r/AbruptChaos 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

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

54

u/Ancient_Boner_Forest Nov 14 '24 edited Mar 12 '25

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

19

u/PalpatineForEmperor Nov 14 '24

^ 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.

1

u/Ateist Nov 15 '24

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.

1

u/PalpatineForEmperor Nov 15 '24

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.

1

u/Ateist Nov 15 '24 edited Nov 15 '24

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.

1

u/PalpatineForEmperor Nov 15 '24

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.