Monday, 29 October 2007

Winston right on racist party

It must be election year, because Winston Peters has woken up. And when Winston wakes up, he always begins by playing to his core audience. That doesn't mean he isn't right.

Of course the Maori Party is separatist: separate justice, planning and welfare systems have been core platforms for the Maori Party since its inception. Of course the Maori Party is racist: special political favours doled out by race is and always will be core policy for the Racist Party.

To call the Maori Party separatist is simply to state the obvious: they've been playing the race card since day one, and everyone knows it even if they're too timid to say it.
Mr Peters ... said accused the protesters of marching in support of arrested Tuhoe activist Tame Iti only "because he is brown."

"We once marched against apartheid, now they are marching for it."
It's true, isn't it. And the mainstream parties have no answer to it. When Winston is right -- even if it's only a bid to attract attention -- he can sometimes be right on the money.

UPDATE: Helen Clark insists this morning that the Maori Party is concerned not with apartheid -- as that would entail keeping one race down rather than giving special favour on the basis of race -- and not with race, but with "ethnicity." As I've said before, "ethnicity" is simply an anti-concept used as a euphemism for race:
ETHNICITY: The elevating of one’s racial identity and associated cultural traditions to a position of supreme importance – a racist version of collectivism, under-pinned by post-modernism in philosophy, and still very fashionable in academia...

Defining oneself by one’s race and tradition -- things about which one has no control over -- is utterly incompatible with defining oneself by one’s conscious choices, and deriving pride in one's own achievements rather than just those of one's ancestors -- which is the essence of individualism.

The antidote to the poison race-baiting, race war and all this irrelevant attention paid to the colour of a person's skin is individualism: to judge a person by the actual choices they make, not by who they 'chose' as their grandparents.


  1. I see Pita Sharples has accused Peters of making racist comments!
    It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so bloody sad and stupid.

  2. Yes, KG.

    "Hello, Kettle. You're black."

    signed, The Pot.

  3. What do you expect from a country that holds up the values of a primitive, tribalist, non-literate ('no writing' if you don't understand the meaning), cannibalistic, violent, non-scientific (didn't even have the wheel), non-working, non-democratic superstitious (Taniwha anybody?) society over its own?

    I mean, really? What DO New Zealanders expect? Honestly?

    This sounds 'racist' doesn't it? Read again. I'm not saying that Maoris ARE all of the above by definition - quite the opposite - but this stupid treaty, the pouring of the country's resources into the past and the failure to address the most antisocial aspects of Maoris' behaviour are feeding the fires and creating division and racialism in this rapidly failing society of ours.

  4. I apologise. I didn't mean to publish that previous comment.

    What I actually MEANT to say was:

    "I'm sorry. I'm greadfully sorry that people 150 years ago came here and established a nation based on democratic Westminister values. I apologise for creating a free education system, an (earstwhile) free health system and an infrastructure that used to be the envy of the world. I think its an awful tragedy that a system of cannibal tribalism was supplanted by this awful social system, and to show how sorry I am, I have supported the establishment of a free-gift system so that non-workers, non-producers and those who prefer to remain illiterate and ignorant can be encouraged to thrive, living off the work of others. I am so wracked with guilt that I will stand by and allow an army of rebellion being formed by these people without raising a finger against them."

    There. Feel better now Pita?

  5. Genuine Question: Do you ignore questions on forms that ask for your ethnicity? (Or fill them in with "Individual"?)

  6. (My) genuine answer David:

    I either ignore it, cross it out and insert "New Zealander" or enquire as to why the party concerned wants to know.

    Oh, and occasionally, I might mention "bullshit" ...


  7. DAVID: I leave them blank. Only time that's been a problem has been in enrolling for universities ...

  8. PC: Vic has a space for, but doesn't require, sex and ethnicity. OTOH, I think they can tell both by looking. Bastards.

  9. I always used to put "minority". Since I am a minority of one I figure I'm within my "minority rights" to so do. Also it buggers up their administrative system with all its statistics and quota BS.

    Always try to get someone else to hand in the form for you as well. It adds to the confusion of a woman hands in something clearly written by a man. "Oh I'm just doing this for my owner", they can say.


  10. I can see the merits in what you're saying, folks. I guess that's why I've tended to put "New Zealander".

  11. I loved Peta Sharples' explanation of the word "apartheid".

    It went something along the lines
    ...It's a South African word, apart - meaning seperate, and teid - meaning hate.

    Honestly, when someone talks utter shit like that, how can you trust anything else he says.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.