Tuesday, March 13, 2012

vto and me

So it starts when I put a comment on The Standard about Hone's open letter to overseas investors. vto places a reply
vto Btw, I recall last week some coughing and spluttering from yourself when I referred to the military machinations of Ngai Tahu. In the last week I have had cause to visit various tourist sites around the South Island, several of which had informations available regarding Maori history at the particular sites. I was quite appalled at the lack of reference to those who existed prior to Ngai Tahu’s invasions and the dominance of recent history (last 200 years i.e. Ngai Tahu) over longer history. I guess that some things never change – the victor writes the history books.
and on we go, please note many of these quotes are taken from long comments
6.1.1
vto Fact: Histories at tourist sites around the South Island are excessively slanted in favour of Ngai Tahu, the victors.
me you keep raising the same point in a snide way, such as – “when I referred to the military machinations of Ngai Tahu” and “I was quite appalled at the lack of reference to those who existed prior to Ngai Tahu’s invasions and the(ir) dominance of recent history.” Those statements are ignorant – sorry if that offends you. Just who are you talking about vto? Ngāti Mamoe? Waitaha? Guess what, most Ngāi Tahu whānui, like me, whakapapa to all three iwi – that’s what it means to be part of the iwi – it’s on the front page of their website, not hard to find. Perhaps you are talking about other peoples who inhabited the island – please tell me who you are talking about. Hopefully you don’t bring up some brailsford bullshit.
vto marty mars, this issue began when you raised yourself to some higher moral ground to look down on the european colonists and their military ways, forgetting your own past and its own military ways. The basis of the issue was hypocrisy and it was that which I was pointing out.
vto “… and through inter-marriage and conquest these migrants merged with the resident Waitaha and took over authority of Te Waipounamu.” Ngai Tahu website. LOL, this is exactly what I was referring to. A painting of history at odds with the reality. For example, why write “…through inter-marriage and conquest … took over authority” which implies inter-marriage was somehow equal at the time to conquest? I tell you why – because it makes for a better looking history when compared to writing “though military conquest the Waitaha were conquered and authority assumed by mamoe at the end of a taiaha. … ” As for inter-marriage, how long after the “conquest” was that? Or was it a result of the rape by soldiers?
vto face it marty mars, the history as written is not settled. Why else would it get raised in conversation when in certain parts of the South Island?And as for your moral high ground when referencing european military escapades as compared your own, sheesh, your own website blows that one out of the water. Wake up fulla.
me “at odds with the reality” – your distorted reality vto, “which implies” – only in your head vto, “better looking history” – so you say vto, the knowledge is there vto of what happened in detail the fact is you aren’t ready for it and couldn’t handle it – it not yours and not for you. your bigotry shows through loud and clear with your final ‘fulla’ – you show yourself.
vto to Hateatea I am questioning marty’s point some couple weeks ago that saw him clamber onto high moral ground and look down on the ways and means of the European as if they are / were somehow worse and more morally lacking than those of Maori at times of conquest or colonisation. His own history is the same, as you perfectly point out above. He chooses to ignore this and claim a superiority. That is what grates. An incorrect view of history and a hypocrisy. The line ‘the victor writes the history books’, so true through all of humanity, is entirely applicable.
vto to Hateatea That questioning by me of marty’s view then resurfaced through the example of Maori histories at tourist sites I happenned to come across some days ago, which also painted a view of their history seemingly at odds with other views. To further support this I copied just one part of Ngai Tahu’s website to indicate how the wording has been constructed to paint a more favourable picture than could otherwise have been written. He has not answered any of this except to say I am thick and no nothing. That is all he has said. Read it yourself, it is all there above and around.
me “He chooses to ignore this and claim a superiority.”, no I don’t – please provide reference. “An incorrect view of history and a hypocrisy” In your opinion or do you have backup for your ‘incorrect history’ story. “seemingly at odds with other views” Which other views – come on provide your sources, “to paint a more favourable picture” Once again in your view – favourable is subjective – my point to you is that you don’t know enough to understand the concept or content in relation to these matters, you are still looking through your blurred lense created by your own stuff.
me You started this deliberate attack on me because you know I am part of the iwi. You added comments to my unrelated comments to bring up the point that you strongly wished to say. Yet you still waffle on scared to tell your truth. Here you go – get it out – tell me the real story.
“I don’t like Ngai Tahu”
“I don’t like maori getting special treatment”
“I don’t like maori not fitting in to our country” and so on…
Frankly, if it is actually about indigenous historial narratives and their use in creating perceptions and positioning for marginalised groups, I’ll eat my hat.
So that is a flame war of sorts. Also a bit of fun. I do confess to being sensitive around these matters and when provoked a bit of tiger comes out, but I think vto is totally out of line with his terrible accusations. I cannot stand by and let lies gain traction.

10 comments:

pakehaha said...

I'm sorry but you really are from another planet, as your blog title suggests.

In respect of conquest, Maori in pre-european times lived by the law of the club. The simple fact is that if European settlers had behaved according to the governing practices in repect of warfare and the treatment of enemies dominant in New Zealand at the time, then there would be much less perhaps no Maori alive today. There is no escaping that iwi conquered and enslaved, raped, and ate their enemies routinely, and there was no compassion or concession shown in 99 percent of cases.

The history is there to be read, in multiple sources. Of course, Maori and non-Maori with a poltical agenda, which some might say for some of the later is really about endless muru against pakeha in response to collonisation and if not defeat in general then loss of the autonomous power to decide, encluding the terms of morality, for themselves, must attack history because what can be read in it.

Kim Mcbreen said...

geez Marty, these people. I wonder how they think Māori survived, if our tūpuna spent all their time killing each other. The oral literature and art must have been taught to our tūpuna by some passing european. And obviously vto has more knowledge of our iwi history than, you know, those of us with Waitaha, Kāti Mamoe and Ngāi Tahu whakapapa. Fyi vto--my Waitaha tūpuna don't need the likes of you to defend our iwi, they have their uri--ko tātou ngā kanohi me ngā waha kōrero o rātou mā.

It amazes me that people who have no idea of pre-european history of this land can make such boldly idiotic statements. It's not like balanced information isn't easily accessed--there's plenty of iwi histories been written. Hell, there's even Waitangi Tribunal reports if people need Crown approval before they'll accept something (like you say though, nothing will make them accept anything other than their bigotry).

kia kaha e hoa.

KjT said...

I think what VTO and Marty are both trying to say, is, that no one culture has a monopoly on being arsholes, or saints.

Hateatea said...

I am still puzzled and he is being evasive about which sites and what interpretation he takes issue with.

It sounds as if we have to look further back in time than either of us has to date.

Marty Mars said...

Kia ora koutou

"the law of the club" - that's a good one thanks pakehaha.

I feel your analysis to be a bit one dimensional. Colonisation affected every aspect of the lifes of tangata whenua. This, dragging Māori back by the scruff of their necks from depraved savagery, is a myth.

Kia ora Kim

I know it staggers me what some of these people think they can just say. They don't understand the power of words. All the best.
Kia kaha e hoa

Kia ora KjT

Very good and on the money.

Kia ora Hateatea

I think vto has issues.

Anonymous said...

yet more insults in the north
http://readingthemaps.blogspot.co.nz/2012/03/be-careful-what-you-wish-for-cameron.html
the false claims are circulating on white power sites like Stormfront

Anonymous said...

this is even funnier
http://www.elocal.co.nz/view_Article.aspx?id=518+++++++
maori are guilty of anti-white genocide now! 60,000 bones ground up!

Anonymous said...

i think that too
text for free at
http://textme4free.com/

Anonymous said...

marty mars, why don't you try reading and listening to what I say instead of plastering your own paranoia all over it. KjT has it completely right - no one culture has a monopoly on being saints or arseholes. We get into ding dongs because you and others who regularly comment at the Standard claim a faux moral high ground.

Nothing more and nothing less than this is what I respond to by trying to point out how the human condition is common across all peoples. You deny this (you did it at the start of the military machinations thread. Adele did it by claiming that there was no racism in aotearoa until whitey arrived (obviously duh, but the human trait which leads to racism would certainly have been present and manifested itself in other ways)).

You admit to being sensitive. You are. Try reading the words that I write and stop placing your own smears all over it.

And as for your claims that I am somehow anti-maori. Bullshit. Show me where. Put up or shut up. And get context right.

To those who pile in like Kim Mcbreen, more fool you to not read properly. I was not trying to defend your lot - I was explaining that not one race has a monopoly on being saints or arseholes.

vto

Frank said...

"In respect of conquest, Maori in pre-european times lived by the law of the club. The simple fact is that if European settlers had behaved according to the governing practices in repect of warfare and the treatment of enemies dominant in New Zealand at the time, then there would be much less perhaps no Maori alive today. There is no escaping that iwi conquered and enslaved, raped, and ate their enemies routinely, and there was no compassion or concession shown in 99 percent of cases. "

Oh, thank lordy for civilised Europeans and their noble sense of the art of war!

Not Europeans didn't exterminate millions in two world wars; several other major conflicts; invasions; colonisations; revolutions; etc, etc. It's surprising there are any still Euros left alive today.

Maori lived by the "law of the club" - whilst Europeans lived by the laws of gunpowder. And armoured tanks. And nerve gas, And concentration camps. And vast dreadnought warships. And bomber planes. And finally the atomic bomb.

People like Pakehaha amuse me greatly. They take out of history what they want to support their own learned, warped prejudice. Then they get shirty when others poke fun at their silliness...

Silly Pakehaha; lecturing another race on violence when European history was as bloody as anywhere else on this planet.

But that's not really your point, is it, mate. Your REAL point is a bit of brown-boy bashing, with holier-than-thou, selective historical moralising to justify your racist crap.

"The simple fact is that if European settlers had behaved according to the governing practices in repect of warfare and the treatment of enemies dominant in New Zealand at the time, then there would be much less perhaps no Maori alive today. "

Look up Parihaka - a fine example of the Noble European and how they conquered, enslaved, raped and imprisoned their enemy. An enemy, I might add, that had taken on board the pakeha/Euro concept of the non-violent Jesus Christ.

@ Anonymous (May 2) - "Anonymous said...

marty mars, why don't you try reading and listening to what I say instead of plastering your own paranoia all over it. KjT has it completely right - no one culture has a monopoly on being saints or arseholes. We get into ding dongs because you and others who regularly comment at the Standard claim a faux moral high ground."

No, we get into "ding dongs" because right wing fanatics have been slow to pick up on the failure of neo-liberalism which has reduced incomes since the late 70s; increased wealth disparities; and all but wrecked the global economy in 2007/08.

There weren't too many socialists in the boardrooms of Wall St, AIG, Lehmann Bros, Bank of Scotland, General Motors, etc, etc - but they sure as hell all but destroyed the world econbomy and threw millions into unemployment.

"Faux moral high ground"? No - we get into moral outrage at the stupidity of right wingers who still don't get it.

Mind you, it took the Russians 70 years to 'click' that their grand economic experiment had failed - maybe it'll take that long for adherents of the New Right to come to that slow, dawning realisation?

In the meantime, there will be more victims of this failed market-driven ideology. But not for much longer; the tenor of publiic conversation is changing.

Where once the argument was framed within the parameters of the free market, media and the public are now starting to question whether the last 30 years have been a stirling success - or a Grade A1 Clusterf**k of colossal proportions.

Hell, even the rich like Warrren Buffet, and economic commentators like Rod Oram and Bernard Hickey are questioning the validity of the New Right paradigm.

And when folks question an ideology, there's no guarantee that ideology will find favour with the masses.