Democracy is Unfair, as well as Discriminatory.
First, we had Ngaio Te Ua saying that democracy was discriminatory.
Now we have Palmerston North Councillor Aleisha Rutherford bleating that democracy is unfair.
It all goes to show how racism has become so deeply entrenched in Councils and Councillors. Reading the logical fallacies and breath-taking ignorance from Cr Aleisha Rutherford is scary.
Palmerston North city councillor Aleisha Rutherford said [the petitioners] are largely non part-Maori and they’re making a decision that is going to affect part-Maori after the council had already consulted and made a decision. ”
“A referendum may be democratic but it’s also unfair. We have elected members for a reason. As an elected member we are privy to a whole lot more information than the general public.”
The sounds of secrecy, eh? Along with a bit of the standard arrogance: we were elected to govern. And to hell with democracy!
Never mind the lack of logic in we were elected to govern and we . . . consulted. Why bother consulting the hapless ratepayers if you were elected to govern and are in a privy, know-it-all position?
What form did the consultation take, Ms councillor? A chat over the coffee cups during a council meeting break? Or is that ‘privy’ information?
And no, Ms councillor, the petitioners are not making a decision in the way you suggest.
All your ratepayers will be making the decision. The very people you should have meaningfully consulted before you and your racist clique within council made their arrogant decision.
It was you and your racist fellow-councillors who forced this situation.
Don’t you forget that.
With luck, those same ratepayers will remember your racist proclivities at the next council election.
How can we elect such clueless people to council?
Yes the arrogance of some councillors is extraordinary, what makes these idiots think that they were voted in to subvert democracy.
This idiot is unfortunately in a long line of such idiots!
A member of the Waikato Regional Council said when they were deciding to have separate part-Maori wards that she supported the council passing the motion without reference to the ratepayers because “we know which way they will vote!” A clear indication that she knew what she was doing was undemocratic.
They passed the motion in early November I recall – making sure that the three months available for the signatures for a vote would be over the holiday season. Sure enough they succeeded and we now have two separate Maori wards on the Waikato Regional Council.
Just watch for a government move to make the holding a poll a non-existent right. Phil Goff wants it and so do the Greens and Labour.
Do you have any links to that story? I would like to read them. Such information would also be useful to put by, for future reference.
Simon, If you mean links to the Phil Goff story-no but I watched the Auckland Council debate where they put off any action until they could ensure that their decision to create separate Maori wards could not be challenged witha poll. Nania Mahuta has made it clear that she wants the poll provision done away with.
It was the Lois Livingston thing I was asking about.
The Waikato Regional Councillor who voted against democracy and was proud to do so was Lois Livingston – who has since died. I am sure that unfortunately there are plenty more just as misguided and just as fascist waiting to join our organisations. The shame of it!
So Aleisha Rutherford was elected in a democracy election which to her is unfair. What about standing down so that the people of Palmerston North can vote in someone who wants to get voted on council as she doesn’t believe in democracy. What a bloody loser she is. Bet she voted in the National elections for the person that she wanted to get elected.
People who call democracy unfair are so stupid that they don’t realise that the whole point of democracy IS fairness. It is the principle of majority rule. It is to stop the majority of people having to live by rules or conditions set by a minority, which is exactly what is happening and increasing, in New Zealand.
What is unfair, is that a vocal minority be allowed to make demands and set rules that affect the majority.
What is unfair is when hundreds of thousands of people have to work to pay for special rights for a few.
What is unfair is when people from a minority can sit, unelected and therefore unaccountable and unanswerable, on councils or governments, and make decisions on how our taxes and rates are spent – which is always for the benefit of that minority.
I could go on…….but…
Aren’t part-Maoris human beings? It seems that the rest of the human race in NZ can get by under the inclusive democratic system but there are some people called “Maoris” with their own world view, their own world, etc. It seems that they have to be treated differently from all other human beings. This is madness, as a council is concerned with running the city and its services and how on earth could a superstitious “Maori world view” have any relevance to that?
It was the “Maori world view” that was leading to their extinction, before British Rule was established, in the eighteen hundreds.
It was the “Maori world view” that lead to the extinction of the moa and huia and many other species, in NZ.
It was the “Maori world view” that saw them farm out fishing quotas to foreign crewed sweatships, because none of the part-Maoris those quotas were intended to employ, actually wanted to do any hard work.
Take off the rose-hued spectacles and we see that this fantasy-other-world-view is just another aspect to their separatist agenda; one dis-connected from reality, except for the reality of greedy-grabbing taxpayer assets and cash, and we want nothing to do with it.
The more you treat these unrealistic people as “special,” the less incentive they will have to get on in the world and so they will remain at the bottom of all the wrong statistics. Statistics which have worsened since the Treaty settlements rort. Settlements which have enriched the tribal elite and done damn all for the part-Maoris at the bottom.
It is the tribal elite that is pushing for Maori wards as those are the types who will grab the positions of Maori councillors, then take the money and shun validity and responsibility.
These marxist cretins are everywhere. The usual way to spot them is their logic is the exact opposite of normal thinking people.
An excellent indication as to how the average part-Maori regards the tribal elitists is the fact that at the last election the ‘Maori Party’ was voted out of electoral existance.
They say its racist or unfair that a petition has to be had to allow for a new Maori ward, whereas no petition is needed to make a new (non-Maori) ward. I would be quite happy if a petition was required to have a new (non-Maori) ward. Why don’t people/councillors try and balance it out from that angle?
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/350545/maori-ward-legislation-is-racist-councillor
“Within our right as elected members we can create a rural ward which could have a couple of seats on it but the community cannot overturn that decision. However, when it comes to the legislation it only defines Maori wards as a decision that people can petition against.
Sort-of, but not quite.
Don’t be Fooled!
The Cr. concerned is using a logical fallacy – comparing apples with blue vein cheese.
The comparative example given is a rural ward. Any such (rural or otherwise) voting ward created by the P. Nth council would be one of universal suffrage. I.e. Anyone within that ward’s boundaries could vote.
But a ‘Maori’ ward would not be of universal suffrage, because only those of a certain race within that ward’s boundaries could vote.
I.e. It’s a racist ward, voted into existence by the racist faction within the P. Nth Council.
But you can’t expect racists to see what is so logically simple, because they are all illogical, by their very nature.
Thanks for the universal sufferage comment. That helps me understand it better.
However, I am generally of the opinion that ANY new ward should be put to a vote by the people.
But having said that I accept what you are saying re a universal suffrage ward versus a ward for a certain race/other. And considering this it is understandable why it is the way it is presently.
tks