Founder / Director

Dr Muriel Newman

Dr Muriel Newman

Newsletter

 

View our latest NZCPR Weekly Newsletter …               

Register newsletter– to receive this free newsletter each week by email click the button and register

 

Newsletter logo

 

Dear NZCPR Reader,

Welcome back to our NZCPR weekly newsletters – we hope you and your family had a wonderful Christmas and best wishes for 2021!

To those readers who supported our NZCPR end of year fundraiser with your kind donations, thank you from the bottom of my heart – it’s because of your generosity that we are back and able to carry on fighting for another year.  

As you know, to help strengthen democracy and better inform New Zealanders about public policy and politics, we ensure all of our NZCPR research and commentary is freely available on our websites. To protect our independence, we reject all forms of State assistance, we do not run ads, nor do we have a paywall or offer subscriptions.

That’s why the backing of those who register for our weekly mailout is so crucial.  

We are calling on all newsletter readers who didn’t have the opportunity to support the NZCPR last year to please chip in HERE – to help us keep the flame of freedom and liberty alive in 2021 as we battle against the march of socialism, attacks on free speech, the undermining of democracy, and further attempts to divide us by race…
*And if you don’t like website forms, the direct donation details are:
Internet banking – NZCPR ASB Bank account 12-3099-0833814-00; postal address – NZCPR, PO Box 984, Whangarei.

This week…

In this week’s NZCPR newsletter, we investigate New Zealand’s dangerous drift towards separatism, our NZCPR Guest Commentator the economic historian Professor Jeff Fynn-Paul outlines why standing up to racist attacks strengthens democracy, and our poll asks whether you believe the petition rights enabling citizens to challenge local councils when they change the voting system should remain.    

Last newsletter…

In case you missed it, in our last newsletter we reflected on the fact that for many New Zealanders 2020 was an extremely difficult year – not just because of the pandemic and the loss of business, jobs, and income, but through a growing sense of despair about the direction in which our country is headed. The socialists now have unbridled control of New Zealand. The tragedy is that many New Zealanders appear to have little appreciation of the dangers… see HERE.

Please share our articles…

Please feel free to share our newsletters as widely as possible. This can be done by forwarding the newsletter itself, or, if there are problems with spam filters, by sharing the newsletter link: www.nzcpr.com/newsletter. Content from the newsletter can also be copied into your own email. Social media share buttons can be found on each website article.

Register for the mailing list…

Anyone who would like to receive our free NZCPR Weekly newsletter is more than welcome to register for the mailing list HERE.

Ensuring your newsletter is delivered…

To ensure your receive our newsletters, please whitelist our newsletter mailing address – or add it to your ‘safe senders’ list. The address to whitelist is: newsletter-bounces@nzcpr.com. If your newsletter fails to arrive, it can be viewed through the ‘Newsletter’ link on our NZCPR.com website.

Share YOUR views…

Speaking out in a democracy is crucial – please find all MP addresses, contact details for newspaper letters to the editor, social media links, and other useful contacts HERE.

Thank you for your on-going interest and support.

Warmest regards,

Signature

 

 

 

Dr Muriel Newman
NZCPR Founding Director

 

What’s new on our Breaking Views blog…

Breaking Views is administered by the NZCPR – the views are those of the authors. Here is a selection of this week’s articles… 

  • Barend Vlaardingerbroek: ‘Ethics’ strangle social science research
    The reason for my sudden aversion to the limelight is the imposition of so-called research ethics guidelines which my university adopted. There is now a research ethics committee that vets every research proposal, and the researcher must satisfy the committee where changes are required before being able to proceed.  Ideology is what all this ‘ethics’ crap is about. ‘Ethics’ has become a smokescreen for ideological vetting of research proposals and keeping findings that may not square with PC doctrine out of the academic literature…
  • Clive Bibby: The Empress has no clothes
    When l finally got to read the deliberately delayed Simpson report of the Government’s handling of the pandemic, l could understand why it wasn’t released until well after the general election. Even the most loyal Labour supporter would have to admit it paints a very different picture of the Prime Minister and her bunch of sycophants than the one available to voters of this mythical “Mother Teresa” when they entered the ballot boxes last year. The report in fact shows her to be the “Empress with no clothes”…
  • Peter Bacos: James Cook and the Discovery of New Zealand
    In the 250th anniversary celebrations of Cook’s landing in New Zealand last year the government tried to bracket this with the Maori arrival nearly 800 years before. This is typical of the way the European discovery of NZ is downgraded now by the state and put on a par with the Maori discovery centuries before; it is all part of a state orchestrated campaign to vilify and disparage European culture in this country. The doctoring of history continues by the Maori activists and their Pakeha partisans…
  • Michael Bassett: Teaching Early New Zealand History in Schools
    Serious historians fear that the teaching New Zealand history to all students risks becoming mere propaganda by those with axes to grind, rather than a teaching of the facts. Students will be given a lop-sided picture of our early history if the curriculum ignores or romanticises the pre-1840 period where several Maori tribes went on annual marauding exercises to settle old scores. They killed between 40,000 and 50,000 Maori, approximately 25% of the total number of Maori in the country at that time, eating some, and enslaving others… 

NZCPR Weekly:

APARTHEID NEW ZEALAND
By Dr Muriel Newman

 

In the 1980s, many New Zealanders stood proudly against apartheid – the South African system of government which enabled a race-based minority to impose its rule over the majority of the population.

It is therefore ironic that many of these same people now support a separatist minority to impose its culture and political will over the majority of New Zealanders.

The authority for the tribal elite’s plan to ‘co-govern’ New Zealand comes from their claim that Maori are Treaty of Waitangi ‘partners’ with the Crown.

But this is a lie – as the former Judge and law lecturer Anthony Willy points out: “It was and is constitutionally impossible for the Crown to enter into a partnership with her subjects. She can as she did in 1840 make promises to them but by definition, the Crown is supreme, and the people are subject to her laws.”

He further explains that the legal authority for their ‘partnership’ claim – which is alleged to have come from a 1987 Court of Appeal judgement – is a fabrication, since the reference to ‘partnership’ by Justice Cooke was not part of the decision, but of the commentary which has no standing in law: “In no legal sense does this case decide that that there is a partnership between Maori and non-Maori.”

The claim of partnership is a clever political construct used by separatists to dupe the public into thinking that those with Maori ancestry have greater political and legal rights than other New Zealanders. The Treaty however, confers no such privilege. In fact, the Treaty guarantees all New Zealanders equal rights.

While common sense would indicate that the Maori supremacy goal of having an unelected and unaccountable race-based 15 percent of the population ‘co-governing’ New Zealand with 50 percent of the power is profoundly undemocratic and highly unlikely in modern-day New Zealand, under Jacinda Ardern’s Government, this indeed appears to be the direction of travel.

In 2018, desperate to hold their grip on the Maori seats, the Office of Maori-Crown Relations was established. The objective of this new agency was to enable Maori to work in “partnership” with the Crown in the post Treaty settlement era. But as a result, a radical ‘Maori worldview’ has been introduced into agencies across the State sector and it is having a disproportionate influence.

New proposals published just before Christmas to enable State control of industry-based vocational training shows just how far this radicalisation has progressed. A requirement for the new Workforce Development Councils is that half of all members must be Maori.

This contravenes established State protocol. As the former Attorney General Chris Finlayson noted a few years ago, ‘proportionality’ is necessary to avoid racial bias: “In a representative democracy, it is important to maintain approximately the same level of representation for everyone”.

By requiring 50 percent of the new Council members to be Maori, the Government is ignoring the proportionality principle and as such is in breach of section 19(1) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, which guarantees New Zealanders freedom from discrimination.

Please note: These Workforce Development Council proposals are open for submissions until February 5 – details can be found
HERE.

As a result of these developments not only has the imposition of Maori cultural practices on the public escalated, but an inflammatory separatist narrative of victimisation and oppression – that denounces the ‘evils’ of colonisation and makes widespread accusations of ‘institutional racism’ – now increasingly dominates New Zealand society. 

The end result is that our highly integrated and relatively harmonious society is now being openly described as ‘racist’, ‘colonisation’ is being reinvented as ‘evil oppression’, and anyone of European heritage speaking out against separatism is being framed as a ‘white supremacist’.

This is producing absurd and dangerous outcomes.

The disproportional number of Maori in prison is no longer deemed to be a consequence of their criminal offending, but the result of systemic and institutional racism within the Police Force, the Justice System, and Corrections.

Maori children are no longer being taken into State care to keep them safe from serious abuse by their parents and caregivers, but because the Ministry for Children is racist.

With the health system also being accused of racism, patients in desperate need of surgery are no longer being prioritised on the basis of their clinical urgency, but on their ethnicity.

Furthermore, with Maori disadvantage being blamed on colonisation and institutional racism, the real causes of social deprivation, namely the breakdown of the family, educational failure, and the growth of intergenerational welfare dependency, are being ignored because they don’t fit the prevailing narrative.

Those promoting such misrepresentations know that blaming society’s problems on racism is extremely effective as a weapon of control – to close down the debate and give themselves a platform to further their own agenda.

None of this is rocket science. But these days common sense is being subjugated by those seeking to undermine equal rights and democracy. 

New Zealand has now reached a turning point. The radicals have become emboldened by Jacinda Ardern’s election success and the majority she now controls. As a result, demands for separatist policies are growing so strong that the country is indeed in danger of becoming an apartheid nation where a minority world view is increasingly used to control the majority of the population.

The education system has already fallen to the separatists, with a doctored New Zealand history due to enter the curriculum next year.

The teaching of the Maori language in schools is also well advanced – a move that the former Maori Party co-leader Marama Fox explained is essential for separatist control: “New Zealand would gradually move to its own unique form of governance, one that would abandon the Westminster model in favour of Maori customs, principles and values… The critical step… is to make the Maori language a core subject in the country’s schools… people look at things differently once they’ve acquired te reo.”

With vast sums of taxpayers’ money being ploughed into attempts to indoctrinate New Zealanders in the Maori language, the current strategy appears to be one of saturation: Maori language phrases are ever-more frequently being inserted into English communications; Maori names are increasingly used for Government initiatives and agencies; calls to replace English language road signs and place names with dual or Maori language signs is intensifying; and New Zealand is now being called “Aotearoa” so often that there is no doubt that the public is being softened up for a referendum on changing the country’s name at some stage in the not too far distant future. 

But promoting the system of political control being used by separatists to gain influence over the country and turn us into Apartheid New Zealand is madness. We should not accept it.

To make matters worse, not only are accusations of racism increasingly being used to silence opposing opinions, but some in the mainstream media are abandoning their Fourth Estate responsibilities for balance in reporting, by refusing to publish anything that could be considered critical of Maori.

A case in point is the situation where a number of community groups around the country are challenging local council decisions to introduce Maori wards without consulting their community. 

Petition rights were introduced into the Local Electoral Act by the former Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark as a democratic safeguard to protect communities from councils wanting to change the voting system to suit themselves – without first seeking a mandate from their ratepayers.

Since creating Maori wards requires a change to the voting system through the introduction of the Maori electoral roll, petition rights apply. This means that if communities can gather the support of 5 percent of voters, their councils are required to hold a binding referendum on Maori wards.

In an outrageous development, Stuff – one of the biggest media groups in the country – has not only refused petition advertising in their community newspapers, but they have also been publishing opinion pieces that falsely claim that petition rights are racist and only apply to Maori wards, when even a cursory review of the law shows they apply to all voting system changes.

How long a newspaper group can continue to exist as a consumer product when they have taken a seriously biased position on such an important issue, remains to be seen.

To make matters worse, the Minister of Local Government, Nania Mahuta has indicated that she intends abolishing Helen Clark’s petition rights because Mayors and activists are opposed to voters being able to challenge council decisions to support separatism.

But the Minister should be aware that there are legitimate and illegitimate ways for governments to abolish important constitutional rights. Since Helen Clark’s petition rights are a cornerstone of local government democracy, repealing them without undertaking a nation-wide referendum would be totally illegitimate and smack of totalitarianism.

As we look ahead and see that democracy is increasingly under threat, the question on everyone’s mind is how do we stand up to separatism?

This is a question that has also exercised this week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, Associate Professor Jeff Fynn-Paul of Leiden University in Holland, who, as an economic historian, was so disturbed by the racist attacks on colonisation that emerged around the world last year that he wrote an opinion piece, The Myth of the Stolen Country, for Britain’s Spectator magazine.

His article touched a nerve and went viral. After reading it, I contacted Professor Fynn-Paul to ask his views on the best way to defend democracies against separatist attack. In his excellent commentary he explains why using accusations of racism to close down debate is not only absurd, but, “at a societal level, this attitude creates extreme dangers which work against the proper functioning of a democratic, science-based society”. 

He also makes the point that it is only when full debate is possible on all topics of serious political importance, that democracies “can be returned to health”:

“In the process, we have to reject social tribalism. We are one society, and everyone is an equal stakeholder. We have to return to an embrace of meritocracy, and an embrace of the institutions which created our current prosperity as a society. We have to remember that Anglophone institutions remain the very best political institutions which the world has ever created. This is objectively true across any metric you care to use.   

“The left is now in grave danger of throwing out the baby of our democracy, with the bathwater of our colonial past. But our democratic institutions, and the science, and the meritocracy that support them, have to be allowed to flourish without wrong-minded opportunism based on an appropriation of history, including the history of race.    

“In New Zealand, this means that all issues surrounding Maori rights have to be open to debate. To declare them to be out of bounds is not only anti-democratic. It is totalitarianism, plain and simple.”   

We all have a responsibility to defend our democracy and fight back.

One of our readers recently shared his experience of ‘fighting back’. He was a long-standing supporter of a charity but after receiving letters heavily laced with Maori language, he questioned the appropriateness, and cancelled his financial support when no response was received.

That’s exactly as it should be in a consumer democracy. We should all exercise our choice to withdraw support. Only then will organisations get the message that their behaviour is not acceptable – they will need to heed the wake-up call if they are to survive.

On reflection, 2020 was not only the year in which a virus rampaged out of control around the world, but so too did left-wing activism. With their goal of securing power and control, separatists seized on the disruption and instability caused by Covid-19 to accelerate their agenda.

Anyone who is appalled by these developments can no longer do nothing. Everyone must join in collective action and we each must do our bit to help stem the tide and defend our democracy. It is no longer enough just to be concerned – 2021 is the year in which we must all act!

Please note: If you would like to take action by writing to MPs, newspaper editors, or by joining in the debate on our Breaking Views blog, our very active Facebook Group, or on our Twitter feed, our NZCPR Communications page HERE provides links to all of these avenues for engagement. Furthermore, if you haven’t already done so, please consider taking action by supporting the NZCPR by clicking HERE to ensure we can continue to take a lead in 2021 and speak out strongly against those who are seeking to undermine our Kiwi way of life.

THIS WEEK’S POLL ASKS:

*Do you believe the petition rights enabling citizens to challenge local councils when they change the voting system should remain?
Note: Please feel free to use the poll comments to share your views on any of the issues raised in this week’s newsletter.

*Poll comments are posted at the end of the main article.

 

*All NZCPR poll results can be seen in the Archive.

 

 

NZCPR Guest Commentary:

IS IT RACIST TO DISAGREE WITH A PERSON OF COLOUR? 
By Associate Professor Jeff Fynn-Paul

 

“This essay has argued that:

1) It is absurd to suggest that it is racist to argue against a person of colour. 

2) This treats people of colour not as equals, but as inferiors, who are not fit for rational debate.  The tactic is therefore dehumanizing, condescending, and racist in itself. 

3) Playing the ‘race card’ on matters of political debate is childish, and disingenuous.  It makes as much sense as saying that a husband cannot disagree with a wife without being sexist… or a non-plumber cannot disagree with a plumber without being plumbist.   

4) Vigorous democracy requires vigorous, good-faith debate.

5) The tactic, ubiquitous on the left, of shutting down debate by suggesting that some topics are ‘out of bounds,’ is unfair, disingenuous, and dangerous to the democratic process.

6) It has sent a chill across all sectors of society, which is akin to that felt under totalitarian societies. It therefore stokes authoritarian sensibilities and practises. This can erupt from all corners of society. 

7) Voters instinctually feel when others are arguing in bad faith. When this is carried to the extremes that the current ‘racism’ scare has been, this fuels anger and frustration across the political spectrum, causing people to lose faith in democracy itself. 

8) Democracies which stifle meritocracy and open debate, are hobbling one of the greatest strengths of the entire democratic system: tolerating, and taking seriously, a full spectrum of facts, opinions, ideas, judgements, experience, and points of view. This weakens our decisionmaking process, and leads to sub-optimal outcomes, at a time when the world faces unprecedented dangers on a number of fronts.

9)  Only when full debate is possible on all topics of serious political import, will our democracies be returned to health…”

*To read the full commentary please visit the NZCPR.com website.

 

Clicktoviewx150

 

facebookrsstwitteryoutube

___________________________________________________
New Zealand Centre for Political Research
PO Box 984 WHANGAREI
Ph: 09-434-3836, Fax: 09 434-4224, Mob: 021-800-111
muriel@nzcpr.com
www.nzcpr.com

To unsubscribe from the newsletter, send this email – but don’t forget to reply to the confirmation message.
If you need help unsubscribing, please email admin@nzcpr.com with “REMOVE” in the subject line.
Please note it’s important that you contact us over unsubscribing problems because
it’s often caused by the fact that it was an older address that was registered,
not your current one, and we will need to search for that. 

To change your address please email admin@nzcpr.com with “ADDRESS CHANGE” in the
subject line, advising the new address to be added and the old one to be removed.