Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

[wizard of Tauranga]

Seen as we’re on the slippery slip of race today:

I’m very involved in the Rotorua community which is predominantly Māori. What I always notice is Māori are a lot more family and community orientated in their thinking and time as opposed to other cultures which are more individualistic.

There are positives and negatives to this cultural observation.

Now if we accept that outcomes are predicated by the inputs, there is no way we will end up with similar outcomes when culturally we have vastly different priorities.

The attempts to skew policy and advantage groups to give equal outcomes seems fraught and destined to fail in the longer term if you don’t equalise the underlying differences that make up each culture.To change outcomes fundamentally you need to change the people.

Do Māori want to be more individualistic (eg more personal responsibility for their own individual health) if it means losing the communal community mindset that makes them happy? That’s the only way I see equal outcomes. Or should we be happy with differences and accept we will have different outcomes?

The whole issues is when cultures say they want to keep different cultural priorities but expect the same outcomes that different priorities deliver.

Flowing on from this, the focus is always on negative Māori outcomes. But there are lots of outcomes where Māori have better outcomes that we don’t highlight. More secure within their family unit; more loved; better family and community supported; etc than other cultures. Would Māori trade this for better individualistic outcomes?

Just my thought for the day.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

most māori go with Labour, National or Winny, Moari are just your run of the mill centrist.... and no i dont think that, didnt cross my mind

How it seems to typically play out on here is that the lefties say something ridiculous, the centre-right counter it with logic & fact, the lefties then find some angle loosely related to earlier ridiculous statement to then accuse the centre-right of being racists, centre-right then gets dragged down to lefties level and what follows is an all in no holds barred royal rumble. This is a long winded way of saying it’s all top8’s fault.

 

[Worried2Death]

Is it time to declare Soverieign Citizens a terrorist organisation before this happens here?

Alleged Porepunkah shooter once described police as 'terrorist thugs'

The man accused of shooting dead two police officers in Victoria's north-east is a "sovereign citizen" who once called police offensive names and was involved in an attempt to have Daniel Andrews tried for treason.

www.abc.net.au

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Is it time to declare Soverieign Citizens a terrorist organisation before this happens here?

Alleged Porepunkah shooter once described police as 'terrorist thugs'

The man accused of shooting dead two police officers in Victoria's north-east is a "sovereign citizen" who once called police offensive names and was involved in an attempt to have Daniel Andrews tried for treason.

www.abc.net.au

Nah, we need to find the underlying issues in society that’s causing their numbers to explode.

Society is getting more complex and restrictive with it systematically getting harder to live the good life. Seems an increasingly bleak pattern that will keep pushing people to say ‘why bother’ and look at other options?

Perhaps provide a fenced off place where they can all live lawlessly on their own. I put forward Gore.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Is it time to declare Soverieign Citizens a terrorist organisation before this happens here?

Alleged Porepunkah shooter once described police as 'terrorist thugs'

The man accused of shooting dead two police officers in Victoria's north-east is a "sovereign citizen" who once called police offensive names and was involved in an attempt to have Daniel Andrews tried for treason.

www.abc.net.au

Sounds like he’s gone bush and could be hard to find. Reminds me of that father and kids the police can’t find around the Waikato.

 

[MrFrankWhite]

Is it time to declare Soverieign Citizens a terrorist organisation before this happens here?

Alleged Porepunkah shooter once described police as 'terrorist thugs'

The man accused of shooting dead two police officers in Victoria's north-east is a "sovereign citizen" who once called police offensive names and was involved in an attempt to have Daniel Andrews tried for treason.

www.abc.net.au

So your answer is criminalising thought? I wonder if anyone has written philosophically about this?

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Nah, we need to find the underlying issues in society that’s causing their numbers to explode.

I think these underlying issues are partly connected to our worsening rates of depression and suicide, rising homelessness, declining voter turnout, rising family violence stats, etc.

As society becomes more complex and defines an ever narrowing path to ‘success’ more people inevitably fall through the cracks, unable to keep up.

I don’t think the system is actively meant to disenfranchise people, but it is failing many.

For those who choose to step away from the system and simply be left alone, the reality that wild animals enjoy more rights and freedoms than humans. In many ways, society has reduced us to slaves, bound by tougher and tougher laws, rules and obligations while maintaining only the illusion of freedom.

‘We have freedoms, but they’re freedoms inside a cage. The bars are invisible most of the time — until you try to step outside.’

 

[FormerlyJamesW]

‘We have freedoms, but they’re freedoms inside a cage. The bars are invisible most of the time — until you try to step outside.’

I think the envitabiity of trying to create safety, is that you have to impose restrictions.

I understand that when we talk on this way, we're implying that these restrictions are too tight. However, we should also consider the ramifications of not having these in the first place and consider one key point; not all people in the world are good people. How intolerant you want to be of bad events (murder...etc) will determine how much freedom of choice you want to give up to prevent these events from happening.

This is subjective and thus, has no black and white answer, which is why the majority of people disagree.

Sure, some animals may have more freedoms afforded to them, but they are also subject to more brutal (natural) lives. Do they live a better quality of life to those in a zoo? I'll leave that up to you to decide.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

I think the envitabiity of trying to create safety, is that you have to impose restrictions.

I understand that when we talk on this way, we're implying that these restrictions are too tight. However, we should also consider the ramifications of not having these in the first place and consider one key point; not all people in the world are good people. How intolerant you want to be of bad events (murder...etc) will determine how much freedom of choice you want to give up to prevent these events from happening.

This is subjective and thus, has no black and white answer, which is why the majority of people disagree.

Sure, some animals may have more freedoms afforded to them, but they are also subject to more brutal (natural) lives. Do they live a better quality of life to those in a zoo? I'll leave that up to you to decide.

It’s not just tolerance for crime. Some examples:

- in the past 1 working parent could support a family and now both need to work and still struggle
- in the past that parent could support large numbers of children, now we struggle to support 2
- young people can’t afford a house where in the past they could
- our ever rising housing standards result in in affordability and people becoming homeless
- In the past we could leave school at 15 and have a successful career, now a university degree is no guarantee of a career.

Society must progress but is it actually getting better for all? I think it is for MOST but the less capable - the lower educated, lower IQ, less resilient, different personalities, etc are spat out the bottom.

It’s like being a Tigers fan and expecting them to enjoy your lot…

 

[MrFrankWhite]

I think the envitabiity of trying to create safety, is that you have to impose restrictions.

I understand that when we talk on this way, we're implying that these restrictions are too tight. However, we should also consider the ramifications of not having these in the first place and consider one key point; not all people in the world are good people. How intolerant you want to be of bad events (murder...etc) will determine how much freedom of choice you want to give up to prevent these events from happening.

This is subjective and thus, has no black and white answer, which is why the majority of people disagree.

Sure, some animals may have more freedoms afforded to them, but they are also subject to more brutal (natural) lives. Do they live a better quality of life to those in a zoo? I'll leave that up to you to decide.

That philosophical discussion has been going on for 3000 years and probably a lot longer

 

[MrFrankWhite]

Society must progress but is it actually getting better for all? I think it is for MOST but the less capable - the lower educated, lower IQ, less resilient, different personalities, etc are spat out the bottom.

It’s like being a Tigers fan and expecting them to enjoy your lot…

How did these people fair say 10,000 years ago? 5000? 500? 100? You'd be hard pressed to find a time in history where the bottom quintile enjoyed such peace, safety and comfort.

 

[MaybeTop8]

Nah, we need to find the underlying issues in society that’s causing their numbers to explode.

Society is getting more complex and restrictive with it systematically getting harder to live the good life. Seems an increasingly bleak pattern that will keep pushing people to say ‘why bother’ and look at other options?

Perhaps provide a fenced off place where they can all live lawlessly on their own. I put forward Gore.

Well, neoliberalism driven by the right caused the conditions and dislocation, then very cleverly put the blame on others and propagated huge amounts of disinformation, and now claim to be the saviours.

That's about it.

 

[MaybeTop8]

So your answer is criminalising thought? I wonder if anyone has written philosophically about this?

Disinformation is a virus that you spread quite happily frank

 

[FormerlyJamesW]

It’s not just tolerance for crime. Some examples:

Well, I suppose it's about how you would define a crime. Is it on a morale scale? Obviously most people view murder as immoral. Some view hoarding of wealth, whilst others go homeless, as deeply immoral.

Laws are, inherently, a moral 'line in the sand', so to speak. So where do you draw that line? (Answer if you want, but it's really a rhetorical question).

- in the past 1 working parent could support a family and now both need to work and still struggle
- in the past that parent could support large numbers of children, now we struggle to support 2
- young people can’t afford a house where in the past they could
- our ever rising housing standards result in in affordability and people becoming homeless
- In the past we could leave school at 15 and have a successful career, now a university degree is no guarantee of a career.

'In the past' populations were smaller and had more of a sense of shared identity. This came with its own pitfalls. I won't go into them, as mentioning these tend to upset alot of people.

But how do you fix the issues that you've highlighted? No matter how you look at it, we're either going to end up with:
More personal freedom, but more likelyhood that the bigger fish will eat us.
Less personal freedom, but more likelyhood that we'll find the limitations of what we're allowed to do.

Life is a balancing act of reality vs. a plethora of ideal outcomes. The best we can achieve is a mildy content majority.

Society must progress but is it actually getting better for all? I think it is for MOST but the less capable - the lower educated, lower IQ, less resilient, different personalities, etc are spat out the bottom.

Society will inevitably progress, as certain as death and taxes. As for the working class? I agree on your point. However, as we are still in the backlash of COVID economics, I believe that it remains to be seen.

I think we'll see this when the world is a bit more stable again.

Bit of a long one, so kudos if you've made it this far.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

How did these people fair say 10,000 years ago? 5000? 500? 100? You'd be hard pressed to find a time in history where the bottom quintile enjoyed such peace, safety and comfort.

I’m agreeing it’s an inevitable part of progress and inevitable some will fall out the bottom. But are the struggling getting bigger and reaching a critical mass? The gap between those that thrive and those that don’t getting to much? The pressures on the struggling greater with less support?

All the signs are there of societal stress.

And in your examples from the past, eventually there’s a revolt to rebalance the system.

 

[FormerlyJamesW]

But are the struggling getting bigger and reaching a critical mass?

Are we talking quantity? Per head of population?

Alternatively, are we more aware of it, because of the evolved nature of societies moral prioritsation, medias focus on catering to their audiences and our ability to be communicated to by these outlets (technology like the internet)?

And in your examples from the past, eventually there’s a revolt to rebalance the system.

Who do we revolt against? Governments? Wealthy people?

What does that revolution look like? Guy Fawkes? Guillotines? A world war?

Are historical checks even viable in this day and age?

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Are we talking quantity? Per head of population?

Alternatively, are we more aware of it, because of the evolved nature of societies moral prioritsation, medias focus on catering to their audiences and our ability to be communicated to by these outlets (technology like the internet)?

Yes there’s more per head of population and we’re also probably more aware of it. Even the people better off are tired and stressed. But we also see it in the poverty stats, homelessness, extremism, etc

Who do we revolt against? Governments? Wealthy people?

What does that revolution look like? Guy Fawkes? Guillotines? A world war?

Are historical checks even viable in this day and age?

People get frustrated and turn to extremism. Then we get a Trump and the thriving people can’t understand why.

 

[FormerlyJamesW]

Yes there’s more per head of population and we’re also probably more aware of it. But we also see it in the poverty stats, homelessness, extremism, etc

I'll take your word for it, I haven't personally looked into it.

People get frustrated and turn to extremism. Then we get a Trump and the thriving people can’t understand wonder why.

Very true.

I was going to do a bit of a rant about what I'd like to see, but really it's probably been discussed before.

However, I noticed a few posts back that you mentioned that you're involved in your community quite a bit. This is one of the core things that I think we've lost;

Local pillars of the community. I.e. people who live in the area and are directly affected by any changes.

Having lived in one of the outer suburbs of Auckland for a while now, I've seen it deteriorate as it's agency was absorbed by the joke that is now our 'Supercity' council. As it's own entity, it was run very well, as the local council that ran it knew that we'd be hitting them up at the markets if they were doing a shit job.

Lord, I wish we had our council back.

 

[defensivebomb]

Having lived in one of the outer suburbs of Auckland for a while now, I've seen it deteriorate as it's agency was absorbed by the joke that is now our 'Supercity' council. As it's own entity, it was run very well, as the local council that ran it knew that we'd be hitting them up at the markets if they were doing a shit job.

Lord, I wish we had our council back.

One of the problems (in my view) is the Council's expansion into lots of nice to haves. So they've become fairly crap at everything they do

Just give us water, rubbish collection, clean parks, maintained roads and good libraries. Do all those things excellently and you have low rates and an effective council

The libraries are a bit of a luxury but I'm happy for us to splurge on them.

Providing Eden Park free of charge to an (essentially) bankrupt operator that can't optimise it should be out of scope for a council. Sell the land to a developer, buy some land in the waterfront and lease it to an operator that can get it working. Iwi, for example, do precisely that at Spark Arena and take a clip on ticket sales. Win/win for all involved

Similar issues in education and a lot of other things. Find out what they outright must do's are and be uncomprimising about delivering them

 

[juju]

When I see the antics of MPs' from the māori party I've parliament or the massive financial gains from yeah settlements to iwi who are registered as charities or even worse the privilege to free bowel screening at age 50 based on skin colour while others wait 10 more years to see if healthcare can beat cancer to the finish line..

it's little wonder there are people who feel this way

The thought of you hate watching Indigenous round is hilarious to me.

Your posts always seem to have a sad callous tone. What's that about

Go say this to James Fisher Harris and see what happens.