Entry 2389, on 2025-03-13 at 20:26:42 (Rating 5, Comments)
I've been doing quite a lot of anti-Maori debating recently (or what some people might call racist, Maori bashing). Actually, that's not really accurate, and I'll leave it to you to decide whether I'm racist or not (I really don't care at this point). It is more arguing against Maori activism, Maori privilege, and Maori customs and beliefs being forced onto people in inappropriate contexts. So in fact, I'm not anti Maori, or anti any other group of people in fact, but I am anti some of the nonsense we are forced to endure to maintain subservience to Maori cultural beliefs.
I recently watched a video where American comedian and commentator, Bill Maher, ridiculed New Zealand for giving a mountain, Mount Taranaki, the status of a person. And he's absolutely right, because this is embarrassing and silly, and it is just a way to keep Maori activists happy, as well as making a bunch of mindless woke fools feel good.
New Zealand commentator, Martyn Bradbury, wrote an open letter in return which is too tedious to repeat in full, but here are some selected parts to give you an idea: "Maori have cultural memory of the first wave of white settler capitalist exploitation resource taking" and "they have the flax roots knowledge of what sustainability and environmental protection looks like" and "international right wing think tanks always aim to attack indigenous rights".
It's all the usual nonsense. Would the Maori who "remember white settler exploitation" and who "have the knowledge of sustainability" be the same ones (or the descendants of them) who destroyed more native vegetation before colonisation than has been done since? Would they be the same who wiped out many species, including the moa, because they exploited them as a resource?
The fact is that Maori had no idea what sustainability even meant, and no concept of preserving nature. Environmentalism is primarily an invention of the Western world. If the British hadn't colonised the country would there be any original forest left? How many bird species would remain? Would the Maori have even managed to survive?
This is the point that Maher went on to make in his monologue where he, quite rightly, criticised Maori as being ignorant, stone age, violent, cannibalistic savages. It was really quite a rant, and although it was true, it wasn't something you hear too often.
If Mount Taranaki needs protection then can we do it in a rational way which doesn't make us look like a nation of clowns? There are already mechanisms in place to protect important areas of the country which actually make sense and don't rely on primitive superstitions to be enacted.
In fact, we are laughed at around the world for several other reasons as well, and most of them seem to relate to Maori culture. The All Blacks haka is admired by some, but many others find it tedious, offensive, and completely unnecessary. The debacle in parliament last year when a bunch of idiots from the Maori Party jumped around acting like five year olds was also laughed at by many. And some people have been quite alarmed at attempts to incorporate Maori superstitions and casual beliefs into science teaching and research here.
People have the right to believe whatever nonsense they want. There are plenty of European New Zealanders who believe in some pretty crazy stuff, both in the area of religious and new age beliefs, but at least they tend to keep those to themselves, except for maybe Destiny Church! But even in that case, their activism isn't celebrated and isn't used to formulate laws and regulations.
So I think we need to do two things...
First, we need to keep different areas of human interest in the context they naturally belong in. Mythology and religious belief is OK as long as it is treated that way. It cannot be used to formulate laws and regulations, and cannot be forced onto people who have no interest in it. I will not participate in karakia (Maori prayers) before a meeting or in any other context, for example. And I will not respect laws based on someone else's superstitions.
Second, as far as we do recognise different cultures' beliefs, we need to at least have an even playing field. If we are going to make Maori mythology part of science then why not make creationism part of it too? Obviously, I am making a rhetorical point here, and neither have a place there. If some Maori tribe protests when a traditional belief that they have is invalidated in some way, then how is that different from Destiny Church protests? I know, both are inconvenient and sometimes become somewhat violent, but the general reaction is quite different for similar actions.
Really, it's about time activists of all types were put in their place. Activism is fine, but when it is irrational and self-serving we really need to ridicule it. Maybe Bill Maher could do one of his famous rants and we could put it on national TV news? That might get the message across that we are sick of this embarrassing nonsense.
Comment 1 (7830) by Ralph on 2025-03-13 at 21:34:33:
Surprised that there are no comments, as so many people are now finally speaking out, had enough of this nonsense, probably takes courage to publicly comment. Well done.
Comment 2 (7831) by OJB on 2025-03-13 at 21:54:25:
Well, I only posted it an hour or two back, so there hasn't been much time, but most people don't comment, and with a controversial topic like this, are you surprised?
Thanks for reading this blog post. Please leave a message below.
You can leave comments about this entry using this form.
To add a comment: enter a name and email (optional), type the number shown, enter a comment, click Add. Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous. Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry. The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.
BLOG PAGE