Comments by "AholeAtheist" (@AholeAtheist) on "David Seymour: Why Treaty of Waitangi principles should be redefined | Q+A 2024" video.

Good. What's radical is actually ignoring history and pretending that the radical things Maori had to endure never happened. Stopping a bunch of people going recreational fishing is not radical.
20
The "treaty" is irrelevant. We honour te Tiriti, not the treaty.
13
@geotruthnz7013 Irrelevant. Some are probably Maori from other iwi not local to the area. Again, it's not radical. Beating te reo out of people, that's radical. Stealing land, that's radical. They are not the extremists, the racists are. They are not the extremists, the capitalists allowing unsustainable commercial fishing are.
8
LOL. Jack Genocide Supporter Tame is not that. And David hasn't been misinterpreted just because some people see through his disingenuous lies and dog whistles. Perhaps you need to go back to school.
7
LOL. No.
4
David is either a disingenuous liar, or a low IQ clown. We don't talk about the Treaty, we don't honour the Treaty, we honour te Tiriti, the version the iwi who signed it understood. Every time he says "the treaty" in this interview, he's referencing a defunct, irrelevant document. When he says "I don't think you should be treated different because you're a treaty partner" he's trying to make out that Maori are treaty partners(as per te Tiriti) but pakeha are not, separating the Crown from pakeha, as if we are not the Crown, but essentially we are. When he's saying that "one side always gets a veto" he's essentially just trying to lead pakeha in not honouring te Tiriti, but he doesn't speak for all of us, and that is essentially illegal. We can't go back on it now. When he appeals to other countries that have had essentially apartheid states, he's being completely disingenuous. There's no indication that honouring te Tiriti would lead to that. When he says he's committed to in education, health and housing, the policies of his party regarding those will all just make matters worse for the working class, which disproportionately includes Maori. So this is either disingenuous, or indicative of his having a low IQ. Just a bunch of dog whistles to low IQ racists. If he and his supporters hate and fear Maori so much, they should leave Aoteearoa and never come back.
3
The irony here is, when David virtue signals towards those, it is just a virtue signal, because his policies will actually do the opposite. Especially for Maori who are disproportionately working class.
2
Tautoko.
2
Do you even understand what you're talking about?
1
We must have solidarity with Maori to stop this racist nonsense.
1
Perfect.
1
The treaty is irrelevant. We honour te Tiriti.
1
@StGammon77 Incorrect. Firstly, it doesn't mean the same thing, it's not a direct translation, and secondly you can't just re-write an agreement made between people almost two centuries ago. That wouldn't be fair to the indigenous population who were the majority at the time, but are not now. This is why international law stipulates the indigenous language version is the one that counts, because the indigenous signatories only understood that version.
1
I mean, I agree, but it won't end this nonsense, because we should still honour te Tiriti anyway, with tangata te tiriti as a stand in for "the Crown". And as such, we will probably still have racists like David Seymour and his low IQ voters trying to do away with it.
1
Ok, racist.
1
@StGammon77 Hmm.. Not so sure about that. Either way, that's irrelevant. Te Tiriti is not the same as the Treaty, and international law stipulates that we honour te Tiriti because it's what the indigenous population understood.
1
LOL. He is the one pushing division. Intelligent pakeha have solidarity with Maori. That is unity. Seymour is just playing to the low IQ racists.
1
Nonsense. In this instance, Jack Genocide Supporter Tame is right.
1
Correct, but incorrect. We are now the upholders of "the Crown's" side of the deal, as per democracy. And we will uphold it. Toitu te Tiriti.
1
@mitchelldenysschen3224 We should get rid of the monarchy, and "the Crown" label, move forward as a republic, but we don't really need a new constitution unless it honours and references te Tiriti.
1
@mitchelldenysschen3224 Yeah, sure, if they want to disregard international law, which stipulates that the indigenous language version of such treaties are the versions to be upheld. A new constitution might also just be an excuse for a racist majority to ignore that and do away with te Tiriti altogether. Realistically, if Seymour, Luxon, Peters and their colleagues really want to go through with a referendum on an issue that should never go to referendum, they should be dragged through Den Haag all the way to prison.
1
@mitchelldenysschen3224 Well you don't interpret all laws through it, at least not as far as I'm aware, but international law stipulates that when it comes to treaties with indigenous people by colonizers, the indigenous language version is the one to be upheld. So "the treaty" isn't worth the paper it's written on, instead we uphold te Tiriti.
1
@StGammon77 Yeah, nah, they don't know what they're talking about.
1
True, but that shouldn't mean doing away with te Tiriti. We should still honour it with tangata te tiriti standing in for "the Crown".
1
@AmonAnon-vw3hr LOL. wut? Go back to school.
1
@thomasr246 How is that different from Europeans? It's not. In fact, Europeans were more brutal. Maybe research all the torture devices used and all the wars across Europe over the centuries, and give your fucking head a wobble. What you are talking about in philosophy is called the state of nature bias, which basically means new world societies had a different relation to the land than Europeans, and Europeans came along and couldn't compute that mode of relation, and then imposed ours on them. That doesn't mean they didn't appreciate it or use it. In fact, it realistically means new world nations were more civilized and enlightened when it came to land/property rights. Again, give your racist head a wobble. Clown.
1
Umm, part of them getting treated like others necessarily involves them getting some special treatment to improve the outcomes they are suffering. They're victims because they're actually victims. You need a better education.
1