The Big Lie Theory – Part 2

The Big Lie Theory – Part 2

By Aamy Hall

As I demonstrated in The Big Lie Theory – Part 1, telling huge whoppers is easier to get away with than telling small ones. Most people do not expect other people to be that dishonest so openly, therefore they think these ‘big lies’ must be true.

But not everyone believes them. Some people are more sceptical than others, more suspicious, or have studied the subject so that they recognise the technique when they see it. For these unfortunate souls, more propaganda techniques are used to keep them quiet.

This list of propaganda techniques and explanations I have taken from Wikipedia, but the inserts in red italics, demonstrating how I see them being used today by Maori, are mine. I will just highlight the techniques I see used most often.

Ad hominem

A Latin phrase which has come to mean attacking your opponent, as opposed to attacking their arguments.

This one you will find on almost any blog or forum which discusses the issues that 1law4all is concerned about. We saw it constantly on John Ansell’s blog, we see it here on our own, and on our Facebook page. It’s everywhere. If you dare to express an opinion that is negative towards Maori, their culture or politics in anyway, rather than challenge your opinion or ideas, they attack you personally. In my opinion, once the opposition resort to this technique they have lost the argument as they are unable to counter our facts with facts of their own.

Ad nauseam

This argument approach uses tireless repetition of an idea. An idea, especially a simple slogan, that is repeated enough times, may begin to be taken as the truth.

This technique, also used with the Big Lie technique, is also common. For example – Maori have claimed for years that during the eviction of the Maori people who were squatting on crown land at Parihaka, the women and girls were repeatedly raped. They claim that this atrocity took place, even though the whole eviction was witnessed by members of the press and other observers that were present at the time. We are to believe that a mass/gang rape of these helpless women and children took place, but it was never been so much as whispered about by any of the witnesses? Given the strict morality of the era, it does not seem plausible that the press would not have mentioned it at the very least. But there is no historical record of this occurring in any documentation or press reports. No letters written to family mention it. It’s as if it never happened – because – IT NEVER HAPPENED!

Yet Maori, and some pakeha, believe this is fact. Maori, what is more, claim that during the rapes, the Maori women were infected with an STD, causing them to become sterile and therefore aiding in the ‘extermination’ of the Maori race by causing them to become unable to breed. Some go so far as to assert that this was deliberate.

Such is their hatred of the colonialists that they have spread this lie for generations, to anyone who will listen, and now it is mostly accepted as fact, even though it is a complete fabrication.

Appeal to authority

Appeals to authority cite prominent figures to support a position, idea, argument, or course of action.

This is another technique I often come across. Maori have their favourites too – such as Dame Claudia Orange and Paul Moon.

If you speak of the Littlewood draft of the Treaty of Waitangi, for example, the most common argument you will hear is that Paul Moon said in his book that it cannot be a valid treaty as it was not signed. Maori love to quote this. But it is the most ridiculous argument for an academic to make. The Littlewood draft is just that, a draft, NOT A TREATY. Who signs a draft? A draft is a written document from which an original document is made and then the original is signed. You do not sign draft copies!

Dame Claudia Orange was the first Historian to see the Littlewood draft after it was discovered. Her first words on viewing the document were to the effect of: “This will be embarrassing”. Since then she has gone out of her way to discredit the draft and often acts as if it doesn’t exist at all. When it is pointed out that the Littlewood draft is dated before the date of the Treaty, the best she can come up with is that Hobson must have made a mistake on the date. Really? She did not even mention it in her lastest book on the Treaty. A very strange thing for a Historian of her repute, as an expert on the Treaty, to ignore a document that was the greatest find since finding the original Treaty itself! She continues to deny and discredit the Littlewood draft, even though experts have verified the hand writing, the one signature at the bottom and the paper that it was written on, which had a distinctive watermark. Dame Claudia Orange has lost all credibility in my opinion.

Appeal to fear

Appeals to fear seek to build support by instilling anxieties and panic in the general population. For example – Joseph Goebbels exploited Theodore N Kaufman’s Germany Must Perish! To claim that the Allies sought the extermination of the German people.

I struck this one very recently, when a person was commenting on Facebook about the first part of this article, he said this

 “By the time the treaty settlements and Maori self-determination was being finalised, anti-Maori sentiment was nothing new — not by a long shot. The Maori people had suffered a long history of prejudice and persecution. And although propagandist perpetuated centuries-old lies, this time those lies would have their most devastating effects. Like never before, anti-Maori sentiments was manifested in a sweeping far right party known as “1law4all,” which sought to eliminate the only balance Maori have to be truly an equal people off the face of the Earth.( based on fact Bro)”

There are a few things odd about this statement. He is talking in past tense, as if he is reading from something that is printed about our current times, from a book in the future. So what I think he has done is taken a passage from a book that refers to something in the past, and changed some of the words to fit the current situation and 1law4all, but he hasn’t change the tense.

Another thing that doesn’t fit is “centuries old lies” – heck, the Treaty was signed less than 200 years ago.

Then he claims, in that weird statement, that 1law4all want to eliminate Maori’s chance of being equal off the face of the earth. Yet, 1law4all is the only party who advocate guaranteeing equality for all races in this country. And the way it is written, you know that a lot of Maori will just read that to mean that we want to ‘eliminate Maori off the face of the earth’, which is absolutely ridiculous, but it’s the fear of that, that he is trying to instil in others and use against us.

Demonizing the enemy

Making individuals from the opposing nation, from a different ethnic group, or those who support the opposing viewpoint appear to be subhuman, worthless, or immoral through suggestion or false accusations.

Racists, rednecks, klu klux klan, Nazis, white supremicists, – those are all accusations, labels and hate speech terms that are shouted at any non-Maori, and indeed at some Maori, who disagree, disapprove or speak out against the actions, politics and behaviour of some Maori. In fact that is what they call us because we want equality for all races!

I say that at times this is used against some Maori also because both Billy T James, who showed Maori up on TV, and Allan Duff, who wrote books about Maori lifestyles which became movies, (Once Were Warriors and What Becomes of the Broken-hearted), and his honest and earnest book called Maori – the Crisis and the Challenge, received death threats from Maori for their trouble.

To be continued…

Comments are now closed here on this article. To continue this discussion, please go to the independent DODNZ forum.

%d bloggers like this: