Could the woke do to Christchurch solidarity what they did to the Pride Parade?

32
11

Could the woke do to Christchurch solidarity what they did to the Pride Parade?

Maybe…

Christchurch vigil or political rally? Why some people walked out of Auckland Domain event

Was it a vigil, a political rally – or both?

Speeches calling out racism, colonialism and white supremacy at an Auckland vigil for victims of the Christchurch mosque attacks had some attendees leaving early, saying it was “too soon” for such discussions.

But organisers and speakers have defended what some called a “political” tone of the Jummah Remembrance vigil held at Auckland Domain on Friday, saying they were “hard truths” Aotearoa needed to address.

Thousands attended the vigil, where official speakers strongly challenged the rallying cry that last week’s atrocity that killed 50 Muslim worshippers and injured dozens more was “not us”.

Muslim and tāngata whenua speakers covered experiences of everyday racism and violence they face, and spoke to New Zealand’s white settler history and colonial violence.

Sharon Hawke, of Ngāti Whātua Orakei, said hatred existed in New Zealand.

“White hatred is its foundation.”

She spoke of atrocities committed against Māori throughout New Zealand’s history, including at Parihaka, and even Okahu Bay in Auckland in the 1950s, where the Auckland Council burned down her hapū’s village.

Israa Falah of the Auckland Muslim community said the Christchurch massacre was the result of the normalisation of xenophobia.

People should call out racism when they saw it, she said.

Zainab Mussa attended the vigil with her two young children but they left early partly because of the “uncomfortable tone”.

“Even being non Pākehā, I did feel uncomfortable at times with the continued mentions of white extremism and white terrorism.”

While she said she understood the need for a conversation about racism and white supremacy, she felt a week after the attacks was too soon.

“I think there was too much mention of ‘white’ and colonial times. To me that wasn’t a remembrance of the victims and not the way to push for unity.”

Another attendee said they left early because they wanted the vigil to be more focused on the victims.

“No one disagrees the conversations need to be had, just not last night.

“That vigil was important to Aucklanders. It was important to me, to collectively show respect and love to the victims and the Muslim community, to weep quietly at the insanity and savagery of it, to be human and together in that response.”

Graham Adams takes the danger of the blame game further in his Listener column

But while the Prime Minister has risen above politicising the slaughter by stating “This is not us”, others have decided “No, this really is us.”

Instead of looking for the good in our communities as Ardern has done, some commentators have raced to identify any utterance or action that could be construed as being even mildly racist — presumably on the grounds that a good crisis shouldn’t go to waste in furthering a political narrative.

That narrative at times seems to want to portray many of us — and particularly those perceived to be on the right — as somehow complicit in being enablers of an assassin.

Some commentators are gleeful that the National Party has removed the online petition opposing the UN Global Migration Compact as if objecting to it is inherently racist. While some objections to it are undoubtedly for racist reasons, opposing it is a perfectly reasonable political position to take if you believe, as some do, that it could eventually put our immigration policy into the hands of a supra-national body.

A photo of Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hosking holding up a T-shirt with a symbol of a forefinger and thumb curved in a symbol of approbation — that happens to also be a white supremacist gesture — has been taken down from a BNZ site after complaints. The Spinoff filed this information under the title: “The Quiet Deletion of the Islamophobic Archives” even though Hosking’s employer, NZME, “assured us that neither Mike Hosking or his team were aware the symbol used held an alternative meaning”. 

North & South has been singled out as being racist for an excellent article in 2016 by the magazine’s deputy editor, Joanna Wane, simply because the cover line asked whether New Zealanders should fear radical Islam. As it happens, Wane’s approach was cleared with members of the Muslim community but it would have been an entirely reasonable question to have asked even without that endorsement. 

So the list goes on. And it is clearly not a reaction confined to New Zealand. As British writer Maajid Nawaz — a self-confessed former extreme Islamist — points out on The Daily Beast: “A mere day after 50 of my fellow Muslims were so publicly and tragically killed, while the blood was still wet and the bodies remained unburied… the ideologues had circled like vultures. Opportunistic Islamist and far-left extremists began calling for a purge of people whose politics they disagree with, and started publishing McCarthyite lists of personae non grata to target.”

Among our public figures, Greens co-leader Marama Davidson has been the most inflammatory in her attempts to spread the blame far beyond the killer by linking the massacres to colonialism.

At a vigil in Auckland on Saturday, she told the crowd: “New Zealand was founded on the theft of land, language and identity of indigenous people. This land we are standing on is land we were violently removed from to uphold the same agenda that killed the people in the mosques yesterday.”

Then there is the persistent claim that last week’s violence occurred partly because New Zealand has a substratum of casual racism that allegedly “normalises” such depravity. According to one schematic pyramid circulating among the woke on the internet, the spectrum of hate includes “racist jokes, denial of white privilege, a Eurocentric school curriculum, anti-immigration policies” and yes, “cultural appropriation” (which presumably includes wearing a sombrero to a fancy dress party).

By this rationale, anyone who has ever argued that the nation’s infrastructure simply can’t cope with the number of people pouring into our country is automatically an enabler of hate by advocating “anti-immigration policies” — even though Ardern herself, who has been beatified in the media, promised to reduce the influx in the 2017 election campaign.

However, the nadir of the casual racism argument has to be the claim by a Herald reporter: “That friend who puts on a fake Indian accent? That’s what a racist looks like. Racism is a violation of human rights. Do not let that happen in your life and go unpunished.” 

Most people will remain deeply sceptical of a causal link between private, idle mockery and mass slaughter even as they acknowledge that they could often do much better in their dealings with, and attitudes towards, minorities.

Long-standing National MP Gerry Brownlee eloquently summed up in Parliament what many people will conclude in reflecting on their approach to others: “I think we have become more aware of our own actions, our own omissions, and our own oversights, and aware too that they are more pronounced at the more unattractive edge of what is us.

“We should not engage in self-doubt though, but recognise that small change in each of us can make a big difference.” 

In short, we could be kinder and gentler and work to make New Zealand a better nation yet without feeling somehow responsible for a massacre.

The real danger in politicising the attacks and spreading the blame far beyond the perpetrator, of course, is that we open the door to the same approach against Muslims if there are reprisals on New Zealanders here or elsewhere — as Isis spokesman Abu Hassan al-Muhajir has demanded

Moderate Muslims would be caught unfairly in the backlash, even if they have no connection with or sympathy for jihadists but simply because they share the same religion. Will those who have politicised the Christchurch massacres have any credibility in trying to depoliticise a reprisal if such a terrible thing occurs?

Brendan O’Neill has a good analysis on Spiked of the double standard at work in the aftermath of the Christchurch mosque attacks and of what he describes as “the most cynical exploitations of mass murder in recent years”. He argues that after Islamist attacks Westerners are always encouraged to put politics aside and simply grieve whereas after this white supremacist slaughter we are being asked to “get political”. 

…attempting to connect the violence on Friday with right wing opinions, the defence of free speech or concerns about immigration and conflate that with all white people as racist murderers is a sure fire way of eroding the solidarity in sorrow that has bound many.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

The vast, vast majority of NZers found what happened on Friday as a disgraceful act of despicable hate, we need to find common ground between us instead of blaming each other if we want to build from this moment.

While I think attempting to connect the violence in Christchurch with garden variety domestic bigotry lacks credibility from the point of view of Tarrant’s own manifesto and its obvious international strain of white supremacy, that doesn’t mean we don’t need to address racism in NZ. As part of the healing process required from this atrocity, NZ must take a long hard reflective look at our own behaviour in contributing to a climate of fear and pain towards everyone in the NZ whanau.

How do we do that? I think following Jacinda’s example of inclusion is the most important step because I think after the mess woke identity politics activists visited upon the Pride parade, we don’t need that result with the solidarity Christchurch has generated.

There is more common ground between us than divides us. Let us seize upon that and work to heal rather than divide and seperate. The very Muslim Community who have been so horribly attacked have shown that level of grace, the least we can do is mirror that.

 

32 COMMENTS

  1. Now we conservatives see war as a necessary evil. Dictators and despots have risen through out history and needed to be stopped. For human beings to be fighting over petty quibbles as we diversify our cities is incredibly stupid because as we increase our footprint, as we move beyond our boarders we begin attracting attention from beyond our boarders. There for as we are seen to be known to the rest of the world we have to rapidly increase our defensive capabilities. We really can’t spend to much time killing one an other so if we are going to be a global trading nation the Green Party’s Defence policy as it stands is going to have to be jettison from the coalition government.

    Now thats easier said than done because currently there’re a lot of good arguments for nationalism and there are a lot of good arguments for globalism and there’re a lot of good arguments against globalization, especially in today’s social and political climate, there isn’t really a vehicle or a platform in New Zealand that could possible create the type of global unity that we all want but especially the type the The Green Party wants and that we all deserve.

    So now that we are entering the 4th industrial revolution, people all over the world are seeing there jobs and well being taken over by the double edge sword that is progress and automation, which if we are honest is the root cause of all this growing unrest. The only thing we can really hope for is that our fellow coalition partners reject tribalism and also make decision based on rational instead of emotions because when Europeans first started raising Māori villages us Māori only survived because of how far imperial logistics lanes across oceans were, and when Māori tribes from around Bay of Plenty went to reinforce ally’s at Rangiriri it was colonial marines that cut them off before reaching Rangiriri. And lastly when the Pacific Fleet retook the Pacific from Imperial Japan in WW2 it was Admiral Nimitz that took it back. The takeaway being that sea is really important to an Island Nation.

    So if we are going to be a global trading nation and paint a giant target on our backs then you’ve got to make sure that New Zealanders are ready for the threats that will come. We have to be unified.

      • Youre referencing RT News, a RUSSIAN govt propaganda mouthpiece to lecture US about free speech vs censorship??

        you’ve missed the irony there Red Buzzard

        It’d be like the Cinese govt govt telling us how to relate to our muslim community

        Or Trump lecturing how to behave around women and not grab their genitals

        • MJOLNIR: “Youre referencing RT News, a RUSSIAN govt propaganda mouthpiece to lecture US about free speech vs censorship??”

          I point out to you that Russia is a democracy, along with concomitant freedoms of speech. Were that not the case, you would not hear as much critique from Russians of its government as you do. It has much more vigorous public political debate than we have here, unfortunately for us. There are TV programmes featuring guests with competing political perspectives. Imagine if we had such a thing in NZ! Instead, we have only the egregious “reality” shows imported from overseas.

          I hope that you’re not reading/watching those overseas government propaganda mouthpieces BBC, The Guardian, CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT, Al Jazeera. No good can possibly come of that.

          I’d add that, if you want to know what’s going on in the world, go to RT. Forget about local sites. They’re useless.

          When the news of the ChCh shootings first started to trickle through on RNZ very soon after the event, I went to RT. And – predictably and reliably – the news was already on its website. That was before the police had nabbed the suspect, even.

          • “I point out to you that Russia is a democracy, along with concomitant freedoms of speech.”

            Rubbish

            Tell that to Alexei Navalny and he’d laugh in your face!!!

            • MJOLNIR: “Rubbish. Tell that to Alexei Navalny and he’d laugh in your face!!!”

              As I suspected: you’ve got your information on Russia from those US/UK government propaganda mouthpieces I listed above. Surely you’ve noticed the increasing restrictions on freedom of speech in both polities since the 9/11 attacks? These so-called news outlets broadcast and print the official line of their respective governments. Including anti-Russian propaganda.

              Remember, were it not for political freedoms in Russia, Navalny wouldn’t be able to do what he does, and you would not know who he is. His support is minuscule.

              Though his policies differ, he’s more or less the Russian equivalent of Colin Craig: lots of (mostly western) press attention, but bugger-all public support.

              Navalny would indeed assure you that there is no freedom of speech, very probably during an appearance on federal television.

              Russian liberals in general will propound at length on the lack of freedom of speech, right at the time they’re exercising it. They are stupefyingly dishonest, and not much liked by ordinary Russians; liberals’ noisy support for terrorism against their fellow citizens does not help either.

              • “Remember, were it not for political freedoms in Russia, Navalny wouldn’t be able to do what he does, and you would not know who he is. His support is minuscule.”

                Well, thats probably not helped by Putin having maximum exposure if Russian media while opposition are bareky given airtime

                Also not helped that Navalny has been arrested several times on trumped up bogus charges. Those convictions mean he cant contest elections personally

                Hes been locked out of the democratic process as well as denied the same campaign exposure as Putin enjoys

                Convenient huh??

                “Though his policies differ, he’s more or less the Russian equivalent of Colin Craig: lots of (mostly western) press attention, but bugger-all public support”

                How would you know hes the Russian equivalent to colin craig?? Why would you even make such a slur unless its to demolish the rep of any opponant to Putin??

                You dont know the guy and you dont live there. But you have the same opinion of him as most people do of Trump

                “Russian liberals in general will propound at length on the lack of freedom of speech, right at the time they’re exercising it. They are stupefyingly dishonest, and not much liked by ordinary Russians; liberals’ noisy support for terrorism against their fellow citizens does not help either”

                The same liberals who advocate for free speech??

                That puts you in a bit of a bind then, doesnt it

                • MJOLNIR: “…while opposition are bareky given airtime”

                  Oh dear. It’s clear that you really have no idea about the Russian political environment. Nor would you, if you don’t speak or read Russian, and your sources are Western msm. It’s clear that you’ve made no attempt to read alternative views, yet there are plenty available on the internet.

                  “Hes been locked out of the democratic process….”

                  No. He hasn’t. He just isn’t popular with Russians in general.

                  “How would you know hes the Russian equivalent to colin craig??”

                  Did you not read what I wrote? I compared him to Craig in the sense that he has considerable media exposure but bugger-all public support. Do please try to respond to what people actually write.

                  “You dont know the guy and you dont live there.”

                  Heh! Welcome to the world of political commentary that isn’t Western propaganda.

                  “The same liberals who advocate for free speech??”

                  Oh dear: it looks as if either you didn’t read what I wrote, or you didn’t understand it. The point I was making is that liberals witter on at length about the lack of free speech, and the fact that they’re able to do so, for instance in political debates on federal TV, is testament to the fact that they actually do have free speech. Were there no freedom of speech, they wouldn’t have the public platforms currently available to them, of which they’re able to take advantage.

                  Please do stop with this there-is-no-free-speech-in-Russia schtick. It’s simply not true and your pursuit of it is foolish and pointless.

              • These are some of Navalny’s policies –

                “One of Navalny’s primary focuses during the campaign is improving the economy. His more specific economic proposals include instituting a minimum wage, lowering prices of apartments and reducing bureaucracy of home construction, making healthcare and education free, lowering taxes for many citizens, taxing the gains from privatization, decentralization of financial management and increase in local governance, increasing transparency in state-owned firms, implementing work visas for Central Asian migrants coming into the country for work, and increasing economic cooperation with western European states. He also wants to collect higher taxes from oligarchs while lowering taxes on small-time entrepreneurs in order to lessen income inequality.”

                Sounds damned good to me

                I’d vote for that

                • MJOLNIR: “These are some of Navalny’s policies…”

                  A mix of things the actual government is already doing. And doing better than a dim-witted petty criminal like Navalny ever would. Along with moronic ideas like increasing trade with Western Europe (the result would be Europe dumping its goods on the Russian market and not reciprocating). Europe is in economic decline anyway – the big opportunities are in Asia; the government is already pursuing them. His only real policy is capitulation to the US in all things.

                  And the fact that you are shilling for him is a reminder that he is more popular among foreigners than he will ever be in his own country.

                  “I’d vote for that”

                  Say what? He’s an Atlanticist and a neoliberal. Aren’t you a lefty? That being so, I seriously doubt that you’d vote for him.

                  An observation from a member of this household: “Wasted effort with the blogosphere commenters who won’t listen to any Russian source that doesn’t validate their idiotic beliefs.”

                  A reasonable summation, in my view.

    • David Stone: “Marama might have blown it with this.”

      My view as well: the Green Party shedding votes every time she opens her mouth. She and Golriz Ghahraman need to be a great deal more judicious, both in what they say and how they say it.

      I don’t know how the Green Party machinery works, but I’d have thought that, if it has the equivalent of Party grandees, such people would have pulled both women aside and urged a greater degree of diplomacy. Especially right now.

      • “I’d have thought that, if it has the equivalent of Party grandees, such people would have pulled both women aside”

        Yup can’t have uppity women speaking their minds can we?? After all, men are assertive, women are stroppy, bossy, etc, etc

        No sexism here folks, nothing to see , move along

        • MJOLNIR: “Yup can’t have uppity women speaking their minds can we?? After all, men are assertive, women are stroppy, bossy, etc, etc”

          What? Did you read Martyn’s post at all? Or that of Chris Trotter on a similar theme?

          It has nothing at all to do with their being women. It has to do with their making inflammatory statements and politicising a mass slaughter. This is a very foolish move on their part, as Graham Adams notes:

          “The real danger in politicising the attacks and spreading the blame far beyond the perpetrator, of course, is that we open the door to the same approach against Muslims if there are reprisals on New Zealanders here or elsewhere — as Isis spokesman Abu Hassan al-Muhajir has demanded.

          Moderate Muslims would be caught unfairly in the backlash, even if they have no connection with or sympathy for jihadists but simply because they share the same religion. Will those who have politicised the Christchurch massacres have any credibility in trying to depoliticise a reprisal if such a terrible thing occurs?”

          Moreover, if these women desire to drive many ordinary pakeha citizens, along with sundry white immigrants, into the arms of the right wing, they’re going the correct way about it. And we need more of that like we need toothache.

  2. Weird that most of the Muslim world have praised NZ as having such an incredible response to the massacre.

    But as usual the usual suspects want to take an event and bring it back to their personal anti white (generally anti Pakeha) views and experiences.

    If it had been a Muslim or Maori or Non white who committed the atrosity, would the political commentators be rallying around and saying that all muslims and Maori and non whites had a problem??? Nope because that would be racism!

    If the woke point to a country that is much more tolerant of race than NZ in terms of racism then maybe they should mention it. Maybe the woke should have the refugees be taken off the plane and put into the more capable hands (sarcasm) of a CPP official https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_issues_in_China

    Or https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html

    Or the modern day apartheid in India with the castes systems.
    https://www.redressonline.com/2014/03/gender-and-caste-discrimination-in-india/

    Acid attacks in the UK, processing refugees on Islands in OZ, setting buses full of school children on fire in Italy…. racial crimes or discrimination are all around the world.

    It’s basically a joke to be saying how racist NZ is when compared to surrounding countries. The woke need to get out more as well as get a grip on world reality!

    It was only a matter of time with our Laissez-faire tolerance and indifference of any checks into immigration and visitor permits here that a terrorist or lone wolf massacre would happen.

    Now it has happened are the woke interested in stopping it, nope they are going after the domestic infractions even more while not worrying about more people who might have the intention of hate crimes coming here to live!

    Nor do they see any issues with importing of drugs that are creating massive social harm, or growing frauds against NZ. Instead they lobby to keep drug smugglers in NZ!

    But love (sarcasm) how the government went after the fraudulent roofers with a vengeance though.

    NZ police and government know how to ignore the big stuff and worry about the small infractions to a T!
    http://www.yourdestinationnow.com/2019/01/british-gypsy-family-will-be-deported.html

    Luckily our neoliberal political system can continue on while the woke worry about domestic micro aggressions or visitors not paying for meals they deport, instead people coming to NZ with serious racist or patriarchal views, serious social harm intentions to NZ via drug crimes, wide spread frauds on labour and goods and the intention to train here to commit hate crimes!

    • SAVENZ: “If it had been a Muslim or Maori or Non white who committed the atrosity, would the political commentators be rallying around and saying that all muslims and Maori and non whites had a problem??? Nope because that would be racism!”

      Exactly. I agree with your views in this comment.

      A significant problem here and elsewhere in the world is the semantic expansion of the term “racism” to encompass pretty much anything someone says that someone else doesn’t like. It’s become a reductio ad absurdum, an epithet designed to squelch debate and to shut people up.

      And yes, whites – and in this country, pakeha – can have the racism epithet chucked at them, yet it isn’t used about Maori or other brown people.

      When I was a young adult fighting against apartheid, we knew that it was a racist system. As were pre-civil rights governments in the US. Back then, racism applied to the governing arrangements of a country, not to what people say to or about each other.

      People may well be prejudiced, bigoted or xenophobic. But that isn’t racist. We’re a groupish species: bias in favour of people who look like us, speak our language, share our culture, is part of what it is to be human. And there’s nothing wrong with it. Expecting otherwise is unrealistic and a counsel of perfection.

      • “People may well be prejudiced, bigoted or xenophobic. But that isn’t racist. ”

        The thing about that comment D’esterre is you dont have the self awareness to realise how utterly ridiculous it sounds

        Racism IS prejudiced, bigotry and xenophobia & vice versa. What else would you call it FFS!! How do you think people of colour would react to your statement??

        For someone who *claims* she marched against the 81 Springbok Tour you show a depressing lack of insight

        • MJOLNIR: “Racism IS prejudiced, bigotry and xenophobia & vice versa.”

          That’s the whole point. It isn’t. And it wasn’t when I was young. We knew what racism was. And wasn’t. Back then, the term “racist” applied to the governmental arrangements of various polities. When racial discrimination is built into legislation, that’s when particular ethnic groups really feel the effects. Fortunately, we don’t have racist legislation in NZ: ergo, this isn’t a racist society.

          On the other hand, if you want to see racist legislation in action, look at how Australian immigration is treating NZers at present. I’d characterise that as racist.

          I urge you to read SAVENZ’s comment on this topic. Depending upon where this gets posted, that comment is just below here. Or just above. Read it, anyway.

          ‘What else would you call it FFS!!”

          What you just called it: bigotry and xenophobia. Prejudice. Bias.

          “How do you think people of colour would react to your statement??”

          And here we have the nub of the problem: in virtue of what would you suppose that only brown people can be the targets of bigotry etc? Or racism? You need to do a bit more reading. Or travel. Or both.

          “For someone who *claims* she marched against the 81 Springbok Tour….”

          What’s this “she” business? Be careful about the assumptions you’re making here.

      • I agree 100% D’ESTERRE. In my view the word ‘racist’ has used by neoliberal interests to help their agenda, because if we are all the ‘same’ then it does not matter what nationality the individuals are that own the assets of local communities and run the countries are. It becomes about money.

        If you don’t agree with that then MSM and others labels it xenophobic and racist. So they have changed the meaning of the terms to help their own ends.

        Sadly the dimwitted woke have bought into that discourse and are now helping spread world poverty and fueling racial/social disharmony, by aiding power interests with their MSM/multinational driven commentaries and woke views.

        • As shown by the Green MP decision to grant the Chinese company increased NZ water rights for virtually free in NZ to be sent overseas and bottled into plastic polluting bottles! And the pay off is apparently 60 paltry jobs and at any wage and only applies when they are at full bottling capacity (so if they never reach it then, I guess they don’t have to do anything they said)…

          At the same time zero political interest or intervention of the university of Auckland laying off or cutting down MORE jobs, 100 – 114 jobs

          https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/06/auckland-university-confirms-library-closures-despite-huge-protests.html

          and burning the books https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/354765/library-closures-prompt-fears-university-of-auckland-will-burn-books

          …apparently finances were the reason for that but wait, the Auckland Vice-Chancellor’s annual salary of more than $710,000 is 2nd highest in the public sector….

          Something is horribly wrong in NZ with our politicians logic and hypocrisy and the more woke the politicians, councils and civil servants become, the more disliked they are from their voters, and the less likely a left leaning government will survive, in fact is very hard to identify what Labour and Greens are doing that is left in terms of saving high paid jobs for locals in this country!

        • SAVENZ: “In my view the word ‘racist’ has used by neoliberal interests to help their agenda, because if we are all the ‘same’ then it does not matter what nationality the individuals are that own the assets of local communities and run the countries are. It becomes about money.”

          A fair assessment; That’s certainly how it looks to those of us who’ve been around the clock a time or two, and who’ve done a bit of reading.

          “If you don’t agree with that then MSM and others labels it xenophobic and racist. So they have changed the meaning of the terms to help their own ends.”

          Yup. To the great disadvantage of so many worldwide.

  3. “attempting to connect the violence on Friday with right wing opinions”

    They are all enablers Martyn. The likes of right wing radio shock jocks may not be in the same camp as the far right white supremacists, but they sure as hell pave the way for them.

    I’ve been away from The Daily blog too long. I didn’t know it had become an apologystic site for the likes of Plunket, Garner, Hosking, Leighton Smith etc. If you want to see what right wing opinions look likem, check out the TWITTER thread for Sean Plunket. Every right wing nutter in the country must be commenting and click ‘like’ with every reprehensible comment. Few are countering those hate messages.

  4. Like many kiwis I’ve been deeply disturbed by the words & actions of those who have taken advantage of this massacre to further their own angry grievance fueled agendas e.g. the brown racist desecration of Catholic church in Gisborne.

    The opportunistic politicisation of this tragedy by such people is simply adding fuel to the fire & is downright despicable.

    Over the last two days I’ve written a couple of posts which have been published here & I’ve tried my best to be conciliatory & objective but unfortunately, due to the circumstances & my simmering anger this has not been 100% successful. It has been therapeutic though, so I decided to leave things be for a while & leave my keyboard in peace.

    Then, silly me, I just read this post about the inflammatory ‘hate speech’ things that have been said yesterday in Auckland & now the old white radical loser in me is absolutely fuming. Dangerous stuff.

    If this kind of hysterical victim mentality stuff keeps being bandied around by a noisy, resentful & hate filled minority, then more & more fence sitting white NZer’s will begin to see the extreme right as a very attractive option.

    This is the stuff that race wars are made of so these dickheads should stop poking the bear & pull their bloody heads in before things get really nasty.

    Okay old fella, peace now, cool down & take a breather for a bit.

  5. FFS, if we were totally honest, there is a bit of a prejudicial, potentially ‘racist’ person in all of us, no matter whether white, brown, yellow, black, purple or whatsoever.

    I have traveled the world, and I have come across prejudice and racist views in many places, it is not the ‘privilege’ of white person to deserve to be called ‘racist’, although in at least some cases that may well be such an attitude.

    But saying this kind of stuff is of course not fitting the narrative being created now. Maybe white New Zealanders are meant to feel like Germans, eternally ‘guilty’ for what a past generation, or part thereof did, under Nazi indoctrination and dictatorial rule, there to the Jews, gypsies and the likes.

    Pakeha are supposed to be guilty forever, for the oppression and also killings of Maori, as some seem to try and suggest, but what are you going to create with that? A backlash at some point in time.

    The blame game is convenient for some.

    Are we not talking about one immigrated Australian with extreme views, and the determination to commit an atrocity in a place where it would shock the most?

    Do we not read into this a bit too much, when talking about New Zealand???

    • Spot on Marc. I know full well the effect the Zionist/Israeli holocaust guilt trip industry has had on baby boomer Germans & it’s still going on. A similar thing is happening here. The other problem with this is Jewish people have a blind spot when it comes to those of their own who were involved in someway in the persecution of their own people. Maori have a similar blind spot when it comes to the supportive, greedy & vengeance seeking roles some of them played in the colonisation process. History is a bitch.

  6. Xenophobia:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia

    Surely not something New Zealand may have experienced alone.

    I witness much less of that here than in many other countries with different ethnic populations, in Auckland it may be here and there in some individuals, but few would even dare express it here.

    It seems some are exploiting the terror attack for their own ulterior motives now.

    • The argument against free speech being that if every one said what they thought then the streets would run red with blood.

      Which is why I believe that it’s not a proper debate unless there is blood in it. People of all ages should be able to think for themselves. It’s way more dangerous handing that level of control over to a goer meant or corporation for obvious reasons. One reason is millions died in The Great Wars to protect these ideals.

  7. I attended the vigil. It was not what I expected, and some of what was said was uncomfortable to listen to. I identify as a pakeha kiwi although I wasn’t born here. But I listened with an open mind because I want to part of the solution. I acknowledge the anger from those who experience the everyday casual racism that we live with and accept as normal. I am sad for those who have experienced far worse, and I hope we can start to do better. Hopefully, if nothing else, we could empathise with the speakers and think carefully about what we can each do to make this world kinder, fairer and more equitable for everyone.

Comments are closed.