Pakeha Party launches for 'equal rights'

Forums › Off topic › Pakeha Party launches for 'equal rights'

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 14

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#851174 8-Jul-2013 19:37

jeffnz:
KiwiNZ: It is being organised by a troll and appealing to the lowest common denominator.

are you referring to the Mana party here

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#851175 8-Jul-2013 19:38

ajobbins:
StarBlazer:
ajobbins:
Klipspringer: I bet this is going to be labeled as racist.

Yes, because it is

More racist, less racist or equally racist in comparison to either the Mana or Maori party?

Two rascisms don't make a right.

Yes, but it makes a point .

Do you have a constructive alternative of your own?

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#851177 8-Jul-2013 19:39

KiwiNZ:
jeffnz:
KiwiNZ: It is being organised by a troll and appealing to the lowest common denominator.

are you referring to the Mana party here

no

my apologies then

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#851178 8-Jul-2013 19:40

KiwiNZ: This is a pathetic country sometimes if mindless crap like this gets mileage.

Please explain.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#851179 8-Jul-2013 19:42

surfisup1000:
KiwiNZ: This is a pathetic country sometimes if mindless crap like this gets mileage.

Please explain.

I think you can work that out

alexx

867 posts

Ultimate Geek

#851239 8-Jul-2013 21:12

It might be quite a dilemma for some potential members.
They'd like to join, but then they remember they object to the word Pakeha, :)

#include <standard.disclaimer>

hdinsider

552 posts

Ultimate Geek

#851284 9-Jul-2013 00:38

Klipspringer:
Elpie:
The Mana Party policy is about Maori only because their mandate is for Maori only.

hmmmmm. I dont get it.
Maori party, Pakeha party. Whats all the fuss about?

Whats wrong with having a Pakeha Party? With a mandate for Pakeha?

Come on people. To an outsider. Somebody that is not from NZ. This is ridiculous. Its one sided to suggest the one is racist but not the other. All based on skin colour?

I thought New Zealand is suppose to be moving forward (same rights for all)? I have been told we lead the world in this regard! Seems I'm wrong.

PS: Marori = a race.
Pakeha = can be anyone from outside NZ including myself. (Anybody)

Whats wrong with representing people from outside NZ? Pakeha is not about skin colour. Maori and Mana parties are.

I think the point of giving any particular group a helping hand to create true equality in our society is undermined by the rest of society saying "me too", (or in this case 15000 rednecks liking a Facebook page).

It does sound a bit too much like a "white power" movement to me.

don't mess with me.... i'm the hd insider....

bigal_nz

635 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#851300 9-Jul-2013 04:30

Maybe we need a "Equality for all NZers party - not racist, just fair"

CruciasNZ

879 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#851304 9-Jul-2013 06:48

I think they should just retire all the racist parties; Mana, Maori and this new one. I've actually had arguments with separate people overseas regarding their racist conduct on a site and Teamspeak Server I operate and all of a sudden the "you're from NZ and have that racist party" comeback materialized.

The current group based "positive" discrimination is not working well enough, it is being milked for all it's worth. I think they should change to focus more on income and health based discrimination - that would be fair across all races.

Edit: Typos galore!

Professional Forum Lurker

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#851309 9-Jul-2013 07:20

Elpie:
Klipspringer:
ajobbins:

Creating equity on a citizen by citizen basis is unrealistic - therefore group based policy is the best way of achieving equity amount a disadvantaged group. Will there be exceptions amount groups who will get more benefit than needed/intended? Sure, but in the overall scheme of things, it's the most efficient way to achieving equity.

The problem with this way of thinking is that you are assuming that its just one group of people that is disadvantaged.

Problem is its not. Inequality in NZ is not limited to Maori only. The current policies however benefit Maori ONLY. The Mana Party policy for Maori first-time home buyers will benefit Maori only. Stuff everybody else that can't afford a house.

The Mana Party policy is about Maori only because their mandate is for Maori only. Their policy will never become reality anyway so I don't understand the fuss. In order for it to happen Labour would have to win the next election, Labour would have to rely on the Mana Party for support, Labour would have to find the funding, and-more importantly-Labour would have to be willing to pass legislation that favours one group of New Zealanders while excluding others. It won't happen.

However, if the policy causes a government rethink on funding first home buyers, including all those who do not have access to traditional bank-based mortgages, then its a good thing.

Before people get all bitter and twisted its worth considering whether any pie-in-the-sky scheme has a chance of coming to fruition.

to correct your first statement, the Mana party is about racism, and run by a clear racist.

Pakeha party (not an actual party) is racist (sorry all) and as stated earlier two racists don't make a right, so why do we accept Mana party and poo-poo Pakeha party?

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#851310 9-Jul-2013 07:22

hdinsider:
Klipspringer:
Elpie:
The Mana Party policy is about Maori only because their mandate is for Maori only.

hmmmmm. I dont get it.
Maori party, Pakeha party. Whats all the fuss about?

Whats wrong with having a Pakeha Party? With a mandate for Pakeha?

Come on people. To an outsider. Somebody that is not from NZ. This is ridiculous. Its one sided to suggest the one is racist but not the other. All based on skin colour?

I thought New Zealand is suppose to be moving forward (same rights for all)? I have been told we lead the world in this regard! Seems I'm wrong.

PS: Marori = a race.
Pakeha = can be anyone from outside NZ including myself. (Anybody)

Whats wrong with representing people from outside NZ? Pakeha is not about skin colour. Maori and Mana parties are.

I think the point of giving any particular group a helping hand to create true equality in our society is undermined by the rest of society saying "me too", (or in this case 15000 rednecks liking a Facebook page).

It does sound a bit too much like a "white power" movement to me.

Would you prefer someone spouting " black power" and if there are 15000 rednecks, what does that make the supporters of the Mana party, do you have a racist slur for them too?

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#851312 9-Jul-2013 07:27

The whole thing appears to have been created by someone who revels in division and seeking his 15 minutes playing a dangerous misinformed game. It saddens me that so many have been suckered in by this, but alas it does not surprise me.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#851313 9-Jul-2013 07:30

Why don't both parties get together and make it their mandate to help poor people. That way Maori and pakeha who don't need the help because they are well off won't get it, and poor people, regardless of race, will get the help they need. Singling out one racial group because they are over represented in the poor segment of society seems one step too removed from the problem. The problem isn't being Maori, it's being poor.

spearsniper

133 posts

Master Geek

#851316 9-Jul-2013 07:55

ajobbins:
Ragnor: Equality of opportunity not equality of outcome.

The problem with that is that given 'equal opportunity', factors beyond the control of individuals will lead to unequal outcomes, which is not fair.

As a society, we need to recognise that equitable opportunity will lead to more equality of outcome - which is fairer and better for everyone.

The minority in our country (and most) control own and control the majority, and do so with their own personal biases.

In a highly general sense:

Are women disadvantaged simply because they are women? Yes
Are Maori disadvantaged simply because they are Maori? Yes
Are immigrants disadvantages simply because they are immigrants? Yes
Are disabled people disadvantaged simply because they are disabled? Yes
etc etc.

Creating equity on a citizen by citizen basis is unrealistic - therefore group based policy is the best way of achieving equity amount a disadvantaged group. Will there be exceptions amount groups who will get more benefit than needed/intended? Sure, but in the overall scheme of things, it's the most efficient way to achieving equity.

Are the Maori All Blacks disadvantaged? No. So why do we have a race based team, and think it is perfectly ok?

Other countries look at NZ, and cannot believe that we still allow apartheid.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#851318 9-Jul-2013 08:03

spearsniper:
ajobbins:
Ragnor: Equality of opportunity not equality of outcome.

The problem with that is that given 'equal opportunity', factors beyond the control of individuals will lead to unequal outcomes, which is not fair.

As a society, we need to recognise that equitable opportunity will lead to more equality of outcome - which is fairer and better for everyone.

The minority in our country (and most) control own and control the majority, and do so with their own personal biases.

In a highly general sense:

Are women disadvantaged simply because they are women? Yes
Are Maori disadvantaged simply because they are Maori? Yes
Are immigrants disadvantages simply because they are immigrants? Yes
Are disabled people disadvantaged simply because they are disabled? Yes
etc etc.

Creating equity on a citizen by citizen basis is unrealistic - therefore group based policy is the best way of achieving equity amount a disadvantaged group. Will there be exceptions amount groups who will get more benefit than needed/intended? Sure, but in the overall scheme of things, it's the most efficient way to achieving equity.

Are the Maori All Blacks disadvantaged? No. So why do we have a race based team, and think it is perfectly ok?

Other countries look at NZ, and cannot believe that we still allow apartheid.

Sorry but what a load of nonsense, based on that we shouldn't have teams based on gender or age or physical disability.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 14