How did that play out in reality?
Moa - extinct
Native geese - extinct
Native ducks - extinct
Huia - extinct.
Geez humans hunting animals to extinction, what a shocker.
Come to think of it, wonder where all the Great Auk of Britian disappeared to?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
How did that play out in reality?
Moa - extinct
Native geese - extinct
Native ducks - extinct
Huia - extinct.
long-term thinking (intergenerational well-being is a central pillar of Kaupapa Maori) esp around sustainability (Guardianship)
Geez humans hunting animals to extinction, what a shocker.
Maori were colonisers. They colonised the Moriori and some tribes colonised others at various times.This is the correct take. In Aus and NZ colonialism was a net benefit to the indigenous population.
I wasnt going to touch that one myselfMaori were colonisers. They colonised the Moriori and some tribes colonised others at various times.
Bit of a can of worms with this one, bit of a myth though.Maori were colonisers. They colonised the Moriori and some tribes colonised others at various times.
Is the argument about colonisation?I just think the argument against colonisation is like an argument against say, the existence of a mosquito, or how the atomic bomb happened
It just is.
Yes, it could have been done better.
But at the same time, it couldn’t. Because that’s how it happened, for better or worse, for all of us to get to where we are now
Yes, but one tribe imposing themselves on another is colonisation. There are probably very few people or races or ethnicities that have never been colonised. Most races have been colonised multiple times.Bit of a can of worms with this one, bit of a myth though.
A few iwi went to the Chathams and killed off most of the Moriori, who some say were an off shoot of the first Māori to get to the mainland while others say the Moriori were on the Chathams prior.
By all accounts its a combination of both.
Current argument on the streets of Wellington is about the treatyIs the argument about colonisation?
or the treaty and subsequent long history of it being ignored & breached?
I'm not sure what your point is here.Yes, but one tribe imposing themselves on another is colonisation. There are probably very few people or races or ethnicities that have never been colonised. Most races have been colonised multiple times.
They cant cosplay as having a special relationship of conservation. Would you say thats fair?Are you saying any race who ever hunted an animal to extinction can't then claim enviromental guardianship of their homeland?
MrFrankWhiteMaori were colonisers. They colonised the Moriori and some tribes colonised others at various times.
Yeah, ironic for sure. At least they provide some legitimate sources for their information.Is that two Māori givng the history of MoriMori? Don't see the irony in that?
But thanks for the link. Interesting
Is that two Māori givng the history of MoriMori? Don't see the irony in that?
But thanks for the link. Interesting
They cant cosplay as having a special relationship of conservation. Would you say thats fair?
Huh? Im not "going off" anything. A question was asked about co-governance and and answer was given that implied Maori have some sort of innate guardianship knowledge. I merely pointed out that doesn't appear to be the case looking at the record.I'd say judging what you think people can choose to be or believe by the actions of long dead ancestors is a slippery slope.
This is an interesting point of view.What if they only ever traded. Wouldn't that also have been a net benefit to both?
Have always found this a little ironic and a bit if revisionist history. Fits much better into todays values but an afterthought in Hunter gatherer survival.They cant cosplay as having a special relationship of conservation. Would you say thats fair?