ACT go full blown triggered snowflake by demanding Human Rights Commission be cancelled + Seymour’s Te Reo prank

By
Martyn Bradbury
-
105
2498

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.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

105 COMMENTS

  1. Free speech isn’t freedom from consequences. If you’re representing a ministry, company or other organization, and you make a statement, whilst representing the group, that is deemed offensive or inappropriate, you should expect consequences and that may involve you losing that position.

    • Yeah right.
      David Seymour has never had a chance to understand how the world works. A privileged upbringing followed by a few years stuffing his head with Laplace Transforms, Z & H (no red dwarf intended) transforms and 2nd order differential equations and then basically straight into the alternative universe inhabited by our MPs.

      • However you want to define the concept “privilege,” it’s not so much privilege in itself that you disavow: what you disavow is that, according to your personal assessment, the “wrong” people have privilege. Like all progressivism or leftism (or whatever label you want to give it), it is an inherently particularist morality dressed up as being universal – so you end up with slogans like “Fight the power and end oppression! (but give us the power and the ability to oppress).” I can respect the Will to Power underlying it all, but the detestable aspect is that it is hidden under a guise of holding a moral high ground.

        If it comes down to someone having to have privilege, (i.e. my group or another group) and because given the nature of privilege, not everyone can have it, then I’ll go with my group having it every time. I’d be stupid to give it away due to completely disingenuous moral blackmail, wouldn’t I? I’m certainly not going to fall for the lie that the non-privileged don’t want anything more than a change of respective positions.

    • ” David Seymour will make a fine deputy prime minister & finance minister. ”
      I agree completely. As an example of how well a democracy can still work even when the creepiest of the twerking, sock-puppet psycho’s to their dungeon masters, in the instance dirty little roger douglas, can get to having control over us all which is far too close for comfort to being in a position of power where they can exert their deep emotional rage for being cursed with small penises.
      Nearly forty years of the con job that’s neoliberalism is forty one years too many. douglas should be in prison and history might bare witness that seymour should be in the cell next to it.

      • I’ve just found this via Boingboing.net.
        Looks like an interesting read to me. I only hope there’s something in it that you don’t already know.
        “Mean Streets” by Don Mitchell explores capitalism, private property, and homelessness
        https://boingboing.net/2023/02/06/mean-streets-by-don-mitchell-explores-capitalism-private-property-and-homelessness.html
        Publisher’s summary:
        The problem of homelessness in America underpins the definition of an American city: what it is, who it is for, what it does, and why it matters. And the problem of the American city is epitomized in public space. Mean Streets offers, in a single, sustained argument, a theory of the social and economic logic behind the historical development, evolution, and especially the persistence of homelessness in the contemporary American city. By updating and revisiting thirty years of research and thinking on this subject, Don Mitchell explores the conditions that produce and sustain homelessness and how its persistence relates to the way capital works in the urban built environment. He also addresses the historical and social origins that created the boundary between public and private. Consequently, he unpacks the structure, meaning, and governance of urban public space and its uses.”
        I take the gist to mean that homelessness is a mechanism to enable vast, private wealth creation. In other words, you got a mortgage, your arse is owned. Until the Earthquakes, I lived in a cute wee rented cottage on Beachville Road in Redcliffs in Ch Ch. We were right on the ocean and it was lovely. Earthquake= fucked it=business fucked too= had to move.
        But I did wonder why it was such an expensive spot. The sandy, salt water logged section had a market value of $750K back then and the entire package could have sold for $1.2 – $1.4 million. So. Why that money in real-real land?
        The small two bedroom cottage was about $10 K to $20 K in materials. Piles, wall framing, flooring, insulation, windows, roof framing, roofing, wiring, plumbing, nails, screws, Pot at smoko, sarnies, etc.
        The land had a market value was $750,000.00. To put that in scale, we bought a 3000 acre sheep station for $80,000 back in 1971. I know, I know… I know that was fifty years ago so I know what you’re thinking but never the less.
        The land value on Beachville Road, in real-real land, was worth what could be earned from it, surely. Sheep? You’d graze five maybe. Cattle? Two and you’d have to bring in feed. Dope? The soil would be too cold and salty so it’d be a hot house operation so about $20K + court costs and bail. Rent? We got a good deal at $280 a week. The deal was I kept the place looking nice so the owner could drive his old in-care mum past for a look-see now and then which I found to be a pleasure. The whole deal in Real-Real Land was worth about fuck all. Say about $40- 50 K
        So? Lets be generous and deduct the Real-Real Land price of $50K from $1.4 million. That’s = $1,395,000.00. That’s in Real-Real Land the La-La Land banking ‘industry’ try to make us believe is a false economy.
        In short, banking is a scam and we’re fools and you know what’s said about a fool and his or her money? Yep. They’re soon parted.
        Now, here’s the other pot hole in the journey to understanding our false economy. We vote for, and pay well, people who tell us they’re our politicians. And then the moment they [get] into power, they behave in precisely the opposite way. Suddenly, they’re the Banksters Besties and we must bare witness to populations of people growing under motorways or in shop door ways or in cars. And yet! And yet, we keep buying into the bullshit the banks keep telling us while our politicians either look the other way, quit or become part of the problem.
        I guess that means is we all live in a false reality within a false economy pursuing a false future for all the wrong reasons. Doesn’t it just make you want to leap out of bed and, with a cheery whistle on your lips then giggle your way to work, to work and work and work?

  3. 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.

      • @Jason:
        I’m not convinced the trade unions even understand what they are dealing with. The Labour Party may force them to go along with it.

    • 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.)

  4. Act party supporters are mostly Maori-hating bashing bigots it’s not that difficult to brainwash their wrapped knuckle brains claiming to be victims of Maori aspirations

      • “at least two of his caucus are Maori…”

        Does that mean that there are more who are not prepared to say, or god forbid, admit that they are Maori?

    • Not advocating any of their policies, yet in identitarian terms Seymour and Winston are both Māori as were National’s Bridges and Bennett. Labour’s leadership pales by comparison.

      Are you implying, as Willie Jackson and Kelvin Davis did, that only Māori who think in the ‘correct’ way are real Māori?

      See how shallow your arguments are and a hostage to fortune you become when you reduced politics to race or identity and a simplistic black and white worldview. Woke are meant to be all in on non-binary, obviously not when it comes to thinking.

      • Dave McCain racism
        /ˈreɪsɪz(ə)m/
        Learn to pronounce
        noun
        prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

  5. 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?

    • Trying telling your boss that they are a “insert appropriate expletive here” and if they try to fire you, just explain that freedom of speech means you can say whatever you like, to whom ever with fear of sanction, and see how that works out.

      Freedom of speech is the right to speak, write, and share ideas and opinions without facing punishment from the government. Only that.

      No one, especially not Martyn, is required to listen, publish or agree with anything you say, and may take whatever legal means they have available to respond to your “free speech”. So ACT can say what they like, but you get to decide whether you vote for them or not.

      • Talking about a work place in comparison to publicly funded entities like the HRC is not comparing apples with apples. David Seymour is not the boss of the HRC and if you are congratulating him for saying he would get rid of public entities that say things he doesn’t like well that’s a sad state of affairs

        • David Seymour is allowed to say that, however a representative of a specific organisation such as the HRC, would need to make very clear he was making the statement as a private individual and was in no way representing the views of the organisation they are currently representing, before making such comments.

          • Why is David allowed to say that, he is a representative of a specific organization…Act, did all his party agree before making such a comment?

            • Yes there are restrictions on what Seymour can say. If he said something that clearly violated ACT Party policies or rules, then the the party could sanction him. Likewise if he said something defamatory outside of parliamentary privilege, then the defamed party could sue him. And if he says something you don’t like or find offensive, the you can cry to yourself & not vote for the party that is going to take New Zealand into a brighter, more inclusive future. It’s your choice.

    • 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.

  6. as I always say the right are as easily triggered snowflakes of the cancel culture…they just want to cancel different things

  7. 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

  8. Feeble, Martyn. Seymour’s been a consistent critic of the HRC, his proposal to abolish it goes back at least a year and isn’t just about Hunt’s latest idiotic utterance.

      • Neoliberalism is, by definition, fascist capitalism. NOT, as it should be within a democracy, being SOCIALIST capitalism, as ours once was. That’s what gave AO/NZ the third highest standard of living rating in the world back in the 1970’s.
        All of our political ‘parties’ are neoliberal, either directly or indirectly.
        Our politics are not for us, but for the Them. Nine multi billionaires and four now foreign owned but were once AO/NZ banks literally embezzling billions of our hard earned dollars out of our country annually in net profits. Surely, you must understand that the recent scandal/swindle combo that was our house price rise scam was merely a con to profit the foreign owned banks. All your now grossly inflated mortgages and interests goes off-shore. There’s only five million of us living on a massive market garden who derives its cash income from exports and the penny has still yet to drop on most of you as to just how fucked you’re being by the likes of seymour and his odious snuggle buddy, roger douglas, without the kissing.
        A rats never retire from being rats.
        “In 1993 Douglas and Derek Quigley founded the Association of Consumers and Taxpayers (the forerunner of the ACT New Zealand party) as a means to further his policy ideas. Douglas returned to Parliament as an ACT backbencher in 2008 before retiring in 2011. ”
        Based upon clear evidence douglas, and now seymour, laid down fiscal motorways upon which public money was traveled to private destinations which has seen our society become a dire, concentration camp of people searching for their money while the neoliberal fascists laugh at our attempts to find it from their gun-turret mansions surrounded by a moat full of all bought and paid for MSM fed logical fallacy crocodiles.
        @ Michael Robinson, that prick above? He’s your enemy. If seymour gets in? It’ll be the likes of him who’s fault it is. NOT YOURS. You can only work with what you know, and trust me, you’ll only ever be allowed to know fuck all and to be honest, the facts speak for themselves.

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

      • Fair question PPII. Any review of the statistics for Health, Education, Poverty, Justice, and Employment shows a disproportionate percentage of Māori in the disadvantage category. This surely gives a level of credibility to the HRC conclusion that there is a level of racism in NZ society that needs debating. The report states that “93 percent, (of Māori) reporting that racism affected them “on a daily basis”. If this is a true indication of the lived experience of Māori we have a serious problem. We should be debating the reasons for the disproportionate representation in statistics and the daily issues faced by Māori – not trying to sack the messenger. Unfortunately, from past experience, I am sure that any debate around these figures quickly identifies a level of underlying racism existing within Aotearoa’s conciseness.

        • You have these statistics and then assume it is to do with racism. You need better evidence than just a reckons

          • Anker, that’s exactly what the debate needs to be about -not pillorying the messenger who dared to suggest a level of racism is embedded within our society.

        • Ok, so you’re in the “inequality of outcome = racism” brigade. Firstly, I don’t think anyone in their right mind would deny there is racism in NZ. I’ve lived in countries outside the Anglosphere, and I saw evidence of prejudice and racism there too. It’s quite possibly part of the human condition, so I’m not sure what Hunt thinks hes contributing with his preaching. Where I part company with you (and Hunt) is in the attribution of inequalities of outcome to racism. If NZ is a white supremacist country, why do Asians excel in our education system, and in business too? They outdo “white” Kiwis. And in some sports too – lndians and other subcontinentals cleaned up at the awards in my cricket club last year.

          If we are to dogmatically interpret inequalities of outcome as evidence of discrimination or a rigged system, we must conclude (inter alia) that our justice system is grossly biased against men. Look at the numbers of men behind bars!

          • PPII, not sure on what you base your classifying me in the ‘brigade’.
            Yes, I agree a level of what can loosley be called racism exists in all societies. I think that the success stories being achieved by some Máori groups indicates a level of self determination is extremely valuable and needs encouragement. These successes also indicate that a level of entrenched racism, or maybe disadvantage would be a better term, exists in our government one size fits all approach.

  12. 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.

        • Third highest party. Look at AKL and see how few people one actually needs to win, and ask yourself, do you feel lucky?

          • Auckland is Green. Seymour is the only person who is a constituent MP and that is gifted to him. Luck plays no part.
            There, now that wasn’t too hard, was it.

  13. It’s been interesting to read the commentary and see who the commenters think ACT’s supporters are.

    • Funny in some places seeing ACT supporters saying they’re ditching them because Seymour isn’t strident enough!

      • Dave, I think you have got that right; ACT supporters think of New Zealand as ‘theirs’, presumably to be exploited for ‘their’ benifit alone. The rest of us think of Aotearoa as belonging to us ‘all’ to be nutured and protected for the benefit of us ‘all’.

          • We can’t claim that the current corporate exploitative economy is caring for our environment; so if the iwi (via treaty rights) can provide input that balance care for the environment with exploitation, I reckon we should embrace it with both hands.

      • Ah McCain you haven’t done it again. Reducing and freezing the minimum wage is ‘caring’ about the country?

  14. David Seymour is the monkey that Richard Prebble and Rodney found, trained to their blind Robert Muldoon style idiotology, then John Banksed him into right wing Epsom, and from their he has manufactured his clown personality to make people not dislike him. But what he represents is evil, and his political party is evil. ACT insights racism, sexism, all the hate that is in society now, comes from ignorance like David Seymour’s. It is heartbreaking to think that the educated people are under attack from those that would prefer to ignore science, evolution and radical progress. Mother nature is clearly short on patience with us human types, sadly the less fortunate always suffer worse, first, and for the longest. Seymour represents an elite that would rather build bunkers and floating water-worlds than address the damage that human greed has caused to the planet, to society, and to those of us that believe we can save ourselves. But with unhelpful, incendiary social media comments like that from a sitting member of parliament responsible for another ten or so mps, that is wrong, and should not be tolerated.

      • Fucking nailed it Mathew. If Bob disagrees then we all know it’s the truth.
        Bob is like that annoying little itch that just keeps turning up.

    • Yes Seymour comes out withe most vile racist comments we have ever seen. His party quite rightly is a joke born out of a bastard relationship. Think Banks, Hyde, Prebble, Douglas, Quigley and Brash and you’ve formed NZ own Klu Klux Klan.
      If people worry about the HRC they should be shit scared of the Taxpayers Union.

    • Agree – Act serve a purpose by allowing National to stay closer to the center – thought they might be abandoning that this year. Frightening.

  15. The simple fact is that the HRC and this Government ARE extraordinarily racist, sexist and ageist – against white people, men and the older generations.
    Imagine if Genter had told young maori women they needed to just sit down and get out of other peoples way. The shit storm would have blocked out the sun, but say it against “pale stale males” and crickets.
    The HRC just reflects its woketard masters.

    • Indeed. Under the guise of universal “tolerance” they openly hate White people. They actually don’t care about tolerance, equity, diversity and inclusion, because if they did, they wouldn’t be so hostile towards a particular group. If everyone is essentially the same (i.e. no racial distinctions, sexual distinctions etc.) then this logically cancels out their own argument: why not have a workplace of all straight, White, males, if these aren’t real points of distinction? How would such a workplace differ (on their own premises) from a “diverse” workplace (i.e. one with fewer men and/or White people)? Any difference would necessarily be a result of a mere construct and constructs are just categories of the mind, not of reality. However, because those who push this ideologically are fully aware of the reality of objective differences and therefore categories among human beings and among groups of human beings, they seek to use “DEI” as a weapon against their enemies. They aren’t really helping their “favoured” minorities as such, they are in fact using them as weapons against the detested majority.

  16. Well Paul Hunt was the first one to indoctrinate the ex PM at Waikato uni in the 1990s. And it all went sideways from there. Ideologically ‘bent’.

  18. 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.

  19. 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.

        • I see you provided evidence with your post, not.
          Again Bob, you are TDB laughing stock. Funny is self promotion of going to Dulwich school, particularly given it’s paedophile history. It’s funny that you’re proud of that but never mind.

  20. 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.

    • I’m not sure that it’s being a “white” society that attracts people to NZ. It’s things like the rule of law (uncommon outside the west), low levels of corruption, free speech, and low levels of conflict. We’ve come to take these civic virtues for granted, but how long will they survive in the present political climate?

      • That’s precisely what I mean by a “White society” (i.e. founded by Europeans and therefore reflected in the institutions). When people talk of “Whiteness” (pejoratively or otherwise) they are using it as a synonym for “European.” As you rightly note “things like the rule of law (uncommon outside the west), low levels of corruption, free speech, and low levels of conflict” are all features of majority European societies, and pretty much exclusively so. Without Europeans, none of these characteristics be engender or be perpetuated. These are all desirable features of a society, hence people want to come here from unlike societies.

  22. 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.

  23. 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.

  24. Seymour is Maori, so he would know when he says:
    “Seymour said the Treaty of Waitangi, written after the Enlightenment, was a document that guaranteed Enlightenment values, including the promise of limited government that would not oppress its citizens and the promise of equal citizenship.” For that reason, Seymour said he believes the chiefs that signed the Treaty, “would sign up to ACT today”.

Comments are closed.