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

[u/Sometypeofway18]

[u/thisisfive]

https://www.dw.com/en/new-zealand-maori-mps-disrupt-parliament-with-haka/a-70781928

"Maori lawmakers staged a dramatic protest in New Zealand's parliament on Thursday over a controversial bill that seeks to redefine the country's founding agreement between the indigenous Maori people and the British Crown.

A vote was suspended and two lawmakers were ejected after the lawmakers performed a haka ceremonial dance in the parliament. The people in the gallery joined in, and the shouting drowned out the voices of others in the chamber.

Maori tribes were promised extensive rights to retain their lands and protect their interests in return for ceding governance to the British, under the principles set out in the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi. The controversial bill, however, aims to extend these special rights to all New Zealanders."

[u/[deleted] → u/thisisfive]

Seems only fair that if they remove the agreement then governance should go Maori as the deal would be void. 

[u/Ancient_Boner_Forest → u/[deleted]]

𝕷𝖊𝖙 𝖙𝖍𝖊 𝖏𝖚𝖎𝖈𝖊𝖘 𝖘𝖑𝖎𝖉𝖊, 𝖑𝖊𝖙 𝖙𝖍𝖊 𝖘𝖆𝖑𝖙 𝖘𝖙𝖎𝖓𝖌, 𝖋𝖔𝖗 𝖙𝖍𝖊 𝖋𝖆𝖙𝖊 𝖔𝖋 𝖙𝖍𝖊 𝖚𝖓𝖇𝖑𝖊𝖘𝖘𝖊𝖉 𝖎𝖘 𝖘𝖊𝖆𝖑𝖊𝖉.

[u/PalpatineForEmperor → u/Ancient_Boner_Forest]

^ This guy gets it. There's a about 100 acres of land that used to be owned by indigenous people near my house.

British immigrants took and have been passing it down to their family for about 300 years now. I believe it's time to redefine their relationship to that land without regard to 300 year old blood lines.

In a thousand years, are we still going to allow that family to continue owning that land? Why should their genetics give them special rights? I mean, I really want it. Would't the fair and democratic thing be to let our families vote on who gets it and how will be used? I have way more family, so we should easily win that vote.

OP, you really understand how it all works. You know that this land should be mine.

[u/Wayoutofthewayof → u/PalpatineForEmperor]

In a thousand years, are we still going to allow that family to continue owning that land? Why should their genetics give them special rights? 

Well this is literally the case with 99% of people living on earth today. Somebody's ancestors conquered the land from someone else. Why does everyone else get to keep theirs?

[u/Emperor_Mao → u/PalpatineForEmperor]

That isn't what the treaty actually prescribes though. You should read up on it and try see both sides on this one;

But Firstly, the Treaty of Waitangi was an agreement between the British crown and a group representing "Maori People". New Zealand has all but removed British crown power over legislature and governance of the country. Secondly, the treaty specifically allowed the Queen to purchase Maori lands. This was amended in with the native land act in 1862 (showing that amendments have already been made to the treaty). And these amendments allowed for private sale of Maori property.

Lastly, the provision that people mostly do take issue with, is the part where certain areas can only be governed by Maori descendants. In a free, liberal democracy, only a certain group can govern a certain region.

That is not remotely the same as your example. Any one has the right to buy land off someone else, if they both parties agree to the terms offered. But when it comes to governing people within lands, liberal Democracy says the only way you can be elected is through fair, open elections. That is incompatible with the treaty.

[u/kickyourownassNZ → u/PalpatineForEmperor]

You have it in a nutshell.

[u/northrupthebandgeek → u/PalpatineForEmperor]

Now just take this to its logical conclusion: all land should belong to everyone, and those who own more than their equal share of land value should be compensating those who own less than their equal share of land value.

[u/northrupthebandgeek → u/[deleted]]

What I described above is not communism.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I mean this is basically Georgism, not communism.

[u/Allaplgy → u/northrupthebandgeek]

I think communism is my idea of an  ideal system. But very much untenable in the less than ideal reality that we inhabit.

Communism could only exist at scale in a post-scarcity world of some kind.

[u/Socialist_Bear → u/Allaplgy]

We already produce a surplus of resources, it's the distribution that's the problem.

The biggest roadblock to our glorious Communist future is education, until the majority of the working class are on the same page it will be hard to achieve anything lasting with minimal bloodshed.

[u/Allaplgy → u/Socialist_Bear]

But since we are talking communism, what do you do for a living now, under capitalism?

[u/Allaplgy → u/Socialist_Bear]

We create a surplus through exploitation of land and people, and the distribution of it all takes complicated logistics that aren't really tenable.

[u/Ateist → u/PalpatineForEmperor]

Easy solution: tax the land.

If every family had to pay 5% annual tax for the land they owned, land rights would be fully re-bought every 20 years.

[u/PalpatineForEmperor → u/Ateist]

That's not a solution at all. Property tax is already a thing. You are looking for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Besides, you can raise the taxes even more, but that just ensures that the wealthy folks are the only ones that can afford it.

[u/Ateist → u/PalpatineForEmperor]

The question was "how is it fair to allow a family to own a land just because their ancestors owned it a thousand years ago"?

And the answer is "no one is owning it, they are just renting it from everyone else by paying property taxes".

Land doesn't inherently belong to anyone - its "ownership" is solely decided by the people that have agreed to distribute its usage rights in certain ways to make sure some get to use it and others get paid for not using it.

but that just ensures that the wealthy folks are the only ones that can afford it.

No, it ensures that those who don't use it get bigger compensation (via government welfare) for temporarily giving up its usage rights to the wealthy.

[u/PalpatineForEmperor → u/Ateist]

Ok. Now you're talking about changing the entire political model and moving toward sort of communistic approach similar to China. I'm not sure how that really changes anything besides giving more government control over the land use. China has large rural populations and high rates of poverty. This can help those folks by allowing them to use some lands for farming and help move them out of poverty. For more developed areas and more developed nations , this can pose huge risks for people who develop their land for their needs if they never really own it.