Without a firm Treaty underpinning, does the colonising of NZ simply prove that might is right?

November 15, 2014

download

Dunno if Alf has got a proper grasp on it, but it looks like the Treaty of Waitangi is a bit of a crock.

One mob signed it on the strength of their understanding of what it says in plain English.

The other mob signed it on the strength of their understanding of what it says in Te Reo, their lingua franca.

Trouble is, the meaning of the English version and the meaning of the Te Reo version are different.

What sort of a basis is that for establishing a comfortable relationship between Maori and the Crown, let alone the underpinning of a written Constitution?

The significance of this difference has become awkwardly apparent since the Waitangi Tribunal produced its latest report on how the colonisers treated indigenous persons in the early days.

Read the rest of this entry »