Posts by mark taslov
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: On joining the international…, in reply to Kevin McCready,
have promoted Brash by opposing
The very same Brash who just claimed on camera off the nzherald site that a brief interruption by protesters definitively proved PC has erm gone too far.
-
oops- the correct Garner link: https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/104150002/don-brash-not-treated-unfairly-by-am-show-bsa-says
-
Hard News: On joining the international…, in reply to simon g,
fair enough, I chose the more ambiguous “support”
1. to bear or hold up (a load, mass, structure, part, etc.); serve as a foundation for.
2. to sustain or withstand (weight, pressure, strain, etc.) without giving way; serve as a prop for.
3. to undergo or endure, especially with patience or submission; t̲o̲l̲e̲r̲a̲t̲e̲.as I felt if I'd gone with something like “giving Don Brash and his views the biggest boost since he left Parliament” it would have overstated things by some considerable degree. But if, big if here, I were to throw that kind of superlative around I’d probably reserve it for someone like Garner or Hill.
-
Hard News: On joining the international…, in reply to WH,
That’s a former leader of the National Party you’re trying to cut out of New Zealand’s political life, Mark.
When Jim Mclay becomes the go-to provocateur employed by media on topics related to Māori then that could almost be relevant. Is your intent to suggest that a racist is ok to continue to mainstream if they’ve held a high profile political position?
Brash is just another racist Pākehā as far as I’m concerned, laud him as is your bent of course.
As much as I warm to the idea, I don’t see myself being able to cut Don Brash out of political life by any stretch.
Realistically.
-
Hard News: On joining the international…, in reply to simon g,
So not in favour of the tolerable bigot being deplatformed but also not in favour of those who are deplatformed employing legal counsel to disincentivise deplatforming? Would that be a fair assessment?
I think you’ll find those views are and have been on a fairly constant trajectory for quite some time and that it’s RNZ and TV3 who have been maintaining the normalisation of those views by retaining Don Brash as the go-to to bigot on all manner of topics related to Māori.
Question I have is where do you personally draw the line, would you hold the same position if it had been Graham Capill who’d been deplatformed?
The reason i ask is that I’m unable to ascertain is whether your support for Brash is a product of internalised racism or you’re ok with open access for all types of toxicity.
-
FWIW, I completely agree with him
Sounds like the standard hegemonic response to be honest, less #givenothingtoracism, more #givesomethingstoracism. One comes to expect and anticipate this as a minority, this fanciful notion of the “tolerable bigot” – bad enough that those impacted complain but not so bad that the hegemony are prepared to meaningfully resist them.
The focus of Gallavin appears very much on the immediate present:
What that may mean for universities is that we need to hire more security, liaise with police and our community more to ensure legitimate protest occurs in a way that is safe and sane.
Showing scant concern whatsoever for the fallout i.e. normalisation of the tolerable bigot, experienced as microaggressions and worse by minorities every day.
Members of the hegemony advocate in this way regularly; “why are you concerned by [insert name of tolerable/ redeemed bigot] when [currently less favoured bigot] is soooo much worse”
As if Aotearoa should reserve a clean seat for those – who while not advocating actual genocide – peddle views that continue to marginalise, defame and divisively malign tangata whenua.
I’m glad Jan has a lower tolerance than you for bigots with these types of attitudes; for the bigots that profit from these views:
"You have a situation where a relatively primitive culture, where education has not been valued, has traditionally produced large numbers of people in relatively low-paid jobs.” (Metro magazine Apr 2004)
Don Brash on Māori single mums:
“Many are in no stable relationship with a man. […] I’ve read of women with children by as many as five men, none of whom takes the slightest interest in the upbringing of their children.”
Would it be correct to assume you’ll be getting in behind the Free Speech Coalition in their impending legal action against Massey University Vice Chancellor Jan Thomas?
-
evidence
Before I forget there was a follow up article. With certain details lacking some reading between the lines is required, my own inferences based on what is presented rather than what may have occurred. Notably the article appears to muddy the waters by presenting ’reverse racism’ as an issue:
Another Herald reader said racism was not just against Asian migrants.
“We are from the UK and we have been told to go back England – we have been here 25 years,” the woman wrote.
This is, taken at face value, arguably xenophobia as opposed to racism – issues best not conflated, bearing in mind some may experience one *or* the other while others experience *both* – and obviously, as mentioned previously; the historic, systemic and power dynamics.
Of more relevance to my above point was another’s testimony:
The racism came from two colleagues but what was most alarming was that when he reported it to management “nothing really happened”, the man said.
“Management’s comment was, ‘It depends upon how you perceive it’,” he said.
In this instance:
’It depends upon how you perceive it’
ostensibly coming from the same school of thought as:
"If anyone felt that it was [racist], then of course we would apologise"
One from the public sphere the other from the private, and both very much in their way indicative of the types of gaslighting employed by the hegemony to minimise and erase the concerns of minorities:
these perceptions of racism are often treated as exaggerated or delusional.
The conclusion reached in this study being that these types of defensive responses to racism being called out are a product of positionality:
Together, these findings are consistent with the hypothesis that perceptions of racism are influenced by the relevance of one’s racial identity. Individuals in the majority group may be less likely to perceive systemic racism because it presents a greater challenge to a mainstream worldview.
and of historical and cultural awareness:
Ultimately, this research underscores the importance of historical knowledge — and activities, like Black History Month, that highlight marginalized forms of historical knowledge — for understanding current events.
Which tangentially leads to a point Julie Zhu highlighted a few days back wrt Suffrage 125, drawing attention to this article
“From 1893, the majority of women were able to vote, but Chinese people (of all genders) were not allowed to vote in New Zealand until 1952, because of their ‘alien’ status.”
duly elaborated on:
From 1893, the majority of women were able to vote, but Chinese people (of all genders) were not allowed to vote in New Zealand until 1952, because of their “alien” status. This is almost 60 years after the suffragettes achieved voting rights for Pākehā and Māori women. Chinese people weren’t allowed to vote because they weren’t allowed to become citizens of New Zealand between 1908-1952, this is over 100 years after the first Chinese person arrived. The structural racism in the New Zealand immigration system has denied the rights accorded to people based on this Pākehā idea of citizenship, or “naturalisation” as they called it. This is often omitted in accounts of how “we” were the first country to achieve women’s suffrage.
One of myriad examples of the hegemonic (invariably Pākehā) subjectivity and selective nostalgia being used to erase significant and prolonged instances of institutional discrimination in Aotearoa.
2018 marks the 125th anniversary of women’s suffrage in New Zealand. On 19 September 1893 the Electoral Act 1893 was passed, giving all women in New Zealand the right to vote. As a result of this landmark legislation, New Zealand became the first self-governing country in the world in which all women had the right to vote in parliamentary elections.
-
Hard News: Harkanwal Singh: What really…, in reply to linger,
my general impression and experience is that as with any educated adult clinging to the notion that new zealand isn’t systemically and culturally “racist AF" – no amount of evidence i can furnish you with could banish those lingering quibbles.
which is not to say I can’t elaborate on the above allegations in some detail – but for what purpose? your entertainment? I left a snapshot of working conditions – take from it what you will.
-
*absolve
-
Hard News: Harkanwal Singh: What really…, in reply to John Farrell,
That’s the state of things – supervisor was informed – I’d argue that blatant racism in the workplace without repercussions is a Government problem – I even assumed – perhaps wrongly – that this is why we have a Human Rights Commission – but more to my point – when folk inherit leadership – the leaders or leadership team tend to send signals – as we’re seeing with Winston right now – signals which may be taken as indication of the type of leadership to expect – the type of environment they’re comfortable with and may seek to maintain – and so – *checking pocketwatch* – who is it today? Rob Jones is the racist du jour, occupying what appears to be a much sought after position in the limelight since this administration took office. In a media environment which is exploiting it for all its worth. Power, influence and using both responsibly to send the most humanitarian – rather than the most politically expedient – signals is underrated.
TLDR: old skooly racism in the workplace sure as shit is my Government’s problem, I can’t speak for yours. in a structurally racist colony the Government is the last instrument I’d resolve of accountability for a racist culture.