Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

9 Comments

  1. Personal political advancement became what drove Tariana and the
    M Party, hence the lack of success in dealing with increasing poverty for many Maori.
    This issue remains unsolved and will require a very organised and committed Government to take the lead for future generations.
    It is not something that tax cuts will solve.

    1. I don’t think Tariana was driven by desire for personal advancement, although vanity no doubt played a part. Somehow she felt personally betrayed when Helen Clark asked for her support over the Seabed and Foreshore that over the years mutated into an out-of-proportion loathing.

      It was this antipathy which prompted her to accept a virtual clone of a Key promoted Seashore Bill. She was now without options and could easily be bought off with a placebo Pilot Programme: Whanauora. Not a bad idea but fatally damaged by underfunding, white-anting in high places and a few crackpot notions that Turia could not quite shake that tied the programme to tribal domination and under-accountability.

      The effectiveness of the linking of the Maori Party to national’s coattails beyond their two reps is seen in the likelihood at each election that they disappear completely.

      Slightly aside from this and granted that there seems no interest among Maori for the idea, the truth is, if Maori seats disappeared and the large number of Maori were on the general role, their interests would be way more front and centre with way more MPs. Rather than a path to enhanced representation, the current situation looks more like Gerrymandered seats in the Southern States with all Democrats locked up in gulag electorates, thus maximizing representation for the white, usually conservative, voter.

      A Maori Voter diaspora would reinvigorate Maori participation in general politics and ultimately give them more say than provided, counterintuitively, by dedicated Maori electorates.

      1. Agree with your points on Turia and the political drift of the Māori Party. I’m not strongly for or against the Māori electorates. I just see it as a choice for Māori to make. If and when they feel they can be properly represented by Māori list MPs or by getting more Māori into general electorates, they will stop signing onto the Māori roll. For as long as enough of them sign up to the Māori roll to justify even a single electorate, then Māori seats have a place, whether rich old pākeha like Don Brash like it or not.

  2. Not wishing to sound offensive, how old are Willie Jackson and Sandra Lee? Are they the type of politician that may get the many young Maori non voters interested in politics and get them out to vote, or will they perhaps rather make very little difference over all.

    Willie has been on Radio Live(ing Dead) talk back for very many years, while some seem to like him, many do hate or dislike him.

    He is just one character, and while he may be doing some good social work – together with his wife, I cannot see him making all that much of a difference in getting more votes for Labour.

    Almost every person I ever talk to, they tend to ask, what does Labour actually stand for, and what is their policy.

  3. I feel that the “poor” vs the “rich” narrative is not working for the left, or the part of the left that employs it.

    It alienates leftists who might be less than poor.

    Many poor people who have not been sucked in by prosperity propaganda may be leftists brought to that position, and perhaps action, by experience – I’m thinking of “I, Daniel Blake”.

    Others may be deeply sympathetic, but the constant calling out of them on the basis of their financial situation (maybe they made their money legitimately and ethically?) alienates, in much the same way I think the “identitarians” alienate otherwise sympathetic men.

    I don’t think it’s necessary. It’s unhelpful. We are trying for a kind society. That means we need to be kinder and more sympathetic in general and avoid divisiveness between perceived groupings.

    1. Only thing is Dave without sounding devisive. That many rich don’t have a clue. They stay in there bubbles and don’t mix with the hoy pa loy… I think this is due to inequality and they are so far removed from the bottom. I think reduce inequality then you will see a more cohesive society and you cannot do it by the Natz individual prosperity as the re are always winners and losers in a dog eat dog society. It needs to come from above via redistrabution and Capital gains tax.

  4. The Clark government would have been damned totally by white racists if Maori equality was allowed. This is the first time I’ve heard a white guy say it.

Comments are closed.