Posts by Stephen Judd
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I see on rereading that I have confused some of what Verpal Singh wrote with Manakura. I hope you'll both forgive me.
-
Hmm, yes indeed, Heather. My daughter, through her mother, can legitimately trace her whakapapa to Ngai Tahu ancestors (and is in fact registered thanks to her grandfather). Yet Maori culture in any recognisable form is extinct in that branch of the family. I'm open to suggestions as to whether she should class as indigenous.
-
Which reminds me:
Lyrics: Payday Is The Best Day (MJ Hibbett and the Validators)
Oh how i long for the last working day of the month
That's when i get paid
I get my money out all in one go
So i can roll around in what i've made
I spend my money fast before it all runs out
I've no idea where it all goes
But while it's there i'll get a chinese takeaway
Some records some books and some clothesBecause payday is the best day of all
It's the best day of all
It's the best day of all
It's like a three day festivalNot indigenous *cough* but a similar sentiment.
-
You know, I've just realised Rate my Date has another, yukkier meaning.
-
I would be very interested in seeing any kind of objective reasoning for this. Again I bring up the urban maori - somehow the deep spiritual connection that they all have buried unknowingly within them is something that can never be attained by me? Just because they ignore it, doesn't mean it isn't there, and just because I feel it, doesn't mean it is?
You and Manakura will be arguing past each other for ever on this one. If I understand Manakura correctly, the connection M is arguing for is supernatural and irrational. It is outside the realm of objective reasoning. If you were to construct a logical argument that demonstrated that a Pakeha could possess an identical quality to that possessed by Maori, M would either dispute the premises of your argument, or posit a new quality, of which one aspect would be that only Maori can have it. And you'll be complaining that M is not objective, and M will be arguing that you're trying to redefine "indigenous". Actually, you are talking about being Jeremy-indigenous, whereas Manakura is Manakura-indigenous.
As a corollary, in some way, by claiming to be indigenous (left blurry and undefined), you're claiming to be Maori, which you're not. As Tom has noted, it comes down to what you mean by indigenous, and one part of M's definition is evidently "possessed only by Maori." Thus the urban Maori can reclaim their indigenous status because other indigenes acknowledge them, whereas you and I can speak te reo fluently, and point out that generations of our ancestors also lie buried in this land, and never be acknowledged.
And I suspect that is why references to one people, all New Zealanders, etc, rankle so much. Not just from their overtones of assimilation, but because read a particular way, they deny the legitimacy of other groupings.
This is how groups define themselves. I wouldn't take it personally. I belong to a group (Jews) you can't just declare yourself into either. It happens. You can't muscle into a group that has decided you don't qualify. You are a Homer trying to join the no-Homers club. You can start your own club, or decide not to play. You can be Jeremy-indigenous, but not Manakura-indigenous, or not worry about it.
Yeah, let's be endemic, like trout, sheep and possums :)
-
Hmmm. I prefer Pakeha, the word I grew up with. Tauiwi offends me with its connotations of foreigner - where the hell else am I native to? New Zealander I have no problem with, and it potentially includes everyone irrespective of ethnicity. Aotearoan sounds phony to me. I'm happy to leave "indigenous" to the autochthons :-)
-
I had to laugh when I was in the newsagents earlier and saw that Truth's shock-horror cover story for this week is that internet dating is ruining the sex industry through declining demand.
-
Some may prefer to have grouting done in their bathroom
.
Is that some new slang? Ewwwww.
-
David, re 1 - well, that's the conservative-liberal divide in a nutshell, yes? And re 2, I am confident in thinking that Key has more brains and more acumen than Bush fils, if not pere.
I am a natural-born Labour supporter, but I'm a bit cross with them these days, for various reasons. If a status-quo-preserving National regime won a term (without my vote, mind) I wouldn't cry. Wouldn't celebrate, but wouldn't cry.
-
Just to support the prejudice-free trader idea: one thing I've learned over the last few years is that successful investors are not attached to ideology, or theory, or any abstract idea at all, other than that which works on practical application. And when they're wrong, they close out their position and move on, having made careful notes for next time.
This is potentially a very good trait in a prime minister.