WAATEA NEWS COLUMN: The Treaty Debate and cultural amnesia
The Treaty debate between Iwi CEO Helmut Modlik and ACT Party leader David Seymour struck a chord with tens of thousands of viewers.
It highlighted to me that we live in a cultural amnesia about the truth of our own history and the group denial required to prop up the inequalities of today so we can ignore the grievances of before.
Dame Anne Salmon says, “Debate the Treaty by all means. But let it be just and impartial, as befits a constitutional discussion, and not conducted on the basis of a bill that is highly partisan, and designed to provoke ill will and anger.
How can we have that debate when so many don’t know the truth of our history?
There are 2 versions of the Treaty, most Māori signed the Māori version, we are signed up to UN Declarations that state when there are two versions of a Treaty, the version in the indigenous language takes precedence meaning Māori did not cede sovereignty. Rhe Principles were an attempt to recognise this truth, yet we threaten crushing the pragmatism of our constitutional arrangements for ideological fervour because the majority of New Zealanders are ignorant of their history?
Dr Moana Jackson said, “Contrary to what the Crown has always said, the Treaty did not admit either a cession of Māori sovereignty or a vesting of power solely in a political system brought here from somewhere else.
Professor Ranganui Walker said, “I have no time for the privileged people who take advantage of their privileged position to attack the weakest in society”
Member of Parliament, James Richmond, wrote in 1851, “I look forward to the day when the preposterous Treaty of Waitangi will be overruled and the ridiculous claims of the natives to thousands of acres of untrodden bush and fern will no longer be able to dampen the ardour and cramp the energies of the industrious white man”.
How is that 19th Century White Settler privilege vibe espoused by James Richmond in 1851 any different to what ACT are preposing today?
The issue of the Treaty won’t go away but I feel from the feedback to the debate that people were genuinely grateful for the space to be able to hear the argument, and learn new things they didn’t realise before.
It is in the engaging of ideas that we can change our minds and work together for a better future knowing our actual past.
Three years ago I was much like Seymoure .Then I decided to educate myself about the treaty .What an eye opener that was .I read Sir Doug Grahams book Trick or Treaty which gave me an insite as to how the process of settlements were being done .The thing that struck me most was the fact he had to find a way to compensate for 1200000 acres of stolen land .The value of that land today can never be fairly compensated .
Then I read about THE NEW ZEALAND WARS ,which were just a land grab by force .this is a well written book by Vincent O,Malley .The third book I read was a bit of a heavy read ,THE TREATY OF WAITANGI ,by Claudia Orange .Having read those and done other research I can now see why there is a need to lift Maori out of the poverty trap which has been forced upon them .My great great grand father was killed while trying to get south Taranaki Maori to relinquish their land to the crown and was regarded as a hero which clearly he was not .
The fact that people arriving into Aotearoa are given better treatment than Maori is an indication that the anti Maori racisim is as strong as ever .How can it be right that a new arrival is imeadiatly housed clothed fed and has access to free health care .Mean while those houses could have housed the homeless who are working and have families .
It has been decreed by the UN, that the Māori version of the Treaty must take precedence.
Mr. Seymour and his associates are trying to overthrow a UN decision.
If they are willing to consider such an attack on the UN, it shows they have very deep pockets and many, many friends in high places. We need to be looking at who could possibly be in a position to challenge the UN.
This is not just our little treaty and our little country. Their threat is world-wide and will be trying to undermine the rights and property of many peoples, not just indigenous peoples.
It becomes increasingly obvious that Seymour is just a small cog in a huge and powerful organization which is moving to replace the UN and affiliated groups.
Has the world ever been in such a dangerous predicament as it seems to be now?
Thank you Martyn, and everyone who took part in the debate including Mr. Seymour. We hope to see more debates like this.
The Cheatie.
The simple truth.
1840. At least 90% of the British people are feudal slaves and
living in the worst living conditions on planet earth.
A few escape their horror prison.
Feb 1840 Waitangi.
British are heavily out numbered by Tangata whenua.
The British stall for time.
British make huge promise to Tangata Whenua .
By 1865 British bring in 14,000 trained soldiers.
Waikato refuse to sell land .
So British pit 14,000 British soldiers against 2000 Waikato.
After furious battles Waikato withdraw south
British invade and steal more than a million acres.
Then they do the same in the Taranaki.
Invade butcher massacre steal destroy.
Like the British did all around the world for 300 years.
The year 2000 a small group of Whites make tiny apology .
Pakeha pay 1% compensation.
2023 Whites withdraw apology and take back the 1% compensation.
Pakeha call this One people One country Justice for all.
You are right .These people cant get away from taking taking and take the rest if we did not take everything the first time .The apology means nothing because they will have a plan to take some more the next week .Just take the abuse in care result which is being swept under the carpet Quicker than Sam Uffendell was .
http://www.nwo.org.nz
Go here for a new zealand history lesson.
I was dissatisfied with how David Seymour got away with spewing his bullshit. If Helmet had been a bit more adroit at hitting back at Seymour you wouldn’t have comments like ‘surprised at how much they agreed on’ or words to that effect. Seymore is whipping up division for political gain and wasting our money to do it.
Māori are a little over 17% of the population. And the “Asian” group is around the same. This means a referendum, by all current NZ residents, to change/specify the conditions of the Treaty as an agreement/contract between Maori and the CROWN can never be anything OTHER than disingenuous and discriminatory. How can one side of the agreement (50% of the contractual parties, eg. Maori), have a fair representation of their views when they’re facing the other 83%?? Unless their votes were to be weighted to 50% of the overall vote? But regardless, one side of the agreement (the Crown) forcing the other side of the agreement (Maori) into a referendum as a way to change the original conditions (to suit their agenda, at the expense of the other party) of their agreement by recruiting the opinions of a bunch of people who were never a part of the original agreement is ridiculous.
See the joe 90, cloths change . Here not i.