Phil Goff Hypocrisy

Kerry from Glenbervie

Exactly one month ago the Mayor of Auckland Phil Goff, once a leader of the Labour Party, wrote an opinion piece in the wake of the Christchurch terrorist attack. There is extreme irony in his statement: “The first thing is not to let the actions of the pathetic and twisted individual who perpetrated the killings define our values as a people and a country.” Ironic, and hypocritical because who was it that was determined to “define our values as a people and a country.” when he, as an elected representative of the people of Auckland unilaterally decided to employ his weighty influence to deplatform Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux to a sold out audience of Aucklanders and others? So he takes it upon himself to define us? Against the clear wishes of many who had the desire to listen to these people? This is a clear cut, and ominous sign of controlling the narrative. Of deciding what people should think, listen to, and decide upon. New Zealand has no experience of real, hard out socialist control to relate to. But we should be listening to those who have. I find it interesting, that two very outspoken critics of so called liberal social policy, Jordan Peterson and Stefan Molyneux both sprang from the same country that currently espouses strongly these liberal socialist policies that reflect Goff’s own views.

Goff continues: “Equally, it is a time to assert zero tolerance for racism.” There, he plays the master card, now no one can or dare question his pronouncement of judgement upon the callous killer, or the hapless Canadian and American.

Goff: “We need to speak out against New Zealanders who peddle bigotry, prejudice and racism. They create the environment in which the killer in Christchurch felt vindicated in what he did.”

Yes we do Phil, that’s why I penned this letter. To point out your double standards, the agenda which is to stifle any agenda not your own. To deplatform people who have as much right as you have to speak their mind. You, by your silencing criticism, have contributed to the environment where violence is perceived to be the only venue left open to them. “When peaceful revolution is made impossible, violent revolution is made inevitable” JFKennedy.

But the truth of the matter is that most Kiwis of any character understand the distinction between a person's race and their worldview even if they have difficulty articulating this. A worldview is the collective sum of all that you believe to be true about the world, about reality, and by which you will make every decision of your life. It is the lens through which you interpret reality.

It is an obvious fact that other ethnicities, people from diverse cultures add a richness to a nation- that cannot be denied. Most Kiwis welcome that. But on the other hand, only a blind fool would not admit that all cultures are not equal on certain points of morality. This equally obvious point of fact is so cogent that one wonders what sort of a world our politicians actually inhabit. What’s more disconcerting is that the media are largely complicit in this. The blindness is so pervasive that one can only assume that they are totally insulated from the effects of their own policies. Partly the problem is that many at a grassroots level are ill equipped to counter their twisted monologue, and they are not given the platform to promote understanding even if they are articulate. Some cultural norms, should not only be not tolerated here, they should be proactively discriminated against in those countries where they originate, as they were in the past.

How often today do we see Japanese women with totally deformed feet as a result of a cultural “normality”? Should we adopt a caste system that relegated all Dalit’s to the most menial of social strata? I learned an interesting fact about the practice of Suttee. When one’s husband died it became a cultural practice for his spouse to throw herself on her husband's funeral pyre resulting in her own immolation. Sometimes it was expected of her, such that if she was unwilling, she was forcibly thrown on. History records that at least some of the cultural impetus for this practice stemmed from Islamic conquest in India when the wives couldn’t bear the prospect of becoming sex slaves of Muslim conquest. I could go on and on about the many cultural practices of different ethnicities that should never play a part in our culture. In point of fact many come to our shores to be rid of these influences.

Hilda Halkyard-Harawira wrote in a recent letter headed “Let’s stop denigrating other cultures” citing endemic racism in NZ, and immediately maligns Pakeha culture: “If we were truly equal in this country, 80 percent of the prison population would be Pakeha.” No doubt she is aware that though Maori make up less than 20% of our overall population, disproportionately, they make up roughly 50% of our prison population. The facts are undeniable, the cause is somewhat otherwise. She is guilty of fostering the same racial acrimony, by her terms of reference, as that which she is no doubt attempting to protest. But who can blame her? Statistics are gathered in terms of race far more comprehensively than in terms of beliefs, attitudes and worldview. The problem isn’t a question of race, it’s a question of differences in worldview. What are the beliefs that are held most strongly by Maori, in contrast to Pakeha, that is causing these distressing facts? We are all equal under the law. (Except I can’t vote in a Maori electorate). We are, admittedly at least in principle, subject to equal opportunity. Whoever continues to talk about these problems in terms of race, are not dealing with the real issues of differences in worldview. Who believes that issues are more suited to be settled by violence than dialogue? Who believes that the importance of education is the way to get more/better opportunities? Who believes that learning to defend your view by being articulate is better than bullying?

Goff, in concert with many of the multiculturalists, mistakenly treats all cultures as equal. As equally irrelevant, truth be told. In the same way, though all religions are treated equally, if only superficially, they are equally invalidated and privately treated with deep disdain by a deeply secular socialist worldview. Multiculturalists have a deep but misguided faith that “What we need is a great big melting pot, Big enough enough to take The world and all its got, And keep it stirring for a hundred years or more, And turn out coffee coloured people by the score”. It will all come out in the wash. This myopic view completely ignores the reality that cultures grown weak with success and wealth act like a vacuum that strident, more dominant, militant worldviews will simply swallow whole.

Many will recognize the saying “A tree is known by its fruits”. When a worldview gains enough of a following among people, race has no bearing, but it is the collective worldview that decides the future of that family, that village, city, country, indeed that continent. Finally, it will be the dominant worldview that decides the future of our planet.

For our immigration policies, there needs to be tacit recognition of, not races, but worldviews. While it is a rough approximation that often a person's worldview can be known by what race, what country, or what ethnicity they originate from, this stereotypical view shouldn’t be accepted. Worldview transcends race. Worldview, that is, a persons controlling narrative, their perspective on reality and upon which all of us make our way in the world, the lens through which we live and move and have our being in the world, should be the criteria by which people are accepted, or not into our country. Not that we should ban immigration, or the plight of refugees, but that we should tread cautiously, and guage at what rate we can safely and comfortably import ideologies quite divergent and sometimes diametrically opposed to our own. And we should know from history, what worldviews are not to be trusted, what worldviews and philosophies are dangerous, and where certain philosophies will end. They follow a predictable trajectory, as others in less fortunate places are finding to their peril. The historical fruit of different worldviews are all around us, it’s time we took notice.