Truth about Don Brash's Massey Ban

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Truth about Don Brash's Massey Ban

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

MikeAqua

8031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3820

#2093872 20-Sep-2018 15:04

Rikkitic:

Has anyone anywhere had any real success in addressing this? I believe even the progressive Finns have issues arising from discrimination against their Sami population.

Even the countries that do well on social care, such as thye Skandi countries and Netherlands don't eliminate inequity, they just manage the associated problems better.

I feel confident in saying that no-one has ever gotten rid of socio-economic inequity, but some countries are good at managing the impact of it. They tend to be countries that have lots of money and usually that money has come from industries the left love to hate. Big-oil, big-pharma, big-food.

A serious threat to managing the impact of inequity - companies moving profits between jurisdictions to minimise tax liabilities.

Note I'm not saying improvements in equity are impossible, just that they won't be achieved by government.

Mike

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2093880 20-Sep-2018 15:14

MikeAqua:

Rikkitic:

Has anyone anywhere had any real success in addressing this? I believe even the progressive Finns have issues arising from discrimination against their Sami population.

Even the countries that do well on social care, such as thye Skandi countries and Netherlands don't eliminate inequity, they just manage the associated problems better.

I feel confident in saying that no-one has ever gotten rid of socio-economic inequity, but some countries are good at managing the impact of it. They tend to be countries that have lots of money and usually that money has come from industries the left love to hate. Big-oil, big-pharma, big-food.

A serious threat to managing the impact of inequity - companies moving profits between jurisdictions to minimise tax liabilities.

Note I'm not saying improvements in equity are impossible, just that they won't be achieved by government.

Government can deal with the legal aspects of inequality, address the past grievances, honour the Treaty, provide support for initiatives that break down the barriers and lead from the front. We as a people need to work on eliminating inequality, discrimination, racism and intolerance.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2093905 20-Sep-2018 16:01

GV27:

That's not the case if, as DPF suggests, she has mislead the Academic Committee. That's getting into misconduct territory, not a question of 'an interpretation of governance responsibilities'. I am more concerned with the implication she was prepared to use funding as leverage over a student club carrying a legal, lawful activity.

I hadn't read the Farrer blog, have now - and agree that looks bad.

I still wonder if at the root of this is that the VC was placed in a untenable position - trying to find a way out a conflict between perceived TOW obligations / policy / interpretation and free-speech principles. Wouldn't be the first time - and probably won't be the last. If so - then that needs to be fixed.

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 589
Inactive user

#2093920 20-Sep-2018 16:38

MikeB4:

Government can deal with the legal aspects of inequality, address the past grievances, honour the Treaty, provide support for initiatives that break down the barriers and lead from the front.

All true.

I'm inferring from your earlier post that you believe that this has not happened to a sufficient extent in NZ. Is that a reasonable assumption?

If so, what would be your view on what "sufficient" looks like?

Edit: removed double-negative

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2093922 20-Sep-2018 16:42

6FIEND:

MikeB4:

Government can deal with the legal aspects of inequality, address the past grievances, honour the Treaty, provide support for initiatives that break down the barriers and lead from the front.

All true.

I'm inferring from your earlier post that you believe that this has not happened to a sufficient extent in NZ. Is that a reasonable assumption?

If so, what would be your view on what "sufficient" looks like?

Edit: removed double-negative

We have come a long way and a lot of good things have been done. Clearly the job is not finished and this thread and others are evidence that a lot more work is needed. What would sufficient look like? when injustice and inequality are no longer an issue.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 589
Inactive user

#2093936 20-Sep-2018 16:51

Parking inequality for the moment... (given that it's a meta issue and occurs on a global scale)

Where do you perceive injustice to exist today in NZ?

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2093938 20-Sep-2018 17:04

6FIEND:

Parking inequality for the moment... (given that it's a meta issue and occurs on a global scale)

Where do you perceive injustice to exist today in NZ?

With respect I am not going to get into that, what is justice in one culture is injustice in another. Injustice is felt when malfeasance abuse and neglect that is left to fester.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 589
Inactive user

#2093943 20-Sep-2018 17:11

I can understand your reluctance.

Let's move on then...

JimmyH

2898 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1554

#2094063 20-Sep-2018 19:36

I'm probably going to regret becoming involved in this thread, but I can't see how the VC can remain.

It is pretty clear from the emails (which I have just read and horrified me) that she didn't like the political optics of what she thought Brash might say, and spent weeks testing every pretext she might use to ban him.

Personally, I don't think that what Brash has said on race is terribly racist. A message that the way a person is treated in law should be dependent on their circumstances (eg government help if they are in poverty, higher taxes if they are wealthy) and on their actions (eg to prison if you murder someone) isn't exactly overtly racist. It wouldn't sound too out of place coming from the mouths of Martin Luther King ("I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"), Desmond Tutu or Nelson Mandela. None of whom are exactly noted racists. Plus, Brash has said he wasn't even there to discuss that sort of stuff - he was there at the invitation of the Politics Society to talk about what it was like to lead a major political party, which seems like an entirely proper discussion for a university.

However, even if his views were repugnant to many, he has a right to express them. And a University ought to be the place for controversial political views to be robustly discussed, debated and if appropriate rebutted. In fact, debating ideas is one of the central purposes of universities.

The bit in her emails suggesting his speech should be prevented because it has "no place in a "te Tiriti led university" is also gravely concerning. Wind back the clock to 1633 and change the email phrasing slightly from "te Tiriti led university" to "Christian university" and you would pretty much have a carbon copy of the argument that the church used to prohibit discussion of the Heliocentric Theory and put Galileo under house arrest. At least they have now admitted they got that one wrong, even if it did take them more than 350 years!

For the VC to stifle potential discussion of political ideas because they offend her own prejudices, and then lie and deceive faculty, students and the public about it allis both disgraceful and at odds with the very principles of what being a university means. I don't see how she can possibly remain. If she doesn't have the good sense to resign, she should be dismissed.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#2094124 20-Sep-2018 20:17

I haven't read the emails but am prepared to take the word of others on this until I do so no argument from me. If the facts are indeed as reported, that person has no business being in the position she occupies.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4