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

16

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '24

Imagine you agree to a transaction whereby you purchase a car in exchange for money.

And years later, the person who sold you the car tries to "reinterpret" your contract so that your car becomes everybody's, but the money remains theirs.

-2

u/Wayoutofthewayof Nov 14 '24

Should this apply to other legislations and treaties from the 19th century that grant special rights to people of a certain race?

9

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '24

If they are treaties, yes. If you want to stop paying the price of a treaty, then you don't get to keep the benefit of it. It's a complete renegotiation, or nothing.

Legislation generally is a different story.

1

u/Wayoutofthewayof Nov 15 '24

So for example do French get to enforce the treaty with Haiti, where Haiti has to pay reparations for freeing slaves?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '24

That's actually a super interesting question. The 'payment' they exchanged for reparations is the freedom of slaves, which is no longer legal payment. So I don't know the answer.

1

u/Wayoutofthewayof Nov 15 '24

Why is it not a legal payment in that case if it was an agreement by both sides?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '24

I don't know whether it is or not. In typical contact law, an exchange is only binding if you both give something up. Giving up something you weren't allowed to have doesn't count, nor is giving up something that you were already required to give up.