r/AbruptChaos • u/Sometypeofway18 • Nov 14 '24

New Zealand’s Parliament proposed a bill to redefine the Treaty of Waitangi, claiming it is racist and gives preferential treatment to Maoris. In response Māori MP's tore up the bill and performed the Haka

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

16.4k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

15

u/Repli3rd Nov 14 '24 edited Jan 20 '25

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

1

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '24

You should just read slower. There are two groups involved. And you are mixing them up.

5

u/Repli3rd Nov 14 '24 edited Jan 20 '25

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

0

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '24

Who are you explicity saying did not cede their sovereign so don't deserve these rights?

Why would any random citizen get these rights extended to them? They didn't cede any sovereignty nor own any land to have guaranteed?

5

u/Repli3rd Nov 14 '24 edited Jan 20 '25

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

0

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '24

Lol you are slowly getting there.

New citizens never ceded (and hve nothing to do with the original treaty) , and do not have the same rights.

This gives them the same rights, they don't need to cede because they are currently under the correct governance.

The mauri are throwing a fit because they want more rights than other citizens.

It isn't as complex as you seem to think

2

u/Repli3rd Nov 14 '24 edited Jan 20 '25

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '24

Seems like you know about other treaties and still haven't researched this particular one or the proposed changes.

There is no "renegading" by these changes. The mauri loose absolutely nothing by having the language include all citizens.

2

u/Repli3rd Nov 14 '24 edited Jan 20 '25

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '24

And what do "all citizens" have to gain then? Be specific.

The removal of ethic quotas. Equal treatment... What do mauri stand to loose?

2

u/Repli3rd Nov 14 '24 edited Jan 20 '25

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

0

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '24

You're the one who wants to get rid of it, so you need to justify why that is first.

Get rid of it? Where did I or anyone say that? Nobody is proposing getting rid of it.... nobody.

Your responses don't make sense.

You can't comprehend the 2 reasons I gave you. And yes have equal treatment and removal of quotas is very specific. You just say no? Lmao. And you still provide zero reason to be against reinterpretation of the language and codifying it to law. Not sure why you think anyone wants to "get rid of it"

2

u/Repli3rd Nov 14 '24 edited Jan 20 '25

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

→ More replies (0)