to be part of them. Such an option was not available to the oppressed masses in South Africa. Find something else to whine about.
So in effect, Anonymous ACT Supporter Intrinsicvalue, you demand that Maori voters be assimilated into the general roll?
Which is what pakeha attempted to do to Maori since their arrival in this country; assimilate Maori into their culture – whether they wanted it or not. That included banning Maori children from speaking Te Reo at school, backed up by corporal punishment.
Are you suggesting we just have one official language in this country as well?
What you’re demanding isn’t equal rights at all. You’re using equal rights to mask enforced assimilation by the dominant culture.
You just need to be more honest about it. Call it what it is; enforced assimilation.
By the way, you have no more right to be on the Maori Roll than you do to vote in another electorate you don’t live in.
You might call that “geographic apartheid”.
“Ignorant twat – Maori seats are self-selected and perfectly neutral. Even you can go on the Maori roll if you choose”
https://www.govt.nz/browse/parliament-and-politics/voting-and-elections/register-for-the-maori-electoral-roll/
I am not of Maori descent, so it would seem that I cannot be on the Maori Roll if I choose to
You may have Maori descent – and if you claim to have it you can go on the roll. No-one will DNA test you.
Which makes it even more of a farce.
@ Peter Matthews – neither can you vote in my electorate if you don’t live here.
To quote the Race Relations Commissioner as quoted in the article you have just commented on and don’t appear to have read:
“Accusations of Maori privilege are not borne out by Maori socio-economic statistics.”
That doesn’t make the accusations false. All it proves is that the privilege hasn’t helped, which those of us opposed to it could have told you from the beginning.
What “privilege” might that be, Anonymous ACT Supporter Intrinsicvalue? Lower health outcomes? Reduced mortality life expectancy? Higher rates of poverty, imprisonment, lower wages, and other economic disparities? The theft of land through illegal confiscations? Illegal imprisonment? Illegal search and seizures?
The “privilege” you speak of (but which you cannot define) is an illusion; a myth from racist pakeha who find their own privileged positions under threat as Maori reassert their rights.
You must feel very threatened by a minority who have been alienated, disenfranchised, impoverished; and had their culture all by subsumed by the dominant colonial culture.
Perhaps because of my own Eastern European background; the occupation of my parents homeland by Russia; land alienated and borders re-drawn, I have a pretty good idea what Maori have gone through.
So you can keep your faux-notions of “apartheid” to yourself. You are speaking from a privileged position of cultural and racial dominance and your crocodile tears calling for “equality” make you out to be a hypocrite threatened by change.
Perhaps you have a right to feel threatened. Much like the racial segregationists of southern states of America, you and your kind are destined for the text books of Aotearoa New Zealand’s history – to be found in the index under “r” for redundant.
Read Crunchtimes post again Frank, then you’ll get the context of my comment.
Oh, and I don’t feel the slightest bit threatened by Maori. In fact I admire them hugely. They are innovative, creative and entrepreneurial. They are a vibrant part of this country I call home. I just don’t believe anyone benefits from pandering to minorities, no matter who they are. Equal opportunity for all.
Your version of “equal opportunity” is steeped in land grabs and the alienation of Maori assets by colonising forces.
Your “equal opportunity” is from the privileged basis of someone who benefitted from those land grabs.
So your “equal opportunity” suits you nicely since it’s on your terms.
The impoverishment of this country’s indigenous people makes your comments self-serving crap.
I absolutely agree, but the point you are missing & which I think Devoy was trying to make, is that having the same rights doesn’t mean people will always exercise them.
Maori as a people seem to be completely disenfranchised with NZ politics, with all governments. This is reflected in the low turnout in the Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election last year.
Whilst I don’t think it has worked (hence why I think there is some merit to be found in Whyte’s comments), I think the intention of establishing Maori seats & the Maori party was to try & bridge that disconnect between Maori & politics.
It was primarily to give Maori an empathetic voice in parliament which they would not otherwise have…
Let’s not forget pakeha took their lands, their lively-hoods and in some cases even their lives away from them. It continued for 150 plus years. Eventually it left Maori so far behind that it became necessary to create a special body that would help them to retrieve at least some of what they lost. I refer to the Waitangi Tribunal. It’s job is still not finished. Hence the need for continuing assistance.
Can you speak Maori. Can Jamie Whyte speak Maori. You take it for granted that we all understand each other because we share the English Language. That is a major misconception. The imposition of a foreign language and culture is racist by definition.Have you ever tried to make yourself understood in a foreign country where english is not the main language.
Learn to speak Maori or at least spend some time in a Maori community before you go spouting on about the racism. of Maori Electorates
Whyte says “A” the left say “B” (and neither the twain shall meet). Between the two is critical thinking. I wouldn’t write Whyte off; he isn’t that dumb.
Meanwhile keep biffing rocks at each other.
Nobody is “biffing rocks”, Martyn’s post and the quote from Dame Devoy therein are well thought out, logical reasoned replies. Critical thinking.
Which you clearly lack the ability to discern.
It seems the right & left are embellishing/going to the extreme to make their point:
Whyte said:
Maori are legally privileged in New Zealand today, just as the Aristocracy were legally privileged in pre-revolutionary France.
The most obvious example is the persistence of the Maori electoral roll and Maori Seats, which guarantee parliamentary representation on the basis of race. This mistake is now being repeated in the Auckland Super City, where council decisions must be run past a Maori advisory board…….how much weight your opinion carries depends on your race….if you are Maori, you have a say on these matters that others lack.”
Devoy said:
““Equating Maori New Zealanders to French aristocrats, who were murdered because of their privilege, is a grotesque and inflammatory statement,”
“Accusations of Maori privilege are not borne out by Maori socio-economic statistics.”
“Treating everyone exactly the same, as Dr Whyte was arguing for, will not necessarily make everyone exactly the same and anyone who thinks so is incredibly naive”.
From this I see the most pertinent point being that Whyte, in an inflammatory & academic snobbish kind of way is saying it is wrong to have a political party or seats appointed on the basis of race or any kind of preferential treatment on the basis of race. That this hinders their growth as a race, people & culture.
Devoy – in a melodramatic way – is saying that Whyte is being idealistic, that just because there might be a level playing field in theory, reality can be very different.
The fact is, while I personally think there is merit to some aspects of Whyte’s comments, this is a massively convoluted issue & now is just not the time to be bringing it up.
I think Whyte was a fool for even going down this path & Devoy was just much of a fool for playing into it.
These issues are decades old & are not going to be resolved before the election & Whyte would better off just putting down his copy of Nietzsche & getting a reality check by hanging out with the youth groups, police, ambulance crews & a food banks or the Sallies for a few weeks or going up to Waitiki Landing or Kapowairua (Spirit Bay)……philosophy looks a little different when it meets up with real life.
We have some massive issues in this country & Whyte just seems to be intent on shifting the focus to the side-show, playing on the stereotypes & people’s tendency to assume, to pass judgement, rather than looking for real solutions.
Taken out of context, your comments make sense. But this is New Zealand, there is a context. Whyte is trying to pull the same stunt as Brash did back in 2005, uncovering the deep vein of racism and winning votes with some ignorant feeling of “fairness”.
Devoy was right to mark it as grotesque.
Yes this is NZ & the context you refer to includes the low turn out in last year’s by-election, the low turn out in all general elections & overrepresentation by Maori in all the wrong statistics….despite the introduction of Maori seats & the formation of the Maori Party.
This is why Hone split & guess what – his party isn’t a race based party, it is a policy based party & one I would argue has been far more successful in terms of breaking the disconnect between Maori & politics.
Whyte’s motives for rising this issue are questionable, but that doesn’t mean to say his comment is without merit.
Whyte’s reference to the French aristocracy however, wasn’t grotesque – Devoy put an emphasis on his comments that did not exist, it was just nonsensical.
Had he made the connection between the deals that go on behind closed doors between the rich & ALL our major political parties then yes, I would be inclined to agree, but to connect Maori & the French goes to show he has spent very little time with his nose outside a book.
Maybe he got put in his place sometime by one of those urbane, wealthy and well educated maori, and he didn’t like it.
Unsol – “Maori are legally privileged in New Zealand today, just as the Aristocracy were legally privileged in pre-revolutionary France.”
Even if that were true, it seems that “legal privilege” is more a work of fiction than anything based in reality.
Considering the vast tracts of land alienated from Maori by colonising settler forces, and the subsequent loss of economic sovereignty and potential earning power – I’d say the notion of “Maori privilege” is in the “Fantasy” section of library bookshelves, between “Many Fairy Tales To Read your Kids At Bedtime” and “Mary Had A Little Lamb & Other Nursery Rhymes”…
Here’s the ‘irony’ of “Maori privilege” (whatever that entails); the colonising forces alienated most of their lands; carried out acts that today would be called war crimes (eg, Parihaka); took control of other natural assets; and suppressed their language and culture.
In return, pakeha society prided itself on having “excellent race relations”; turned them into cannon fodder for land wars in Europe and elsewhere; and made pretty postcards and dolls featuring brown boys and girls.
After all that (and much, much more), pakeha try to gloss over our dirty little history (which was not taught us at High School – though I can recite the dates and circumstances of the first shipment of frozen sheepmeat from Port Chalmers in 1882*) by insisting with righteous indignation,
“But hey! Maori are legally privileged! What about that!?”
Yeah. “Legally privileged”. Seven seats in Parliament. Out of 120 seats.
Even there, the “legal privilege” of seven seats out of 120 ensures that those “brown folk don’t get too uppity”.
I can hear your retort,
“Well, Frank, Maori can get elected into Parliament in the General Roll through the mainstream parties.”
Yup. They can indeed. And then their voice is constrained by Party discipline.
Said parties dominated by pakeha.
Your call, Unsol.
(* Disclaimer: Ok, I cheated with the date, I had to use Google, as I wasn’t sure if it was 1882, 1884, or 1888.)
As someone else said applying the evidence based approach to stupidity this is an issue of Whyte trash incest.
Jamie Whyte makes Colin Craig look perfectly normal.
Having separate Maori representation is not race based, actually. What it is and why should remain is a representation and an acknowledgement that Maori culture is actually different to white European.
Hey what about this then, we scrap all the non-Maori seats and have the whole government kaupapa based, not white European.
Now lets hear you all squeal
FYI I am 100% Ngati Pakeha and admit to having had to give why we have separate Maori representation in this country, a lot of thought to understand why it belongs here and why I stick up for it
So. He is a white spremist?
Every sprem is sacred
Whyte now attacking Devoy calling for her resignation – http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11301977
I think the positive thing about this episode could be that Susan Devoy is now experiencing white racism first hand directed at her. I think it will deepen her understanding of her role and quite likely make her more committed to it.
Jamie Whyte is correct, Maori are racially priviledged in our society and have been for years.
However the bigger issue is… Does this do them any good? Obviously not, otherwise they would not be over represented in the worst statistics (poverty,crime,health, unemployment etc etc). However the left think they can get a different result by continuing to do the same things. (throwing money and special rights at the problem).
As Einstein said, “Doing the same things but expecting a different result is the definition of insanity”
@ Mike – “Jamie Whyte is correct, Maori are racially priviledged in our society and have been for years. ”
Would you care to fill in the blanks and tell us precisely how Maori are “racially privileged in our society”?
Or are we expected to know instinctively what you mean, Mike.
Please. Enlighten us.
Then you can invoke Einstein.
At least Devoy is actually doing something now.I wondered if she even knew what her job actually entailed.
Comments are closed.