On the opinion piece by Dr Hylton Grice — see this post — we received an aggressive comment by someone using the above name.
Historian Bruce Moon has written a response to it below which we’ve decided to make a separate post as the subject is the centrepiece of the Jacinda regime based, it would seem, on the late 1980s reinvention of the Treaty of Waitangi which includes claims that were clearly not intended in the original from 1840 — see this article by Roger Childs. Usually we don’t allow troll comments which are intended at provoking contributors and other commentators, but as Mr ‘Descartes’ attitudes are at the the heart of the Jacinda government and its key backers, they need to be tackled head on.
First the comment from Mr ‘Descartes’ again:
This is racism, pure and simple. You poor saps – denying the reality of the changing face of Aotearoa to one of multi-culturalism and co-Governance is just living in the past – a past that has seen Māori suffer in a post-colonisation world.
Firstly, we have a Treaty that guarantees Māori certain rights and ownerships. Despite the fact that the Crown (represented by the Government of the day) ignored this for decades, illegally stealing Māori land, Māori worked through the courts rather than take up arms – something that would be justified in my opinion.
Reparation for land stolen (yes, stolen, and if you dispute this, you’re either a fool or lying) is barely enough to compensate for that which was taken.
It does filter down through the Iwi and Hapu system to those at the bottom, but they need to show their tribal affiliation. Obviously only those in a particular Iwi will share the returns given to that Iwi.
As for co-governance, opposition to this is grounded in the belief that Māori are incapable of governing well – a belief that a patriarchal, white governance is the only valid one is racist and backward.
Trigger words like “pure blood” – a white supremacist dog-whistle if ever there was one – and “One People” ignore the reality that the British came here and colonised Aotearoa (there’s ample evidence Māori called this land that so take your objections to the name and go back to England) and then systematically robbed Māori of their lands and their rights.
Get used to the future because it’s happening whether you like it or not.
**************************************
response by Bruce Moon
The foregoing response to Dr Le Grice ignores the plain facts of history and is nothing but racist propaganda. Warfare was endemic among pre-European Maori with cannibalism, slavery, land confiscation and degradation of the women of a defeated tribe in accordance with “tikanga” or the Maori way of doing things.
With the arrival of Europeans, tribal land was eagerly exchanged for the wide variety of goods the incomers brought with them. By my count, before 1840, 179 sales in the South Island alone were registered in Sydney by chiefs eager to sell. Aware of this chaotic situation, Hobson, on the day after his arrival, issued a proclamation stating that in all lands in which British sovereignty was accepted, all such sales would be reviewed and only those confirmed would be recognised. A commission was set up to do so, Frederick Maning, the “Pakeha Maori” who had arrived in 1833 being a member. Many claims were dismissed or scaled down sharply.
Then, article second of the Treaty of Waitangi itself provided that all future sales would be to the Crown alone. It is difficult to imagine any arrangement more fair to tribal sellers but in the event, the pressure of selling became so great that this provision was abandoned. To deal with the fact that Maori land was in multiple ownership, a Maori Land Court was set up to deal with this situation and ensure that all title-holders were treated fairly.
Then in the North Island in the early decades of the colonial period, there was a number of tribal rebellions, falsely labelled “Land Wars” today and more or less localised. Indeed Ngapuhi and Arawa offered warriors to the Government to assist in quelling the rebellion in Taranaki. Land confiscation did indeed follow the suppression of these rebellions, fully in accordance with tikanga, largely to compensate a cash-strapped Government for the costs it had incurred. In fact some mistakes occurred in this process and a significant amount of confiscated land was returned to former Maori owners.
As things stand today, about 5.2% of the land of New Zealand remains under traditional Maori multiple ownership, about 4.5% was confiscated and that with rather more than 90% remaining is held under Torrens title by a variety of interested parties, many of whom are law-abiding citizens of part-maori descent. We have done well in such matters as a nation and racist propaganda which denies this should be rejected outright.
The position in New Zealand is really quite simple.
“Maori” are said to be 16% of the population – but this is entirely incorrect – because, almost without exception, those people who say they are ‘Māori’ have less than 50% Maori genetic background. However, let’s be overly generous here and say that perhaps one eighth of these people have more 50% or more Māori genes in their makeup.
That means that only 2% of our population have the right to call themselves Māori. The other 14% illogically deny the majority of their genetic background. This is simply irrational and could not stand up in a balanced debate.
Why do these people then deny the majority of their genes ? I am 1/4 Scottish, 1/4 English, and say 1/16th French – but I do not call myself French, Scottish or English – I am simply a New Zealand citizen who has one vote, in what until very recently was one of the great democracies in the world – and a country where females were first given the vote.
There can be only one reason for that 14% of the population who dishonestly call themselves Māori in having less than a preponderance of Māori genes – and that is that they wish to part of a society that for some dishonest reason gives them advantages that the vast majority of New Zealanders do not have:
• Their group get special seats in Parliament – where the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform which introduced MMP voting, said should be abolished
• Their so called ‘Māori’ businesses and property get privileged Tax and Rates reductions – often they pay NOTHING !
• They get privileged entry to University where in a competitive situation, the % marks gained in entrance examinations are set at an unjust lower level. For instance a set number of people with much less than 50% Māori generic background( as low as 1% if established) can gain entry to Medical School with 70% marks ! – compare this where recently a third generation non-Māori who wanted to follow his Father & Grandfather as a surgeon, was denied entry to the Medical School with marks of not 70% – but in excess of 94% !
• In a disgraceful situation where English is the Offical International Language ( to pilot an aircraft landing in Croatia you can’t talk Croatian, you must speak fluent English) we have unbelievably in NZ 50% ( perhaps more) of school leavers who have inadequate abilities in spoken or written English – and yet this present Government intends laughably to make the teaching of Te Reo Māori, a compulsory subject, and are spending countless $millions of taxpayer money on this project. This is so irresponsible and irrational, but the presently ‘woke’ National Party as the Government’s official ‘opposition’ seemingly does not to ever want to dispute this situation. The only way for people to progress in the world and to benefit NZ is to be able to speak, write, and read English – to a high standard
• At this present time this corrupt Government is creating a Health Service where ‘so called’ Māori will get preferential treatment ahead of all other New Zealand citizens. This is immoral, irrational, ‘racist’, and against all the principles of Hippocrates.
And so the list goes on – where so called disadvantaged “Māori” with as little as as 1% of Māori genetic background become one of the most privileged group of people in the world.
How could any average, honest, hard working, New Zealander possibly tolerate a situation, that has neo-Marxist connotations to it. Perhaps this is exactly so, with our Prime Minister previously having been the President of the Marxist Socialist Youth International.
What we have is unacceptable “racist” outrage – where it must be understood that no racist society in the world has ever survived.
Dr. Hylton Le Grice CNZM, OBE.
Nothing that you say here has any relevance to the points I made. Furthermore, Everything you list here, and I cannot be bothered going through point by point, is either a misrepresentation or an outright lie. The fundamental and uncomfortable truth is that your attitudes are racist.
Thanks for your reply Hylton
You don’t answer any of my points and just repeat yours and bring up new ones. Let’s face it, your post is racist and completely ignores the 200 years of colonisation and abrogation of Māori rights and ownership.
Thanks for briefly outlining the history of land sales to the Crown. I have one question, when you say “land confiscation did indeed follow the suppression of these rebellions, fully in accordance with tikanga”, did it also follow the British law? In other words was there a law whereby the Crown could confiscate land when Maori rebellions occured or were they operating under Maori “law”?
Why yes, there was. However the laws of the time embraced the dominant colonialist mindset, which had racism embedded within it.
This correspondence is now closed. We consider Mr Descartes’ comments above to be trolling and no further in this vein will be accepted