Friday 7 July 2023

Unstoppable And Explosive.

An Awesome Power: The metaphor of the erupting volcano is often pressed into service by journalists and historians. Understandably, since political upheavals, like volcanic eruptions, tend to take all but the most attentive observers by surprise. The existing political order, like a dormant volcano, seems stable right up until the moment it blows apart. 

IT’S VOLCANOLOGISTS who detect the first signs of the pending eruption. Barely discernible tremors, swarms of them, imperceptible to those not equipped with a seismograph, but indicative of something stirring beneath the seemingly solid earth. Magma, rising from the depths, disturbs an equilibrium that may have endured for centuries, causing the ground to shake. Inside the volcano things are heating up. Expanding gases create fissures in the volcano’s flanks, asphyxiating birds and other creatures caught in their invisible plumes. The quakes grow more violent. The air reverberates eerily – as if the mountain itself is groaning. In the final few hours before eruption, the volcano begins to deform, swelling ominously as the magma and the superheated gases expanding ahead of it approach the surface. Finally, with a roar like that of a stricken god, the volcano belches millions of tons of molten rock and ash into the upper atmosphere. For miles, across the landscape, Hell rises and walks around.

The metaphor of the erupting volcano is often pressed into service by journalists and historians. Understandably, since political upheavals, like volcanic eruptions, tend to take all but the most attentive observers by surprise. The existing political order, like a dormant volcano, seems stable right up until the moment it blows apart. Destroyed by forces which have been gathering strength for weeks and months right under the authorities’ noses – not so much unnoticed – as disregarded.

In this volcanic metaphor, the role of the seismograph is played by the polling agencies. It is the pollster who picks up the first tremors of political mobilisation. Barely noticed at first, generating results well inside the margin-of-error, but real nonetheless. Unmistakable evidence that beneath the familiar political topology magma is rising, gases are heating, hitherto solid rock is melting.

It was Act which provided the first indication that the fragile equilibrium established in the aftermath of the Covid Earthquake was coming apart.

As National began its belated rise towards electoral respectability (i.e. a Party Vote in the low-to-mid 40s) it soon became clear that getting there, and staying there, was more than it could accomplish. Meanwhile, the angry Right was refusing to cool down. New Zealand society was being changed radically, and without the permission of those who saw changing things as their prerogative. Moreover, National didn’t seem to be that bothered – as if they regarded the changes as tolerable.

Act’s take-off in the polls was the first sign of the roiling masses of magma churning away deep below the surface. More than willing to take the hard lines that National was eschewing, Act gave voice to the fears of those whose long-established privileges were being challenged by proudly insubordinate social movements pushing transformational ideas about ethnicity and gender.

Below the Me Too and Black Lives Matter agitation, however, and below the bewildering claims of the transgender activists, there was an upward thrusting force that at once empowered and overwhelmed the causes which Act and its fellow travellers dismissed as “Woke”. This was the magma of Māori nationalism, the expanding force of a people whose numbers and aspirations simply refused to stop growing.

The Māori Question was being put to Pakeha New Zealanders with an urgency born of too many wrong and/or misleading historical answers. It was heating the rhetorical gases of the Left, but it was not the Left. To the defenders of Pakeha privilege, however, the denizens of old New Zealand, two things were terrifyingly clear. That all this “Māori stuff” was huge – and that it was rising inexorably towards the surface of New Zealand politics.

Act placed itself athwart the Māori nationalists’ path. It promised to turn back the relentless advance of “Aotearoa” against “New Zealand”. The Treaty of Waitangi would be re-written, all traces of co-governance, would be swept away. A new, written constitution would entrench Pakeha privilege forever. But, these were horizontal solutions: as if the Māori cause was an army advancing towards a defensible border; a force that could be stopped and turned around.

Wrong metaphor.

The upward thrust of the Māori cause is magma – unstoppable and potentially explosive. It may flow down the slopes of New Zealand as lava, reshaping the state in dramatic and irreversible fashion. Or, blocked by the congealed rock of racist resistance in its throat, its pressure will grow and grow until New Zealand disappears in an explosion of fire and ash, leaving behind only Aotearoa.

Therefore, take note of the latest Roy Morgan poll. In that dramatic upward tick of Te Pāti Māori – to a system-busting 7 percent – perceive the first, tell-tale tremors of a political eruption in the making. It is the young people, the rangatahi, who are rising. Not simply in response to Act’s futile policies of obstruction and suppression, but because there is in them a passion for growth and expansion that must, by whatever means necessary, find its way to the sky.

This essay was originally posted on The Daily Blog of Friday, 7 July 2023.


Guerilla Surgeon said...

I'm not sure what scares me the most. Neo-Nazis or ACT. Probably ACT, given that I have impeccable Aryan ancestors. 😇

David George said...

Thanks Chris, more good reasons for party vote ACT.
An unusual poll result - obviously the big Maori Party swing but the other interesting thing is in the 18 - 49 women demographic. Labour/Green favoured by 34.5% of them, National/ACT on 45%. The ex Jacinda maniacs (?) dumping Labour in particular - down to 26% support.

David George said...

All pretty frightening, given our human propensity to fuck things up.

Paul Kingsnorth, excerpts from Into the Desert, Into the Woods:
"Too much focus on the darkness and you can forget about the existence of light. Aldous Huxley summed up the problem in The Devils of Loudon:

No man can concentrate his attention upon evil, or even upon the idea of evil, and remain unaffected. To be more against the devil than for God is exceedingly dangerous. Every crusader is apt to go mad. He is haunted by the wickedness which he attributes to his enemies; it becomes in some sort a part of him."

"in my essay Exodus. We are all heading into the desert, I wrote, like the Israelites:

In the desert, strength is needed, and prayer too. But the desert, perhaps, is not a bad place to be. Civilisations come and go, but nature keeps renewing, and God is eternal. There are things higher than our cultures; there are things higher than the Machine. If we are in the desert - if this is our Exodus - then we can work to understand how we got here and we can wonder, as we wander, about what the Promised Land might look like. As one cycle ends, another begins. The dead leaves of one culture fall to cover the seeds of another, already sown beneath. The more things fall apart - the more the centre cannot hold - the more new centres are seeded on the margins, which is the only place they can ever grow."

Brendan McNeill said...

It is true that New Zealand has never been more divided by race, or plagued by political failure in living memory. For example, we learned today that our Government has $500m dollars of covid RAT tests stored and about to expire. That’s over 50 million tests for a nation of 5 million people. Who did they think would use them, the much promised climate change refugees? Are they incapable of basic maths?

I don’t know who the pollsters question, and to some extent we all live in a bubble of like minded friends, but it’s difficult to understand how 30% of the population have not woken up to the ideologically driven incompetence of this Government.

I’m not sure the public fully appreciates how dire our economic position is. The beauty of a failing education system is that it’s ‘graduates’ could not describe a balance of payment deficit, or differentiate between 60 billion and 60 trillion of national debt, or care about either metric.

We are approaching days where only two things will matter. The first is energy security and the second is food security. It may surprise the NET Zero advocates that the latter is dependent upon the former. Yet our former PM gleefully closed down our only oil refinery so that we could generate more carbon emissions by importing all of our fuel.

There is still time to turn around this situation. Perhaps we need a national challenge to see who can survive the longest without using any products tainted by fossil fuels. Nothing stocked in supermarkets would be available to contestants, no mobile phones, no electricity - even solar panels are shipped to location using fossil fuels, no cars, no bikes, no paved roads or footpaths, no housing, no store bought clothing or hand-me-downs, no shoes, no sandals.

It is difficult to think what resources would be left to contestants. However it’s this kind of reality check we need if New Zealand is to have any prospect of obtaining energy and food security into the future. Let’s decarbonise if we want to, but I’m doubtful the general public has any idea of the implications. One thing is for sure, if we continue towards NET Zero at the planned rate, before long we won’t be debating issues of race.

David George said...

We're certainly not unique in having to confront unrest. We shouldn't be afraid or allow ourselves to be bullied by the psychopaths lighting the ethno-nationalists fire. They're going to inevitably lose, the only question is what sort of disaster they create in their pursuit.

Abe Greenwald:
"Why are Western populations now so primed to explode? If you’re exercised over a given political or social cause, you’ll see that cause as the explanation. But are all these causes coincidentally coming to a head at the same time? Are Western countries staring at once into the multiple abysses of racism, state-sanctioned brutality, and economic adversity?

I’d argue just the opposite. The West has made such extraordinary—indeed, historically unique—progress in reducing suffering on a large scale that we’re now left grasping for new ideals and new aspirations to fulfill.

How do we see ourselves out of this? The way out surely begins with gratitude. Some appreciation for how far we’ve come would go a long way toward getting our progress back on track. But gratitude is antithetical to the false promise of mass protest. And so, we may have to wait for the new ideals and new tactics to fail before reclaiming the aspirations on which our civilization was built."

John Hurley said...

Is it rangitahi or the cohort who like your friend Scot Hamilton who have no difficulty with empowering the first peoples over a clear majority?

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"That’s over 50 million tests for a nation of 5 million people. "

That's 10 per person. I've already used 5 of mine. And let's face it Brendan, if there weren't enough tests, you'd be criticising them for that.

"It is true that New Zealand has never been more divided by race,"

Excessive economic, social and cultural inequalities among peoples arouse tensions and conflicts, and are a danger to peace. ~ Pope Paul VI
As a Christian you should appreciate that sentiment right Brendan? Probably not though.

Kat said...

Gee...Roy certainly has the David's, the Brendon's and the rest of the anti Jacindas squirming....jolly good...

Just for the record the only poll result that matters is post election.....

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"We're certainly not unique in having to confront unrest. We shouldn't be afraid or allow ourselves to be bullied by the psychopaths lighting the ethno-nationalists fire." these ones? these ones? I've never heard you complain about these.

Or these

larry said...

Oh Dear such dramatic volcanic and tectonic hyperbole Chistopher.

In matters political, the more appropriate metaphor might have more to do with bowell movements and particularly the uncontrollable forces of nature of unannounced flatulance accompanying a dose of explosive diaohorea.

John Hurley said...

The upward thrust of the Māori cause is magma – unstoppable and potentially explosive. It may flow down the slopes of New Zealand as lava, reshaping the state in dramatic and irreversible fashion. Or, blocked by the congealed rock of racist resistance in its throat, its pressure will grow and grow until New Zealand disappears in an explosion of fire and ash, leaving behind only Aotearoa.

Racist - definition
characterized by or showing prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

Justify racist? Do you mean ethnocentric?

David George said...

GS "I'm not sure what scares me the most. Neo-Nazis or ACT"
"Okayyyyy, are the Neo-Nazis in the room with us now?"

Here's one brilliant discussion I'm sure you'll enjoy; Dr. Peterson and Andrew Doyle - Irish writer, playwright, public intellectual and creator of the outrageously woke parody persona titania McGrath. They cover a lot of fascinating territory, including:

Do “left” and “right” wing mean anything anymore?, Activists or caricatures?, Left wing authoritarianism Balancing the need to survive with honest expression, Sacrificing the ideal, theorists of resentment, Harrowing hell - realizing our own malevolence, This is a spiritual battle at its core and Kids pushing back through parody?

Social Justice: A Religious Movement

greywarbler said...

@DG The West has made such extraordinary—indeed, historically unique—progress in reducing suffering on a large scale that we’re now left grasping for new ideals and new aspirations to fulfill.

I suggest that was true but not now. But the story is that it still applies and everyone wants to be lulled into thinking that and ignoring the sad reality.
People are upset because they thought that improvements in standard of living and the economy were locked in as the way forward. But we are slipping back towards Industrial Revolution conditions, but with added tech systems breaking down our human conditions and community. Wake up Rip van Winkle. The Sleeping Princess wakes up and gazes at something unpleasant and as the view clears it becomes ugly.

Loz said...

I listened to a fascinating interview with former British Ambassador Alastair Crooke as he discussed the causes behind the current unrest in France. His opinion was fundamentally that the 1980's Chicago School of Economics prescription that ended the post-war Keynesian consensus is now completely unravelling. The Keynesian consensus is gone. Class based politics in Europe is gone. His observation was that Europe is now dividing into groups over "woke" politics (or a programme focussed on ethnicity, gender and sexuality) as opposed to more traditional values.

The values behind democracy, freedom of speech, equality before the law and the later socialist ideals of equality and workplace collective action are now all "traditional" values that are not part of the progressive agenda. What's described as "the left" isn't socialist nor democratic and it has no answers for improving the material living conditions of working people. It troubles me deeply that as a democratic socialist, if Winston doesn't succeed in a comeback, I may be forced to vote ACT because anti-democratic, authoritarian and apartheid politics must be opposed at any cost.

Also in the news this week from Statistics NZ, Household net worth fell for the 5th quarter in a row. Having grown up with the certainty that the working class, young people and especially young women are Labour and progressive voters, the Roy Morgan poll shows those old political divisions are gone. Significantly, young women under 50 now lean strongly toward National & Act and a whopping 60% of the demographic think Labour is taking the country in the wrong direction. That belief is shared by every single age profile and another whopping 60.5% in the demographic of males over 50.

When we a government may be re-elected when only 34.5% of the population support its agenda, it shows a complete dissatisfaction with our political options & a failing economy will make that explosive.

Brendan McNeill said...


Those are interesting stats around voter preferences, and how the traditional devides are unraveling as a result of the Woke political agenda.

"The values behind democracy, freedom of speech, equality before the law.." used to be universally held by all sides of the political spectrim until the day before yesterday. Incredibly I note that Labour Ministers now feel they can dismiss democracy as a binding mandate, and are happy to promote a race based identity political construct that trumps one person one vote. Furtermore, enthnicity now decides your entitlement to a place on the surgery waiting list in our publically funded hospitals.

This is not the New Zealand I grew up in, and not the one I whish to pass to my grandchildren.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

Good helpers David if you think I'm going to watch close to 2 hours of Jordan Peterson's drivel you really have no idea do you? 5 minutes of the man is enough. At least enough to know that he is a total hypocrite, who seems to be sadly descending into madness. Still, if they lock him away it might shut him up a bit.

If only the anti-woke brigade could actually define it I wouldn't mind quite so much. Personally I think I prefer Jonathan Cleese's definition of it – something like – "a whole lot of people simply waiting around to be offended."

That describes most conservatives it in my opinion. Doesn't take much to offend you people does it? A coffee cup with the wrong slogan, a gay person advocating for their rights, someone saying "happy holidays" instead of Merry Christmas, Mr potato head, science, paying taxes, Doctor Seuss, unions – the list goes on.

Of course, you probably wouldn't describe it like that – a better description of your idea of it may well be something like "Anything anyone does that I don't like." As opposed to socialism, which has become "Anything the government does that I don't like."

Still, if you want to watch hours of Jordan Peterson – try some of this.

That might be a bit long though – try this. The 1st few minutes at least shows how he started out on his public pseudo-intellectual career with a lie.

David George said...

I don't think there's any reason I should be "squirming" about it Kat. That unusually high Maori party result looks to be almost entirely at the expense of the other mad outfit - the NZ Greens. See the graph on the link I posted above.

I suspect that for many the mere possibility of a TMP component in government will poison their usual left inclination generally; to say nothing of the recent Labour/Green endorsement from Harry Tam & Co.
Loz's position above is fairly typical - I've heard it myself from quite a few.

Harry said...

"Maori" nowadays means anyone who can claim any percentage of Maori ancestry (and hope to benefit from it). Every Maori should correctly be described as part Maori. Those who try to impress by reciting their tribal affiliations should also be required to detail the non-Maori side of their ancestry.

Tom Hunter said...

that the 1980's Chicago School of Economics

I don't recall those policies having much effect on France, given it's long history of massive, centralised State Power. In fact I don't recall reading of any privatisations or massive efforts at de-regulation - even when they did have "right-wing" Presidents and government. Even their Right looks pretty Left compared to Britain. And the French central bank seems to have been pretty Keynesian over the last forty years whenever recession hit, let alone the state.

The one private sector aspect about France that often surprises people is that most of the water management is in the control of private companies, but that happened over a hundred years ago. Interesting contrast with the numerous SOE's.

greywarbler said...

@Loz We have to bring our minds to understanding politics in a 21st century way - a far more advanced and painfully cerebral way than in last century. We are no longer children getting our education, working hard and being rewarded we hope with good health and nice holidays, children nice houses etc etc. The Holocaust looms over us. People who couldn't, wouldn't, were afraid, went along with a new Party that promised all good things to them, though not good things to others. The not good things happened throughout the 1930s even before, didn't just crop up in 1939.

Laying your gavel (steak knife and fork) down and saying in sorrowful tones to Labour et al that they aren't good enough and so you will have to vote for someone else; that's not the answer. You are not a babe in a cot throwing a tantrum and the toys out on the floor. We have to understand that the 21st century motto is People/R/Us - a vulgar sales pitch that actually carries to us an anguished message which is that we have to help each other and love each other because we have unbalanced the world and a small number of people are unbalanced with too much wealth.

Don't vote to make things worse because that is your mood! Today this is eternally appropriate: Benjamin Franklin's comment at the time of the signing of the Declaration of Independence 1776: "We must all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately." This man's may have written what we need to know: Rushworth Moulton Kidder (May 8, 1944 – March 5, 2012) was an American author, ethicist, and professor. Kidder founded the Institute for Global Ethics in 1990, and is the author of :
'Moral Courage and How Good People Make Tough Choices: Resolving the Dilemmas of Ethical Living'.

Shane McDowall said...


How many Highland pipe bands have you seen and heard in New Zealand? Plenty I bet.

Did it ever occur to you that none of them are "full blooded" Scots?

Bet that thought never crossed your mind.

The British Isles have been invaded and colonised so many times that there are no "full blooded" English, Scots, Welsh or Irish.

Bet that thought never crossed your mind.

Plenty of anti-Maori bigots, like you, who have the cheek to tell others what their ethnicity is.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

I've posted numerous examples of your extreme right friends abandoning democratic principles Brendan and yet you have ignored them – or at least not commented on them. Can one assume then that you approve? Then it's just when the left purportedly abandons democracy that you are agin it?

David George said...

Shane: : "Plenty of anti-Maori bigots...... tell others what their ethnicity is."

How ethnicity is categorised is pretty lose though Shane. I'm listed as Maori by the health outfit and could be on the Maori roll despite being only 1/32 Maori. Apparently I had entered European and Maori on some form and that defaults automatically to solely "Maori". I'm not Maori, I don't look Maori and don't even have much respect or affection for the culture. It's very misleading.

Ethnicity is both race and culture - it's perfectly reasonable for someone racially western European, and immersed in the local culture, to consider themselves Scots or French for example.

It's almost impossible to reconcile considering how much mixing of races and cultures there is and what's happening is very divisive. Perhaps we should all just be thinking of ourselves, first and foremost, as New Zealanders.

David George said...

I didn't really expect, given your vitriolic hatred, that you would watch that Peterson/Doyle discussion GS. Your loss.
It's quite something to see two very intelligent people have a genuine, unguarded journey into some of humanity's highest, and lowest, ideas.

Loz said...

@greywarbler, I share your fears. Collapsing laissez faire, rising inequality, and ethno-nationalism we have seen before. 21st century politics rhymes with the 1930's and 1790's - perhaps less cerebral in many ways.

In a utilitarian way, Labour and the Greens have more policies I support than other parties, but ethics isn't a tally of good vs bad. If it were only a matter of degrees between good and perfect, there would be no dilemma. The dark shadow of totalitarianism and the rise of cultural politics and intolerance toward different views is our emerging world. The question of how important it is really to have freedom of speech, freedom and information, discourse free of the censor's pen and democracy under universal suffrage is paramount if we are to avoid a resurgence of the 1930s nightmare.

Remember Mussolini's claim that “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power”. It progressively replaced the ideals of democracy with authoritarianism, free speech with censorship, equality with race and culture-based preference within the state. Political debate is replaced by dismissive and insulting labelling of opponents. Our corporate dominated state is demonstrating an equal capability to assault democracy from the left, not as an appeal for "traditional" values but rather an ideal of "enlightened" or "progressive" values. Either flavour of tyranny considers its opponents morally inferior people who are deserving of ostracization and censorship for not supporting the glorious cause and party line. Well-meaning or not, I see us sliding toward totalitarianism very fast.

Charlie Chaplin's speech from the Great Dictator was a clarion call for uniting "in the name of democracy" against those who would tell us what to think and what to feel. It was a call to fight for liberty and a reminder that people died to protect those most basic principles.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

" I'm listed as Maori by the health outfit "
pretty sure it wouldn't take more than a few minutes to change that David – or are you expecting all those "racist benefits" you people keep going on about.

Vitriolic hatred? I wouldn't go so far as to say that, but the man is an obvious and proven liar, whose only claim to fame really is publishing a book of anodyne advice that people should have got from their parents or grandparents. Which might actually have done some good in some cases, but not nearly as much as the evil that he's done.

He is an intellectually dishonest pseudo-intellectual, who promotes pseudoscience, for instance his all meat diet – and constantly makes claims outside of his area of expertise – about which he knows nothing. To the extent you believe any of his bullshit, you are gullible.

As he said – "I don't think that you have any insight whatsoever into your capacity for good until you have some well-developed insight into your capacity for evil." He really should take his own advice.

Brendan McNeill said...

@ GS

I don't know who your friends are, and I doubt you know mine either. Rather than throw around toxic pejoratives like 'extreme right' can you just debate the issues?

@ Loz

Once you have seen Fascism as you describe it, the alliance between Corporates and the State joining to police the preferred narrative there is no unseeing it. This is clearly where we have landed in NZ, and you are correct - it is tyrannical.

I doubt Hipkins et. al. see themselves in that light but that’s exactly how they are behaving, imposing top down radical ideological change that was never debated or disclosed to New Zealanders prior to the last election.

It seems increasingly that politics is a choice between the lesser of two evils, perhaps it has always been this way.

Shane McDowall said...


I do think of myself as first and foremost a New Zealander.

I have little interest in Maori culture.

Has not prevented me from being subject to passive-aggressive and naked anti-Maori racism.

What pisses me off is people who think they can tell others what their ethnicity is based on corpuscular fractions.

Gary Peters said...

Shane, there's an enormous difference between throwing on a kilt and annoying the neighbours and demanding compensation for "colonisation" when 95% of you carries the blood of those colonists!

Guerilla Surgeon said...

Gary, it's not very often I agree with Shane – but it's not up to you to tell people if they are Maori or not. And the blood quantum is not a particularly useful measure of who is Maori either.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"Maori" nowadays means anyone who can claim any percentage of Maori ancestry"

Simply not true.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

Brendan. For someone who has constantly thrown around "toxic" pejorative is like extreme left when applied to people like me, I must say I admire your sheer brass bound balls when you suggest I stop doing it. You probably don't describe yourself as extreme right, but from where I am you look like it. (Although to be fair I should probably describe you as religious right which is just as bad.) You have in the past hinted I am a communist, when in fact I'm a social Democrat as are most people in NZ.

While castigating a reasonably moderate New Zealand government for "corporatism" or "fascism" without any real evidence at all, you constantly ignore the real fascism being promoted in places like Hungary, or for that matter India. Places where press freedom has become non-existent, and people are sometimes imprisoned for disagreeing with the government. As I have said before, to the extent you ignore this I can only assume you approve of it? In what way is this not "the issues".

Shane McDowall said...

Gary, Can you give the name of one person with 5% Maori ancestry who is "demanding compensation for colonisation?

Just the name of one person will do.

Oh that's right, your 5% Maori is purely hypothetical.

Gary Peters said...

Maori female mitochondrial dna is mostly Asian.

"The findings confirm archaeological evidence that the ancestors of today’s Maori originally set out from mainland south-east Asia 6,000 years ago, hopped from island to island, starting with Taiwan, and arrived in New Zealand 800 to 1,000 years ago.

However the research also brings startlingly new evidence that as Maori ancestors migrated one group of islands to the next, men from Melanesian communities joined the boats. This changed the genetic mix, and lead to the differences observed in the genetic make-up of today’s Maori men and women."

When a group of people arrive in a land do they not "colonise" it?

Maori oral history clearly states that there were people in NZ when maori started arriving. Does this not then make colonists.

Maori are no different than the rest of us, we are all mongrels with many different bloodlines creating our dna. While there are markers that can be used to denote maori dna they exist througout Polynesia and again were not Polynesians also colonists?

I am quite certain that many who have claimed "reparations" for historical misdemeanors have a tenuous dna link to maori, maybe even less than the 5% I hypothesised. Happy to have you line them all up though and do the blood sample thingy though to see if my hypothesis holds water.

Maybe have a read of "1421" by Gavin Menzies and see how many of his hypotheses have been proven correct.


"Until 1974, and the passing of the Māori Affairs Amendment Act, a Māori was defined as someone with “half or more blood”. However, the definition was rather loosely applied, and did not require persons to provide proof of their “blood quantum” in order to receive whatever benefits were then available."


"The Māori Land Act, and numerous other statutes, define Māori as “a person of the Māori race and includes any descendant”."

Any descendant.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"Despite a plethora of amateur theories about Melanesian, South American, Egyptian, Phoenician and Celtic colonisation of New Zealand, there is not a shred of evidence that the first human settlers were anything other than Polynesian"
Michael King

Shane McDowall said...


The Wikipedia entry for '1421' says "Historians have rejected Menzies theories and assertions and have categorised his work as pseudohistory".

There is no archaeological evidence to support the idea that there were people in New Zealand prior to the arrival of Polynesians in the AD 1200s.

Apparently there were patupaiarehe, fairy people, before Polynesians arrived.

So you believe in pseudohistory and fairies.

And how other people choose to identify is none of your fucking business.

Gary Peters said...

Ahh, Wikipeadia, that editable website that is open access.

Menzies identified 20 odd sites around the world that may have had Chinese visitors around 1421. Of those site 95% have been confirmed through DNZ testing of the indigenous people.

Oh dear shane, touched a nerve did I? I care little for how people identify, it's when they expect me to believe their fantasies I have a problem or when they decide to blame one tiny as pect of their DNA for all the troubles that have assailed them.

Pretty sure the birth of Jesus is also a myth but it does seemt o have a bit of a following.

Shane McDowall said...


Menzies' book '1421' has been reviewed by professional historians and judged to be horseshit. If you want to believe in horseshit, that is your prerogative.

I prefer peer reviewed history books.

Clearly, you do care how other people identify, otherwise you would not take such an obvious interest in the DNA of ethnic groups that you do not belong to.

Jesus is not a myth. We can't be certain the exact year of his birth, but his death occurred in either April AD 30 or 33.

Oh, and I am not a Christian.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

For God's sake Gary, every academic in the field knows that there were no "original inhabitants". The link I gave has several references to academics who actually know what they're talking about. I suppose you couldn't be bothered reading it. You've done your own research after all. So you would sooner believe a nong like Menzies, who dropped out of school aged 15 and has absolutely no historical training whatsoever – rather than academics who spent most of their lives studying this.

DNZ testing? – That's something to do with dogs isn't it?