Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Turia's vision

I feel sorriest for Jhia Te Tua's mother, Ria Gardiner. She embodies Tariana Turia's vision for Maori women: pregnant at an early age to useless, violent shitheads. Naturally, Turia wouldn't agree that's her vision for Maori women, but it's the practical outcome of it.

Unlike most left-wingers, I file this kind of thing firmly under Not Whitey's Fault. Joshua Te Tua is typical of too large a number of Maori youth; like the subhumans currently on trial for murdering Nia Glassie, Te Tua seems human in his physical appearance, but inside his head where it counts, is as useful to his fellow humans as something you'd wipe from the bottom of your shoe. What happened to destroy these people's humanity I don't know - what I do know is that it's extremely unlikely that Whitey did it to them. Tariana, maybe you should stop working on the principle that it's a good thing for teenage Maori women to be raising children with these human write-offs, and instead look at how these guys (and gals like Oriwa Kemp and a host of others) became subhumans in the first place.

25 comments:

PM of NZ said...

Here, Fido!

Dave Mann said...

I don't think whitey did it to them at all, but I do think that, up until now, society at large has avoided noticing the elephant in the living room in that Maoris are a more violent people generally than most other groups in our society.

Their whole culture seems to revolve around violence, from the haka to the gangs with their tribal battles and the pride of place which the warrior has in their culture and their history. In its less unhealthy forms, this surfaces in their successes on the rugby and league pitches, and in its more unhealthy forms it boils away in the eyes of the disaffected as they glare out from under their hoodies in Westfield and on our streets.

Although Maori culture must obviously contain other elements than just aggression and warriorhood, New Zealand society has nurtured, validated and stimulated their violent aspects by refusing to name it for what it is. We are basically afraid to face up to Maori violence, preferring the cop-out route of appeasement, throwing money and benefits at it and giving them large chunks of our resources by way of 'compensation' for imaginary 'losses'. In this social climate, is it any wonder that we are breeding a dangerous antisocial and sometimes downright inhuman underclass?

In the '50s and '60s, when Maoris were thought of and treated as just ordinary new Zealanders, they behaved like ordinary New Zealanders and were no more likely to kill their own children or rape and murder than anybody else. Now that they have been universally elevated to the status of victim who can do no wrong and must be pandered and respected for their suffering etc they have started to behave in the way that society expects of them. What a big surprise.

Psycho Milt said...

Their "imaginary losses?" Funny, we all seem to have had the same dream...

Dave Mann said...

Sorry Psycho.... I don't follow you. Could you elaborate?

mawm said...

Just PM's way of bookmarking where he managed to read to. He'll come back and finish the story later. Poor fella has a very short... ummm, oh... concentration span.

If you give Maori (or anybody else) every thing they want - free money, access to drugs, alcohol and sex, digital TV, homes, cars, mobile phones, not having to work - then they are not going to aspire to completing an education and getting motivated to have a career.

Anonymous said...

"subhuman".

well then that's easy, isn't it.

apply the animal welfare act: shoot them out of hand.

subhuman.

Dave Mann said...

Well, anonymous, isn't it a funny situation that you have to have a licence to keep a dog, and if you mistreat it the SPCA get all over you like a rash.... but the same doesn't apply to breeding a human child.

Psycho Milt said...

I think their losses were a little more than imaginary, Dave - rather concrete in fact.

I'm off to Sydney for work, back this weekend, so apologies in advance for lack of response to further comments.

Inventory2 said...

Milt - what the media hasn't widely reported is that Joshua Te Tua is a patched Black Power member who was arrested several months before the death of his daughter for his alleged involvement in a drive-by shooting of a Mongel Mob house. In the chase which ensued, shots were fired at a police car from the BP vehicle in which Te Tua was travelling. I guess you reap what you sow.

Dave Mann said...

Psycho, I know you can't respond to this so it won't be a 'dialogue' as such but I'd just like to clarify my thinking on the question of 'losses'.

Briefly, I don't accept that any 20th or 21st century Maori has suffered any loss at all at the hands of any 19th century white settler. We are not living in Dr Who time travel land here. I don't even accept that any Maori living today has suffered AS A RESULT of the actions of their or any other person's forebears. A progressive country with a democratic governance system and a forward looking hard working immigrant base was born where, more, probably, than any other colony in history, each person was considered equal and treated on their merits.

Any sense of loss or grievance is purely imaginary and, while it might suit the purposes of apologists and activists, the best course of action would be to build a fucking bridge and GET OVER IT, frankly.

If I wanted to, I could dredge up all sorts of shit going right back to the Vikings to excuse my failures - and if society were to encourage and institutionalise this irresponsible avoidance thinking then it would reap the same rewards as we are seeing with the Maoris today.

Clunking Fist said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Clunking Fist said...

DM: “avoided noticing the elephant in the living room in that Maoris are a more violent people generally than most other groups in our society.”

Okay, that explains Maoris problem. So what explains the UK's soccer hooligans with their violence and tribalism?

In some ways, whitey DID do it to Maori, and to the former-working class of Britain and latterly the middle-classes of both countries: provide a trough to feed at in return for votes.
As the young lab in Whaleoil's video says "Labour will give you free money".

Mark said...

The thing I can't get is why these woman get invovled with these losers in the first place.

Sus said...

"In some ways, whitey DID do it to Maori, and to the former-working class of Britain .."

Only to those who *chose* to accept it, Fist. It comes down to individual choice. Beware of collectivism.

Milt's post is honest. But he wonders "what happened to destroy these people's humanity". DM explained at length and I can't disagree with much.

AFAIC it's relatively simple. Easy money for nothing in return leads to increased irresponsibility, a sense of ongoing entitlement and, ironically, an increasing sense of ingratitude to the very people who fund the former's lifestyle, (hence the overt aggro twd those perceived to be successful, or just have more).

And when your *collective* - that word again - race is virtually sanctified by the same politically correct Wets who owe their living to being the distributors of such largesse and your misdemeanours are ignored, and even excused on account of your DNA, (more collectivisation) it's all downhill from there, pdq.

The DPB is, of course, a godsend for these folk. It enables two things:

1) loser dads to bugger off and abrogate all parental responsibilities leaving Mum with the kids, knowing that the state (in reality the poor old taxpayer - again) will pick up the financial pieces, and

2) allow loser boyfriends to move in with Mum-on-DPB and live off her very nicely thank you, being fed & screwed on demand.

And that's not even mentioning the bloodsport that can be enjoyed by the truly sick & vile, eg torturing Mum's little kids who are, of course, just a pain in the ass.

That Tariana Turia continues to justify this madness, and that John Key seems determined to allow it to continue, is beyond belief.

The question to be asked is simply "why"?

Dave Mann said...

clunking fist, we could bring up... oh, any number of red herrings and (I think the term is) straw men.

If you can see the logic and similarity between killing your own children and soccer hooliganism, then best of luck to you. You must have been in the University debating club or something, coz you've lost me completely.

Clunking Fist said...

Sorry, Dave, I thought you meant violence per se, not (arguably) statistically insignificant infanticide. (Obviously NOT insignificant in all other respects.) And is it not the STEP parents and STEP uncles the ones primarily dishing out the “love”? That is, they are not killing their OWN off-spring (cavemen lost interest in supporting children who didn’t resemble them, as the theory goes).
What I’m trying to say is does race really have anything to do with it? Is the outcome of welfare dependency the same across all countries at the lowest social level, such as the white chavs of the YooKay? After all, it was white kids that killed the white toddler James Bolger.

Sus:
"Only to those who *chose* to accept it, Fist. It comes down to individual choice. Beware of collectivism."

I'm not sure about what your point on collectivism is about? Maybe I should have said "whitey = sickly-white-liberal-aka-sovialist”? Granted that isn't a given in the way I wrote it!

And what do you mean about choice? Is choice less about accepting the money than about letting it change your life: accepting "20 Free hours ECE" (as I have done for 2 children now) has not prompted me (we!) to have a third. But in lieu of a taxcut those "thieving Labour scum" owe me, I took the 20 ECE as it was (reluctantly) offered by the centre our children attnd.

Sus said...

Fist: 'Choice' as in losers of any stripe who *choose* to live irresponsibly and accept welfare on offer, as opposed to those who don't.

I rail against collectivism because it dumps people in boxes, denying the individual the right to his thoughts & actions. Socialists love to dump people into boxes. It gives them block groups to use for their own purposes. "Maori this" and "women that", etc.

I wrote an article on this very topic which was published in a local magazine and reprinted at Not PC a fortnight ago.

Sus said...

"Is the outcome of welfare dependency the same across all countries at the lowest social level"?

Short answer, yes. I can't think of any exceptions, can you?

FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

Whilst not PC to mention it, yes, there is a glofification of violence among maony maori.
The warrior culture persists today and is emphasised by the gangs as well as the Haka, a primitive war dance pakeha are being urged to adopt as wel.
But yes, the welfare state that allows useless people to breed can also take its share of the blame.
The comments from Sus are entirely correct.

FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

Whilst not PC to mention it, yes, there is a glofification of violence among maony maori.
The warrior culture persists today and is emphasised by the gangs as well as the Haka, a primitive war dance pakeha are being urged to dopt as wel.
But yes, the welfare state that allows useless people to breed can also take its share of the blame.
The comments from Sus are entirely correct.

Anonymous said...

"Is the outcome of welfare dependency the same across all countries at the lowest social level"?

Short answer, yes. I can't think of any exceptions, can you?


No it most certainly is not. the US has a far lower rate of welfare dependency than any other Western country?

Why? Because the US has a much lower lever of welfare than most other Western countries.


Also: how many Kiwis who have moved to Aussie are welfare-dependent?
Answer: none! no welfare for Kiwis in Aus

Anonymous said...

accepting "20 Free hours ECE" (as I have done for 2 children now) has not prompted me (we!) to have a third.

No - but it has made you a bludger

Observer said...

A thought chain

Maori
Poor education outcomes
Low income
Welfare
Need to 'loose' oneself
Drugs
Alcohol
Fatty foods
Sky TV
Crime programmes
Video games
Pick up useful things
Kill the other players
Number of lives remaining
Chase through the game's land
Go for a walk
See something usefull
Take it
Kill the person who had it before
How many lives have they got left?


I hate my mind chain on this,but it works!
"Work for welfare" will get people away from TV and Video games and doing something more healthy
"Education standards" will identify people who need more help to achieve basic qualifications to do more thanpull weeds and dig holes
"Social Norms editing" will remove much violence from our living rooms


The criminals of my youth were the people not caught by the education system and prepared for the life style they were capable of creating for themselves. This is the same here today; however, where I grew up there were no Maori! The crims were uneducated white Anglo Saxon protestants, or the clever people who could manipulate them toi do what they wanted them too, like the Cray brothers.

Clunking Fist said...

Yes, I'm a "bludger", but I will happily forego any and all subsidies/handouts/welfare ...in return for a decent tax cut.

Sus said...

"No it most certainly is not. the US has a far lower rate of welfare dependency than any other Western country?"


Anon 1.07am: You should go to bed earlier, or at least read carefully before you comment, plse. We were discussing 'outcomes' of welfare, not quantity. Observer lists some.

Observer: Working for the dole requires another large bureaucracy which is self-defeating and in reality amounts to little more than rearranging the proverbial deckchairs.

Best to gradually phase state welfare out altogether as Lindsay Mitchell demonstrates regularly on her blog.