500 Pasifika in South Auckland turn up to hear John Key

July 9th, 2014 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

Prime Minister John Key spoke to more than 500 members of ’s community today in an attempt to sway votes from the Labour stronghold.

That’s a massive turnout, in an area which normally is the strongest in NZ for Labour.

Mr Lotu-Iiga said he grew up in the Mangere community and was once too a Labour voter, but he had been seeing a shift in support towards . “Things are changing around here.”

Also at the meeting was Manukau city church group member Del Kumandan, who said he too had seen National’s support grow in the area.

“The tide’s definitely turning?the people are identifying with what National is doing for them.”

National is never going to win South Auckland or even come close. But an extra party vote in South Auckland is just as good as an extra vote in Clutha-Southland.

Tags: , ,

61 Responses to “500 Pasifika in South Auckland turn up to hear John Key”

  1. Redbaiter (7,643 comments) says:

    “National is never going to win South Auckland or even come close.”

    Maybe, maybe not. If Key continues to fly the flag for socialism, and Labour continues to demonstrate a completely ineffective and incompetent management style, the Nats may eventually replace Labour as preferred choice in such left wing electorates.

    Problem is, by becoming your enemy, you never really win the battle.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    Better warn David Garrett that the use of “Pasifika” in a post headline is proof the pinkos have taken over Kiwiblog.

    Or is Pasifika only PC when it refers to Labour supporters?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (789 comments) says:

    My sources tell me that 5000 people turned out to listen Messiah preach the world. Take that DPF.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. gravedodger (1,517 comments) says:

    “But an extra party vote in South Auckland is just as good as an extra vote in Clutha-Southland.”

    A lot better than that, Frank’s intercept on Saturday night was worth 14 points to The Blues, That vote in Manakau is worth two to Key.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    …and it looks like John Key is in on leftist plot:

    “Yet Prime Minister John Key said there had been a shift in support in the Labour stronghold of South Auckland.

    “We’ve been saying for quite some time that we see a shift in the Pacific voting patterns.

    “I can’t think of a time when I’ve been the leader of the National Party when we would have had so many people in Mangere turn up for a National Party meeting .

    “I think it just sends a very strong message that there are changes afoot in voting patterns for Pacific New Zealanders.

    No, John. Get the right political advice from that stunningly successful political operator and analyst David Garrett – they are former cannibals who hate one another. That message will lock in their votes!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. duggledog (1,362 comments) says:

    They are Polynesians, not ‘pasifika’ which is entirely a construct of central Auckland & Wellington intelligentsia, and is widely derided amongst Islanders themselves (I’m quoting DG who should know).

    National could remind them of the findings of the study a couple of years back which proved Polynesians, although great rugby players, cost NZ Inc. three dollars for every dollar they produce.

    In other words, they have it pretty good, and it’s down to the prosperous (mainly farmers, business owners etc) to keep the status quo going for them. Ergo, National. Labour & the Gimps can not help them and this can be explained to them very simply.

    Unfortunately the report was widely regarded as racist, and Oscar Kightely cried about it on National Radio.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    They are Polynesians…

    So are Maori – who collectively tend to have some very different and/or distinct voting concerns, e,g., Treaty of Waitangi, the Foreshore & Seabed legacy, rural services and regional development including conservation especially in the far North and East Coast. Plus Maori tend to be anti-immigration, whereas Pasifika are (obviously) generally in favour of immigration.

    Plus, unlike Pasifika, Maori especially in urban settings are not collectively as religious.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. kowtow (7,653 comments) says:

    What’s with all this race division stuff?

    Shouldn’t we all just be New Zealanders?

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Nukuleka (217 comments) says:

    It is sad that there every time Pacific Islanders are mentioned (I loathe the term Pasifika) on this site there have to be a few knobs who put in their unpleasant 2 penny worth of racism and prejudice which merely confirm the left’s view that conservatives are racists!! References to ‘former cannibals’ etc are distinctly unsettling and surely unnecessary.

    Great to discuss issues and have free and open views but please avoid the nastiness and blatantly vile racial slurs. It is possible to discuss Pacific Islanders, Asians, Maoris, the Dutch or whoever without resorting to glib stereotyping.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Redbaiter (7,643 comments) says:

    “Shouldn’t we all just be New Zealanders?”

    We should be, but the Marxist’s strategy is to split us into warring groups under the old divide and conquer principle.

    As you can see, its working pretty well for them. In fact, you could almost say with the utter failure of the opposition to resist or recognise such strategies, the Marxists are winning hands down.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. 103PapPap (129 comments) says:

    Interesting that Key lobbied the NZ Rugby for the All Blacks to play Samoa in Apia next year as part of their RWC preparation.

    This is going to resonate with Auckland Samoans.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Griff (6,833 comments) says:

    Kimbo
    its a new day buddy
    Leave yesterdays dispute behind or you start looking just a little obsessed and unhinging.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Alan (1,064 comments) says:

    I heard there was a free buffet, people will turn up at anything if you feed them

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    @ Nukuleka

    Great to discuss issues and have free and open views but please avoid the nastiness and blatantly vile racial slurs. It is possible to discuss Pacific Islanders, Asians, Maoris, the Dutch or whoever without resorting to glib stereotyping.

    Always good advice.

    Just out of interest – is the term “Pacific Islander” more acceptable to you and your family and friends than Pasifika? I understand that folks want to retain, just like everyone else, their distinct identity be it Samoan, Tongan, Niuean whatever. But if and when non-Maori Polynesians of the South Pacific are referred to like in this post, is “Pacific Islander” the preferred term?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    @ Griff

    Fair enough.

    I couldn’t help myself – It stood out like dog’s balls.

    And as far as “obsessed” goes – hey, a guy’s gotta have a hobby.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Pete George (22,866 comments) says:

    “We should be, but the Marxist’s strategy is to split us into warring groups under the old divide and conquer principle.”

    Just as well we have Redbaiter working so hard to unite everyone then, otherwise the Marxists and others intent on dividing and conquering would be winning hands down.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Nukuleka (217 comments) says:

    Kimbo- ‘Pasifika’ is a generally meaningless term to Pacific Islanders. You’re right that Samoans, Tongans etc see themselves as separate cultural identities and don’t much like to be lumped together. I can’t speak for others but I’d be happy with ‘Pacific Islander’.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    Malo

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. ShawnLH (3,527 comments) says:

    “If Key continues to fly the flag for socialism”

    Red, you clearly don’t know what the word socialism means.

    A far more accurate description of Key’s economic view would be the Social Market/Social Capitalism philosophy of the continental European center Right, the model for Germany’s post-war success.

    Your understanding of political and economic categories is ridiculously narrow and ignorant of the broad sweep of conservative thought historically and globally.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. ShawnLH (3,527 comments) says:

    “We should be, but the Marxist’s strategy is to split us into warring groups under the old divide and conquer principle.”

    Hilarious!

    I need to get back to the States and tell all the Native Americans that they are Marxists! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. ShawnLH (3,527 comments) says:

    For Redbaiters ongoing education:

    “The Social market economy (German: Soziale Marktwirtschaft) is a form of market capitalism combined with a social policy favoring social insurance, and is sometimes classified as a coordinated market economy. The social market economy was originally promoted and implemented in West Germany by the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) under Chancellor Konrad Adenauer in 1949. Its origins can be traced to the interwar Freiburg school of economic thought.

    The social market economy was designed to be a third way between laissez-faire economic liberalism and social democratic mixed economies. It was strongly inspired by ordoliberalism and the tradition of Catholic social teaching or, more generally, Christian ethics.

    The social market economy refrains from attempts to plan and guide production, the workforce, or sales, but it does support planned efforts to influence the economy through the organic means of a comprehensive economic policy coupled with flexible adaptation to market studies. Effectively combining monetary, credit, trade, tax, customs, investment, and social policies, as well as other measures, this type of economic policy creates an economy that serves the welfare and needs of the entire population, thereby fulfilling its ultimate goal.

    Some authors use the term social capitalism with roughly the same meaning as social market economy. It is also called Rhine capitalism, typically when contrasting it with the Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism.

    Critics identify the social market model with the notions of the welfare state and sometimes mistakenly identify it as being socialistic. However, one of the main factors for the emergence of the European model of capitalism was to ameliorate the conditions of workers under capitalism and thus stave off the emergence of socialism or socialist revolution.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. hj (6,374 comments) says:

    What this post lacks is why Pasifica might turn to national. Would it be key’s assertions of liberal immigration treatment (family unification)? Or it could be that Pasifika are too conservative for Labour?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. hj (6,374 comments) says:

    But Dr Hansen said the report also contained useful information, which was interesting and provocative.

    It covered the performance of Auckland’s economy and the effects of immigration on New Zealand’s environment and property market.

    “It’s a discussion paper, it says it is a discussion paper and it has caused some discussion,” he said.

    “That’s not necessarily a bad thing.”

    Dr Clydesdale said his paper was peer reviewed and accepted by international scholars before its presentation at a July conference in Brazil, but he has not given details.

    He stuck by his statements that future growth depends on having a population that can create new products and new production processes.

    This requires a high level of education, especially in technology, sciences and engineering.

    “Pacific people have poor educational outcomes compared to other migrant groups, and with their growing population size, this will mean New Zealand will have a smaller proportion with the capability to produce growth.”

    He said it was notable that, when all Pasifika speakers talked about the achievement of Pacific peoples, they provided examples in sport and the arts.

    “Their failure to provide business examples is exactly what I am talking about. New Zealand policy should reflect a need for future economic growth.”

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/463023/Economist-stands-by-underclass-comments

    Cheap labour? Key is popular but so was HC “I’m the most popular PM ever!!”. One day (with luck) people will look at Key and see he was looking after a particular sector (group) to the detriment of the whole.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. kowtow (7,653 comments) says:

    Kimbo says:

    “I understand that folks want to retain, just like everyone else, their distinct identity”

    I don’t agree. Come to New Zealand and become a New Zealander,if not stay at home.

    That applies to all,not just PI’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    I don’t agree. Come to New Zealand and become a New Zealander, if not stay at home.

    That applies to all,not just PI’s.

    Fair enough. Me and the rest of the Presbyterian Ngati Scottish suggest your problem may be an inability to multi-task. Suggest it is possible to be both-and, not just either-or. Over time connection to the original homeland diminishes.

    That is the (almost) inevitable pattern of most immigrant groups, including the most successful immigrant nation of all time, the uSA.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. mister nui (975 comments) says:

    Pasifika is a horrible term. It is not included in any dictionary of note.

    It is simply a term dreamed up by New Zealand’s wet-behind-the-ears-liberal-can’t-offend-anyone media.

    It shows how absolutely beholden to political correctness the limp wristed jerks are.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. mister nui (975 comments) says:

    Come to New Zealand and become a New Zealander,if not stay at home.

    Well said that man.

    I don’t care who you support in rugby, or whatever fetishes you may have. But, this is New Zealand, we don’t throw our rubbish out the car windows, we only take fish inside our catch and size limits, etc. etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. hj (6,374 comments) says:

    A brief commentary on
    “Growing pains: The valuation and cost of human capital”,
    by Greg Clydesdale, Department of Management & International Business, Massey University – Albany

    Prepared by Paul Hansen
    Department of Economics, University of Otago

    Given that New Zealand’s ethnic groups (on average)1 exhibit a range of performances/experiences on the indicators considered, then, by definition, some groups (on average) will be apparently more productive and more likely to contribute to economic growth, while others will be less productive and less likely to contribute to economic growth (and some will be in the middle!). At any point in time (e.g. now), these things are true by definition.
    But I fail to see why these relative positions must necessarily be the same in the future. Why would they not change over time? Specifically, why would the apparent performances/experiences of the Pacific Islands ethnic group not ‘improve’ over time, as has happened (and continues to happen) for other ethnic groups? Clydesdale acknowledges that (p. 10, my italics):

    Where Pacific Islanders have similar skills, they do appear to catch up over time. However, the skills and education of this group is not improving at a rate that would allow catch-up with the population, and as a whole they run the risk of becoming an underclass.

    In my opinion, the evidence presented by Clydesdale in support of the assertion in the second sentence of the quote is inadequate. The only evidence presented (see p. 10)1 is a quote from a 2004 OECD report:2

    … even the educational and skill levels achieved by their [Pacific Islands people’s] off-spring do not seem sufficient for this group to give the result observed in many OECD countries that second generation immigrants from un-skilled backgrounds do much better than their parents.

    In my opinion, more evidence than this is needed.

    https://archive.today/o/jkTFu/http://www.hrc.co.nz/hrc_new/hrc/cms/files/documents/03-Jun-2008_15-34-50_P_Hansen_review_MPIA_formatted.doc

    The unemployment rate for Pasifika was 15.4% in the year to March 2013, which was 0.9 percentage points above its level
    a year ago, and 8.5 percentage points higher than its level five years ago. Compared with the unemployment rate for all people, which was 6.8% inMarch 2013, the Pasifika rate has increased more sharply.

    http://www.dol.govt.nz/publications/lmr/pdfs/lmr-fs/lmr-fs-pacific-mar13.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. kowtow (7,653 comments) says:

    kimbo

    The US was succesful as an immigrant nation as from its founding there was a belief or willingness that one became American and subscribed to an American vision. E pluribus unum and all that.

    Today ,i’m not so sure that holds sway as multiculturalism, race ,and other factors start to tear the plcae apart.

    July 4 th was “celebrated ” in Chicago with some 80 murders. I’d warrant most of the victims and perpetrators were from a race and class that don’t subscribe to the American dream of striving for a better life through education (provided by property owners) and work (provided by free enterprise).

    Meanwhile their borders are being over run by illegal immigrants.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. adze (1,870 comments) says:

    I agree with Nukuleka about the cheap stereotyping that we see here all too often. Even if you don’t agree it’s childish and ignorant, it detracts from any useful points being made.

    Also, I think even a post on black holes and supernovas would be hijacked by hj with one of one of his anti-immigration copy & pastes.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. OneTrack (2,621 comments) says:

    “Shouldn’t we all just be New Zealanders?”

    That was the seventies and the eighties.

    We are now far more “progressive”, and what you think, say and do is far less important than were you come from, who your ancestors were and what your blood quantum is.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    @ Kowtow

    And various shades of alarmist Casandras have been predicting the demise of America ever since the Irish Catholics washed up there in the 1850s.

    At least the Afro-Americans (or is THAT also a PC term?!) can argue THEY were never illegal, or even willing immigrants.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. altiora (211 comments) says:

    Unbelievable! John Key is doing what National has neglected all these years — Pacific Island and Maori voters — to increase National’s voting base. National’s neglect of these voters has allowed Labour to build reliable vote fodder and has in my view contributed to Maori and Pacific Islanders’ failure to maximise their contribution to New Zealand.

    And yet, the sociopaths of the far right are criticising Key for doing his job. Get with the programme! The point is to obtain the maximum votes to be in the position to govern. Elections are not won by being spiteful philosophical Puritans whom no one (but the “godly” elect) want to vote for.

    Good on Key for showing some strategic vision and a good dose of “I am determined to win” aggression.

    Another news flash for the sociopath far rightists: given the population growth, Maori and Pacific Islanders will be an increasingly larger voting bloc over the coming years. If National fails to recognise that, and fails to actively undermine the perception that it is the party of middle class Pakeha it will face electoral oblivion.

    I think you will find that most Maori and Pacific Islanders are proud New Zealanders, but that doesn’t mean that they have to accept policies that Pakeha voters want. Their experiences and values are different in several respects to Pakeha. The big issue for National is does it have the willingness to recognise this and change accordingly. I hope it does, because I do believe that National (being the only broad church party now) is the best avenue to reconcile the various voting groups’ aspirations and to integrate those aspirations in policy that stresses commonality but at the same time recognises difference. Labour and the Greens want to stress difference and to undermine commonality; that does not lead to a healthy country.

    One final thing: I have to say that Pacific Islanders are, by and large, the best example of successful non-European immigration, primarily because they share many core values with Maori and Pakeha New Zealanders.

    I look forward to the day when the fact that someone is Maori or Pacific Islander does not mean that they must vote Labour, and that they are able to see National as a valid alternative recipient of their votes.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Maggy Wassilieff (261 comments) says:

    @ Mister Nui
    “Pasifika is a horrible term. It is not included in any dictionary of note.”

    Anyone got any idea when the word was first used? (Its not in Harry Orsman’s Oxford Dictionary of NZ English -1997). I think the first time I saw the word was in relation to the Pasifika Music festival held in Auckland.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. kowtow (7,653 comments) says:

    kimbo

    You are evading the point I made that America was succesful because it had a vision of unity.You raised the American example.

    Here and in the US we now have multiculturalism being pushed on us. How can a nation be sucessful when divided ?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. altiora (211 comments) says:

    @ Maggy: I understand that the term is from Samoan derivation, and that the left have seized on it as a term to create a collective identity among the diverse Pacific Island communities. To me this reeks of the patronising and cynical collectivist mentality of the Pakeha leftists, and undermines the diversity and richness of the Pacific Islands.

    Many Pacific Islanders resent the term Pasifika, because they simply do not see themselves as a collective group. I suspect some resentment arises due in part to the term’s Samoan derivation: Pacific Islanders who are not Samoan do feel a bit “crowded out” by the dominant influence of Samoan New Zealanders when it comes to the expression of a “Pacific voice” in media, politics etc.

    For example, a very close Cook Island Maori friend prefers to call himself Rarotongan, because that is his birth home and because he like other Cook Islanders differentiate between people from the different islands that make up the Cook Islands.

    Again, Fijian and Solomon Island friends identify themselves as Fijian and Solomon Islanders respectively, and see themselves as very different to people from other islands, especially from the Polynesian region of the Pacific.

    And do we need to mention the distinctions that Tongans and Samoans draw vis-a-vis one another?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. RRM (9,478 comments) says:

    Did they go for his economic policies?

    Or did they go because they are uber-christian and think there is too much GAY stuff going on in labour?

    Would be interesting to know…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    You are evading the point I made that America was succesful because it had a vision of unity.You raised the American example.

    Here and in the US we now have multiculturalism being pushed on us. How can a nation be sucessful when divided ?

    Sorry, wasn’t intending to evade. Just missed your initial point.

    Um, India has its own version of multiculturalism (and secularism balancing religious diversity for that matter, too). I would have thought, given where it has come from, and in comparison to its neighbour Pakistan which was carved out of its boundaries at independence, it is a successful multicultural nation.

    And again, the same hardcore Protestants who opposed Irish Catholic immigration from the 1850s on (and were opposing Kennedy’s election as recently as 1960 because he was an agent of the Papacy!) argued America would not work unless it was overwhelmingly Protestant and could never handle an influx of Roman Catholics…were proved wrong over time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. RRM (9,478 comments) says:

    @ Maggy: I understand that the term is from Samoan derivation, and that the left have seized on it as a term to create a collective identity among the diverse Pacific Island communities. To me this reeks of the patronising and cynical collectivist mentality of the Pakeha leftists, and undermines the diversity and richness of the Pacific Islands.

    When did Phil Fuemana start Urban Pasifica Records – in about mid-90s I think?

    I wouldn’t assume Pasifika is a creation of white hand-wringing political lefties, just because they say it a lot now.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. mister nui (975 comments) says:

    I have to say that Pacific Islanders are, by and large, the best example of successful non-European immigration, primarily because they share many core values with Maori and Pakeha New Zealanders.

    Agreed. I’ve been doing a lot of work in our yard, on the road front over the last month or so. We’e in what some would consider an affluent part of Auckland, but there are a number of PI’s and Maori around us. Whilst I’m working, many people stop-by for a chat or even just a simple smile and a hello as they walk by. I find the friendliest by far the PI’s, then the Maori and then the Asians, but not much between them all. Then there is daylight. Then we have all the white too-fucking-superior-mummy’s. Most of them don’t even acknowledge anyone. If a truck happens to be parked across the driveway, because supplies are being delivered, and one of these snooty whores can’t push the pram past, you want to see and hear the scowling…. Anybody else just smiles, says hello and goes on their merry way.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. mister nui (975 comments) says:

    Did they go for his economic policies?

    Or did they go because they are uber-christian and think there is too much GAY stuff going on in labour?

    Would be interesting to know…

    RRM, I have quite a bit of interaction with PI’s through various enterprises. My feeling from talking to them, is that it is a general sense that things are going well, they’ve got jobs, they can see actual results from policies. Pretty simple stuff really. Not too many of them seem to be bogged down in the detail of who did what.

    Just my observation.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. altiora (211 comments) says:

    RRM: leftists didn’t create it, as I mention it derives from the Samoan language. The leftists have appropriated it for their political objectives. It is one thing to use the term as a loose term to describe music created by Pacific Islanders; quite another thing to use it as a demographic and political label.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. tvb (4,210 comments) says:

    Under MMP you campaign everywhere and certainly not marginal seats necessarily. It would make sense to go where the seats are likely to harvest the most votes. Maybe a more regional approach should be taken

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Redbaiter (7,643 comments) says:

    Anyone who does not understand the simple fact that racial and class divisions are driven by Marxist theory and strategy is living in another galaxy.

    The most clear example of this is South Africa, where the division between blacks and whites was utilised by Marxist revolutionaries like Nelson Mandela to install a communist govt.

    In the US, the racial divide between blacks and whites is engineered by the same forces that operated in South Africa. The mission has also created a divide with Native Americans which is tailored to assist in their intent to grow left wing power.

    The so called aboriginal movement in Australia is well known to be similarly engineered by communists. The divide in NZ is likewise used by communists like Hone Harawira and others to gain political traction.

    None of this should be surprising to any reader. There is a tonne of literature out there discussing the strategy. “Red Over Black” was a well known book that exposed the communist connections of the Australian Aborigines.

    Also, one only has to read the manifesto of the Communist Party USA to understand the political alliance between the myth of racism and the growth of communist influence.

    It is not only race that communists use to divide. They will use any concept they can to split our societies and make them less cohesive and therefore weaker. Almost every social divide existing today, with racism and feminism the most stark examples, has Marxist origins.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. kowtow (7,653 comments) says:

    I don’t think India is a fair comparison with the USA.

    India , interesting. Personally I don’t think it is a nation state like say Germany or France is.India is a concept.It was slowly and incrementally conquered by the British incorporating a massively diverse group of ethnicities/rligious/tribal/language groups.
    When the British left many of those didn’t want to be part of the new polity. The Muslims particularly but also a number of the princely states.Then there was Goa.The princely states were offerred violnnce by the new power so had no choice but to join. Goa was also invaded.You have mentioned the violence of the birth of Pakistan which speaks for itself.The Sikhs continue to want their own state.

    The communal violence and distrust between Muslim and Hindu to this day is a big feature of Indian life and many Muslims don’t identify with “india”, they’d consider it Hindustan and see themselves as a disadvantaged minority.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    @ Kowtow

    …the point I made that America was successful because it had a vision of unity.

    Mind you this “vision thing” (channeling President Bush I) seems to mean whatever ideologues of various persuasions want it to read into it.

    I’d suggest whatever “unity” the founding fathers planned for, it was primarily constitutional. They certainly didn’t envisage a world where women or Afro-Americans participated directly in democracy.

    And I don’t think a bunch of guys who enshrined an elected 18th Century monarch in their constitution, and called it “The Presidency” were necessarily that wise, all-knowing, and applicable for all time. IMHO

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    @ kowtow

    …don’t think India is a fair comparison with the USA.

    But your question was “How can a nation be sucessful when divided ?” In its own way India continues to function and rather successfully compared to its neighbour and what was the case when it first gained independence. You may be imposing Eurocentrc views on what is “successful” and a “nation-state”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. kowtow (7,653 comments) says:

    kimbo

    Make up your mind.

    First the USA was the most succesful immigrant nation in the world .

    Now , not so much!

    Of course the vision was constitutional. The rest flowed from that .But if you examine the history of E pluribus unum you’ll see the founding fathers did have a vision of forging a unity from the diverse religious and ethnic backgrounds of the populations that made up the original colonies.

    Unity is the key.

    http://www.greatseal.com/mottoes/unum.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. altiora (211 comments) says:

    Interesting I did some quick research of the term “Pasifika” to come across this from Otago University:

    ““Pasifika” and “Pasifika peoples” are terms used by the Ministry of Education to “describe people living in New Zealand who have migrated from the Pacific Islands or who identify with the Pacific Islands because of ancestry or heritage.”

    “Pasifika peoples” does not refer to a single ethnicity, nationality, gender or culture. The term is one of convenience used to encompass a diverse range of peoples from the South Pacific region now living in this country who have strong family and cultural connections to their South Pacific countries of origin.” Ministry of Education (2004) Inside cover.

    This description is used mainly to refer to people from the Polynesian islands of the South Pacific because of historical links with New Zealand. However we wish to acknowledge that some people prefer to use other terms such as Pacific Island people and that there is an increasing tendency for people from Micronesia and Melanesia to come to New Zealand for work and study. We wish to include them all.”

    This nicely proves my point that the Pasifika label is something imposed by academics and leftists for their own convenience, and that really it doesn’t matter what the individual Pacific Islanders think about that — it is the label that they have been given once they come to New Zealand. Samoans, are to be lumped together with Cook Islanders, Fijians, Nuieans, Solomon Islanders, Tokelauans, Fijians etc etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. altiora (211 comments) says:

    Hilarious! I get a down vote for merely quoting the official policy concerning the use of the label Pasifika. Is there are spiteful Ministry of Education employee lurking on here?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. kowtow (7,653 comments) says:

    “Is there are spiteful Ministry of Education employee lurking on here?”

    Probably milkymildew

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    The reason why it was only 500 is because Michael Jones snubbed J Keys offer for a seat in the National govt.

    A rat was smelt. And MMP is working to ferret it out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. kowtow (7,653 comments) says:

    Correction

    14 killed among 82 shot. Chicago,not Baghdad.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    @ kowtow

    Make up your mind.

    First the USA was the most succesful immigrant nation in the world,

    Now , not so much!

    No, I stand by my previous points, and you are engaging in the shell game. After I gave the example of America, you followed up with a question “How can a nation be sucessful when divided ?” – and in context by “divided” you meant multicultural. So my answer was the historical multicultural example, “India”. At which point you moved the goal posts and tried to say India is not really a nation.

    But I still stand by my initial assertion the US is the most successful immigrant nation in the world. where communities (Irish, Italian, Jewish, Scandinavian, Polish, etc) retain affectionate links with their initial culture, while also embracing the status of proud Americans. As Pacific Islanders, Dalmatians, Chinese, etc do in New Zealand.

    Yet despite that, in its time the USA has

    1. Enslaved some of its inhabitants

    2. Fought a Civil War that killed 600,000

    3. Killed its indigenous people.

    4. Despised and treated as second-class immigrants from China for no other reason but their race.

    5. Initiated an at-times brutal occupation of the Philippines

    6. Interned its Japanese citizens for no other reason than their race

    7. Lynched on a regular basis its citizens for no other reason but their race.

    …which leads back to the point I was making before:

    The “good old days” of a “national vision uniting” the USA is nothing of the sort. Just as the imminent implosion due to “multiculturalism” is unlikely – IMHO.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Maggy Wassilieff (261 comments) says:

    @ altiora… tx for yr comments on etymology of Pasifika. Yep, I was familiar with the Min of Ed officialese and new academic use of the word.

    But if it had been in regular use as an adjective to describe pan-Pacific Island communities (human, plant or animal) last century, I’m sure I would have stumbled across it and maybe had a clearer idea of when or how to use it.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. kowtow (7,653 comments) says:

    kimbo

    1 to 7 could apply to pre colonial and colonial NZ ( except for the Phillipine bit, maybe we could subsititue that for Samoa)Leftists like to point out our cruel history there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Kimbo (671 comments) says:

    @ kowtow

    1 to 7 could apply to pre colonial and colonial NZ…Leftists like to point out our cruel history there.

    Yes, but that wasn’t my point. No human endeavour is perfect. In fact in many cases they are brutal and flawed…as well as noble and great.

    The reason I think the USA is the most successful immigrant nation is especially that burst from the early 1850s (Irish Potato Famine) until open immigration stopped around the time of the Great War that helped elevate the USA into a genuine world power, rather than a backwater in the Americas constrained by the Monroe Doctrine as it was in the first half of the 19th Century.

    Just the sheer number and diversity that were admitted and ultimately successfully assimilated in that relatively short space of time- not forgetting the many problems on the ground such as rivalries, extortion, corruption and criminal gangs.

    Yet folks in the US still talk of Irish Americans, Italian Americans, etc

    By comparison, New Zealand and Australia took their immigrants from primarily one source – the British Isles/Ireland. What numbers came from other parts (Scandinavians in Norsewood, Croatian gum-diggers, Italians and Greeks in Wellington, Jewish merchants like the Hallensteins, Lebanese like the Fareys and LaHoods in Dunedin) were so small as to be almost curiosities adding a bit of flavour. The obvious exception was the Chinese.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. MH (635 comments) says:

    someone should check out Michael Jones’ family relationship with his former step whatever Father in laws Asian wife.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. altiora (211 comments) says:

    Maggy I think you’re right it isn’t an old term; and from my patchy memory it has only been used as a generic demographic term with any currency in the last 20 years, and I would suggest possibly only ten years. It certainly has been around as a commercial label for a record company and festival for longer.

    Before then, Pacific Islanders were classified according to their nation origins, or as generically Polynesian (but then that label became outmoded once people from Melanesia and Micronesia started migrate to New Zealand in sizable numbers.

    I don’t have a problem with the term per se, but rather with its political usage, which seems to lump together a diverse group of people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Steve (North Shore) (4,500 comments) says:

    Lump together a certain group of people – like PAKEHAS.
    I am almost pure mongrel European with some mixed Coloured/Black/Afrkaan.
    So if Moari and Pacific Islanders don’t like being labelled Pasifika then hard cheese

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Griff (6,833 comments) says:

    PAKEHAS.?
    They have had to remove the praise from many forms including the census or give an alternative.
    I and many other kiwis will not ever tick such a panel on any document .
    I are not a PAKEHA.
    Same goes for the stupid festival they are trying to foist on us
    matariki festival
    Attempts at such social engineering should be rejected.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.