Good to have a dedicated thread, although there will always be spillover on the political threads, because that's what it's become.
But why hide it behind a firewall?
Let it all hang out under the Elections sub title.
Printable View
Deafening silence from davflaws and MT.
They fell right into the trap of showing either their total ignorance of what’s happening out there or closing both eyes to what’s happening.
None as blind as those with eyes but will not see.
None as deaf as those with eyes but will not hear.
None as dumb as those with mouth but will not speak.
Hey Balance,
I should have acknowledged your post. Have not had time to read through all of what you have posted, so will try to make some time later.
From what I have glanced over so far, I don't think I have seen anyone saying that they would like a good civil war to sort things out. You may think that is semantics, but I think politicians saying they think govt policies could lead to unrest is just a statement (and something National is consciously aware of I think, given they are going to great pains at the moment to distance themselves from the ACT Treaty Principles Bill).
If anyone else is out there saying they want a civil war if the govt doesnt do this, that or the other I will take a very dim view on that too.
My main focus right now is not continuing a back and forth on the civil war comment, or whether davflaws was right to report you etc. All I have said is I do not condone that kind of talk from anyone (and though it has been suggested you were just kidding, there is no way to actually 'know' that given the high energy posts you often make on these subjects).
For now, I want to reorientate myself on TOW because a big conversation/debate is coming on the topic and I need to make sure I am not going to form fast judgements on beliefs rather than what I actually truly know.
My suggestion is we cool off on the mudslinging as it is only going to further entrench deeply held beliefs and reduce any prospect of attaining true wisdom.
I'd argue it should be the number one topic on any forum, platform or website in New Zealand.
As what the left are arguing for is essentially the dissolution of New Zealand, and the rights and privileges that ALL New Zealanders currently enjoy, as we know it.
No sh*t we need a referendum on it.
I think the Left have tried to get a to a certain place via stealth and subterfuge, over a multi-decade period of time, and then the disastrous 2020 election result gave Labour and its Maori caucus a window of opportunity to accelerate the process and simply ram ‘co-governance’ and separatism through. This ‘full court press’ by the Left not only took the form of legislation and the likes of ‘3 Waters’, but also via the school classroom, via the public service, and also via instructions to the mainstream media.
Basically Maori since 2020 came to believe that they had official support for the view that they ‘did not cede sovereignty’, & that they would henceforth govern over other New Zealanders in conjunction with ‘the Crown’ (NZ Government) in a ‘partnership’. This utter change in mindset is what is ‘divisive’ in all of this.
Divisive
- adjective
tending to cause disagreement or hostility between people.
Fear of 'uncertainty'? No, it is a fear of certainty. If Maori + Crown governing all other New Zealanders under a co-governance 'partnership' arrangement became the certainty, the reality of how this country was governed, then New Zealand as a representative democracy would be finished. You might think ending our democracy is an idea that has merit, but most will not.
In the unlikely event that you actually want to engage, I will provide correctice context to your referenced claims on the TOW thread on the "Off Market Discussions" forum as soon as I have completed analysis of Jonu's Global Warming claims.
From a quick look at your references, you have omitted (perhaps conveniently) that the people you quote as supporting violence actually condemn it but warn that the Act Referendum proposal is likely to lead to civil unrest. A fuller analysi on the other thread in the next few days.
An academic paper attached regarding 'An insecure secularity? Religion, decolonisation and diversification in Aotearoa New Zealand', published in November 2023.
Interesting phrase in their synopsis. So-called 'decolonisation' is apparently a 'moral imperative', and that is apparently recognised by 'the state'.
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...oa_New_Zealand
'The question of the location of religion in the public sphere is always a matter of the logics, practices, and politics of secularism. While mythologies of a linear secular teleology have been thoroughly critiqued, the ongoing trajectories for both religious and secular politics are contested and emergent. New Zealand provides an important context for examining these dynamics. While New Zealand is frequently referenced as among the most secular nations in the world, with census data tracking a precipitous disaffiliation from Christianity and a concomitant rapid increase in ‘non-religion’, the actual situation is in considerable flux. A crucial dynamic is the combination of an indigenous Māori cultural renaissance and state attempts to recognise the moral imperative of decolonisation which have resulted in new languages of spirituality shaping both law and politics. Diverse religious groups have also occupied prominent spaces in shaping public concern and setting new agendas for national life. This paper traces the emerging contours of this dynamic religious context and the contributions of religion and spirituality in shaping political leadership in Aotearoa New Zealand.'
I believe in a strong liberal democracy. Not sure how any of my posts could have given a different impression.
Though co-governance was not communicated well (which caused fear as people like myself filled in the blanks with what we believed it must mean) and was doomed to fail…I think the scope you describe is much wider than anything that actually was proposed at the time.
As ex Nat MP Chris Finlayson has pointed out, it was more of a co-management arrangement of natural resources.
By including the word ‘governance’ (and then not clarifying what it meant) a lot of people were immediately fear full.
Myself included.