- replies
- 3
- announces
- 0
- likes
- 0
@strypey
@Hyolobrika @strypey
Cats have eaten everything and now suffer the consequences 😿
About the only thing I know about New Zealand 😅
@Hyolobrika @strypey
Oh, it was a quote post, I don't see those from this instance 😬
Considering there WAS some context, my reply might seem inappropriate, sorry.
I could look this up elsewhere but I want to hear about it from people that I know with their biases and spin instead of the biases and spin of a random journalist that I don't know or Wikipedia.
@strypey
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckgrwem73gmt
Sorry
From what I've been able to peice together, when the British signed their treaty with the Maori people, there were 2 versions: one in English, and one in the Maori language. Most of the Maori unsurprisingly signed the version in their own language. But apparently the translation between the two versions was not very good as for instance the English version says they submit to the sovereignty of the queen, while the Maori version says they retain autonomy.
These inconsistencies between the versions caused much consternation and heartburn between the Maori and NZ government so in the 70s they created a commission that is supposed to look at any places the two treaties differ in meaning and issue reports to the government on proposed legislation that might violate the Maori version of treaty, and address past violations. It doesn't seem like the commission's reports carry the force of law, but I gather that the NZ courts have adopted a posture of deference to them.
Apparently some people (I presume predominantly non-Maori) feel this commission has rather over-broadly interpreted the rights and privileges the non-english version bestows to the Maori people vis-a-vis the English version, and object that this fundamental undermines liberal democratic values like equal treatment under the law. So they have introduced legislation that would put rules in place for how the commission is allowed to interpret the treaty. AFAICT basically trying to legistlate originalism in their interpretation.
People opposed to the legislation are, somewhat predictably, calling the people who want the legislation 'racist'. Much ballyhooing ensues.
@Hyolobrika
> Can someone give me an overview of what's going on in NZ?
Sure. Have a look at some of my recent posts with the tags #TeTiriti #TeTiritiOWaitangi #TreatyPrinciples #TreatyPrinciplesBill
Happy to answer any questions that leaves you with.
@thatbrickster
> I've not been online much but I suspect the Maori are making a lot of political noise
That's a rather reductive way to describe it. I literally just posted about how about 1% of our entire population were protesting at Parliament on Tuesday. Not just Maori either, a broad mix of ethnicities were represented. I'm not Maori but I would have been there if I was well enough.
@nicholas
> the English version says they submit to the sovereignty of the queen, while the Maori version says they retain autonomy
It says they retain "tino rangatiratanga", a novel phrase meaning "full sovereignty".
The word "rangatira" means chief, and the suffix "tanga" modifies a word to describe a quality, in this case something like chieftainship.
The word "tino" is an intensifier. It's usually translated as "very", but in this case it's better translated as " full".
Why is the translation different in this case?
@Hyolobrika
> Why is the translation different in this case?
Because as I said;
> >The word "tino" is an intensifier
... and "very chieftainship" doesn't make sense in English.