Let me get this straight, ACT are such easily triggered snowflakes they want to cancel the entire Human Rights commission because they said something about NZ that ACT didn’t like?
Isn’t ACT the supposed champions of free speech?
If the HRC talk about a thread of white supremacy in our history that is entwined in our culture, then maybe launch an argument against that, but no, ACT will deplatform and cancel the HRC instead because hearing about white people being racist is so terrible for ACT that they must censor it altogether?
It’s funny watching champions of free speech argue why they need to censor a Government Agency.
Hilariously David Seymour delivered his entire speech at Waitangi in Te Reo because in woke land, it’s more important that you speak Te Reo than what you actually say!
So ACT are playing culture wars at Waitangi while demanding censorship of anything that suggests white people are racist.
Good times, fun times.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
Obviously he’s trying to ramp up the Culture War, just like all the other neoliberal politicians. That doesn’t mean his initial statement isn’t correct, though — the idea that the country is still white supremacist or institutionally racist is complete nonsense.
The labour movement needs to clearly denounce Critical Race Theory for what it is: a racial chauvanist, anti-scientific, bourgeois nationalist ideology. It is not left-wing, and nobody should be allowed to claim that it is.
100%Kristoff
HE’S trying the ramp up the culture war?
Really! What a strange alternate universe you live in!
David is just stating a truth that may be uncomfortable for the left – that the HRC is part of the problem, and certainly not the solution.
(Other than the Maori Party, ACT has the highest proportion of Maori of any party.)
There must be a faction that support ACT who are no longer sure of which way is up or which way is down. Bitching about Te Reo appearing everywhere and being heard on the airwaves and now their little race baiting great hope, is speaking in Te Reo. That must be like Anakin Skywalker joining the Sith.
As for “freedom of speech is not freedom from consequence” what a ridiculous argument to support the utterly hypocritical stance taken by Seymour. How is it “free” to be able to say what you want if you are threatened with job loss?
Paul Hunt is first and foremost a public servant. He didn’t make these comments to a private friend group.
He made them as head of the human rights commission.
As an individual the HRC Commisioner can say anything he likes.
As a goverment organisation calling all whites racist is absolutely unacceptable.
Imagine the reaction if he said the Maori Party are all racist because their web site stated that Maori have superior genes
T+S, can you please identify where the HRC says “all whites are racist”.
Did he actually say that? A thread is All White folk?
Paul Hunt is first and foremost a public servant. He didn’t make these comments to a private friend group.
He made them as head of the human rights commission.
Freedom of Speech for individuals, but as someone who is the Head of the Human Rights Commission, there are surely restrictions (given he is a public servant) on what he can say.
Seymour is making statements as head of a political party. Surely there are restrictions in what Seymour is allowed to say?
What has Seymour said that in your opinion he shouldn’t have said Bert
All of this…
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/david-seymour-warns-universal-rights-replaced-by-rights-determined-by-race/BSJV52WBLFD7XNR5XYXJNOUCT4/
Now tell me what did the HRC say that he shouldn’t have anker?
Statistics would seem to give a lot if credibility to the HRC’s statement. Seymour demonstrates a very thin inmature political skin by calling for sacking instead of debate.
By analogy, David Seymour’s claim that the HRC needs to be abolished shows he is unfit for office and reinforces the need to abolish parliament.
What a clown.
10% of the population of New Zealand agree with him.
Not a very big number and in fact it was a lot lower until he ramped up racism a few years ago.
It’s been interesting to read the commentary and see who the commenters think ACT’s supporters are.
Same voter base as NZF, red necks.
Funny in some places seeing ACT supporters saying they’re ditching them because Seymour isn’t strident enough!
Hypocrisy David, do not speak of free speech again
The HRC should invite Seymour to look at the wider work they do and it’s importance in protecting individual rights and liberty. Problem with Seymour is he get’s way more attention than is warranted by his wacky and context, and reality, free policy statements.
Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse Seymour turns his hand to philosophy today. Someone please arrange an intervention for the poor man.
Actually I find Seymour a psychological hypocrite. During his 9 years as part of a National party coalition government, alongside the Maori and United future parties, not once did I hear of the co governance arrangements with the Maori party.
He is no philosophist, more psychopath.
Let’s say that it is true that “White supremacy” (whatever that means) is woven into the fabric of New Zealand society: so what? That is exactly what happens when nations are established and laws are encoded. Look at China and it has Chinese supremacy woven into its fabric; so too Japan and Japanese supremacy; or Israel and Jewish supremacy; or . Any nation sets up and maintains its institutions to favour the people who set them up. I’d imagine pre-colonial New Zealand was designed established along Maori supremacist lines.
In fact, being a “White society” is what attracts immigrants in the first place. Facts always expose false rhetoric and, given the large number of non-White people who have decided to freely come to live in New Zealand (and by implication, rejecting their own nation or society as, in their eyes, inferior), they obviously don’t consider New Zealander to be a “White supremacist” society wherein they will be oppressed. If they did think this, then why would they come here and submit themselves to our rampant bigotry? Are they masochists or ignorant? Doubtful. They come here because they want a better life in a better place.
Seems like you are the one that got triggered.
Of course Act = bad. Thank god we have the two main parties who enact progressive ideology that has worked so well here and in California, New York and Illinois with their record homelessness, rampant crime and infrastructure meltdowns.
No ACT = Worse than bad.
ACT has been one of the main party’s…next.
California, New York and Illinois have “great” gun control laws, so gun violence is now almost unheard of in those states.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/11/biden-administration-commends-new-assault-weapon-ban-in-illinois
Try Scandinavian countries if you want to see how progressive political systems function.
Lol @ Matthew saying Seymour trained in “Muldoon ideology”
You quite possibly couldn’t find two politicians diametrically opposed.. must be new to politics, ah well we all gotta start somewhere.
Comments are closed.