My Law For All

One law for all asserts that the English Draft of the Treaty of Waitangi is determinative, despite never being signed by Māori.

One law for all seeks to divide Māori into loyal Māori and agitators (Achievers and Grievers), while at the same time complaining about our divided society.

One law for all frames their debate in the Western tradition, ignoring the fact that Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a Māori text.

One law for all ignores settled principles of International law in relation to the interpretation of Treaties between sovereign nations.

One law for all asserts that Māori granted sovereignty to Queen Victoria in Te Tiriti o Waitangi despite the inability to understand the difference between sovereignty, kawanatanga and tino rangatiratanga.

One law for all believes that the property rights of every citizen should be respected, unless those property rights are held by Māori.

One law for all believers complain about Māori privilege yet are often unable to identify instances of such privilege.

One law for all believes that it is okay to sentence Māori to longer prison terms than non-Māori for similar crimes.

One law for all complains about Government money being wasted on Māori settlements and programmes, yet wants to waste Government money on a poorly worded referendum.

One law for all complains about the Treaty “Gravy-Train”, despite the $2bn paid out over the past 17 years representing approximately 0.5% of Government expenditure over this period, and amounting to less than the total amount of tax paid by Māori in the same period.*

None of this is one law for all.  It is colonisation and subjugation writ large.  Advocates do not want one law for all, they want their law for all.  There is a massive difference between the two. Unfortunately, proponents of one law for all are too intellectually challenged to see it.

*These figures are based on the following assumptions: Annual Government Expenditure of $30 billion per year, and 100,000 Māori paying approximately $1200 in tax on average each year.  Overall, the $2bn  paid out in Settlements represents a total of  $500 per person in New Zealand (or $30 per person per year).  Mr Ansell, I am prepared to write you a $500 cheque for your share of the cost of settling 170 years of historical grievance between an Indigenous People and their Colonial aggressors if you will agree to never again write about a subject which you clearly do not understand and willingly misrepresent.

About these ads

5 Responses to My Law For All

  1. che tibby says:

    a further note: much of the treaty settlement “quantum” set aside in the early 1990s was paid for by reducing direct spending on the department of maori affairs. some welfare spending was “mainstreamed” into work and income or housing, but the net spend was less.

    in other words, you can reduce the amount you’re offering john to a 1990 amount.

  2. paul scott says:

    Do you agree Joshua that we should appoint designated seats in Parliament to our Asian residents. Should we reduce the racist Maori bias in parliament . what you think Joshua,

    • I tend to believe that a more representative democracy provides space for the representation of all ethnic groups within that society. I am, in principle, in favour of designated “Asian” or “Pacifiska” representation in Parliament yes. The original meaning of Democracy is “rule of the people”, not the “rule of 50%+1″. We could take this one step further and do what the Athenians did and elect our MP’s by ballot! There is no racist Māori bias in Parliament, the 170 years of denial of basic Māori rights is testament to that fact.

  3. paul scott says:

    I mean this seriously Joshua, ordinary New Zealand people have equal rights , and we have the right to say so,

    • Yes, equality of rights is fundamental to a fully-functioning democracy. But I have yet to see how anything over the past 25 years favours Māori at the expense of Pākehā New Zealand. If the foreshore and seabed, or water, are property to be held in common by all New Zealanders in the name of equality, then why don’t we hold all land in New Zealand on the same basis? Or all the money as well? That is true equality.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 493 other followers