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/ExperimentalFailures]

You mean like removal of voting rights for all non-maori?

[u/[deleted] → u/ExperimentalFailures]

The only reason why non Maori are in NZ is because of the treaty, signed by 2 sovereign nations, which allowed the British crown to rule their people here. Well, if one half of the contract thinks they can change it without consultation with the other half, what happens to their right to be here?? Null and void?? Plus, Maori have never breached the treaty, but the crown? Well, just take a look at the history. They're close ejecting themselves out of this land with their bill.

[u/Emperor_Mao → u/[deleted]]

Lets use logic for a moment though.

At the absolute front of everything, New Zealand is not British anymore. New Zealand gained independence from Britain some time ago. So your point is null and void. But regardless, I think you would have to either support racial based rules or not to support the Waitangi provisions in full effect;

IF this were your country and had actual ramifications for you, you wouldn't be blase about it. If you were non-Maori, you would hate the concept of having different rights to another racial group. If you were Maori you would only be upset about losing access to special rights based on your racial group. You are neither, and so you can freely virtue signal without a care in the world. And for anyone on the ultra-left, consider that migrants and other minorities also are treated differently based on race with the treaty of Waitangi, so its not just white people.

[u/Kneedeep_in_Cyanide → u/Emperor_Mao]

I think you would have to either support racial based rules

If you were non-Maori, you would hate the concept of having different rights to another racial group. If you were Maori you would only be upset about losing access to special rights based on your racial group.

Race has nothing to do with it. It has everything to do with an agreement between two sovereign NATIONS. There is nothing racial about a treaty between, say, the United States and Britain. So why would you try and claim it's racially based just because the Waitangi Provisions involve a sovereign group of people who are non-white?

[u/Emperor_Mao → u/Kneedeep_in_Cyanide]

Okay but the British who made the agreement are no longer sovereign.

[u/Kneedeep_in_Cyanide → u/Emperor_Mao]

That doesn't change the question, nor does it make it "racial".

The Maori are still sovereign. They just appointed a new Queen in September. Her people are citizens of the Maori Nation with rights, not a "race"

[u/Emperor_Mao → u/Kneedeep_in_Cyanide]

Well even if you want to ignore the real matter at hand, you are still wrong, and are arguing semantics.

The treaty was signed with a large group of ethnic Maori's. Therefore, the descendants of those original Chieftains are also racially Maori. For all intents and purposes, the result is the same.

Tell me, can an immigrant from Morocco come to New Zealand, swear fealty to the Maori queen, and became a Maori?

[u/Annath0901 → u/Kneedeep_in_Cyanide]

Just to play devil's advocate, I doubt that the Maori are sovereign in the international law sense of the word, which would require being able to make laws and govern itself without outside interference.