By all means, if you're Māori and believe in the mythical realm of tikanga, that's your choice. You’re free not to swim, fish, or go sailing. I see things differently. If I died in floodwaters, the last thing I'd want is for my passing to stop others from enjoying the water or gathering kai to feed their whānau.
Over on X, a bunch of left-wing Māori extremists are claiming a rāhui isn’t a ban - and technically, they’re right, it’s not legally binding. But if you actually read the press release, it clearly states: “It covers all coastlines, river mouths, and floodwaters, and prevents the gathering of seafood and kai in these areas as well as swimming and entering the water.” Sounds like a ban to me.
And when everyone ignores them because they need to make their living will the police stop them? Because Hurty wordsdand cultural demands don't matter when the bills are due.
So very well said good Sir. Rahuis are a total crock of shit. What gives a bunch of superstitious pagans the right to dictate what others do? Nothing. Except that Doc & local Govt play the stupid cultural pandering game, giving these bogus edicts some legal legitimacy. It’s a crock, a power game. Like most of the cultural cringing. Your Church example is flawed cos most churches don’t believe in dead spirits roaming the Earth, but were they to demand an exorcism here & there, imagine the outcry. You can’t take food in the lift at Auckland hospital if it’s had a dead body in it. Rooms have to be Maori-blessed after a patient dies & sit idle until they are. This is superstitious bunkum. Why it’s tolerated I’ll never understand.
Agreed, the standard you walk past is the standard you accept. By abiding by these arbitrary bans, your implying iwi ownership of these features and your acceptance of their authority, no matter how illegitimate it is. If anything, New Zealanders should be conducting a "freedom of navigation" exercise of these features to make the point that iwi do not control the coasts and rivers.
If the Rahui is due to a death it's one thing, if it's due to a perceived contamination it's another. It's up to Councils and MPI to decide on the latter AFAIK ..
Just to confirm: Are you saying contamination is a good reason to close a beach (I’d obviously agree), but a death is not a valid reason for a swimming ban? (I’d agree again unless due to shark presence etc obviously!).
Yes, that's what I'm saying. Of course any death is sad and unfortunate, however if that one flooding death is the reason for the Rahui on swimming and fishing in such a big area, it's a religious reason, and should not be applicable to those who do not follow that particular religion.
Indeed, well said. It ultimately comes down to whether your worldview supports animism, residual evil spirits & the like, or if you base a society on science - in a Judeo Christian desacralised world (and allow people to hold private religious beliefs). The former is the exact bullshit being forced upon us and it’s just madness cos as a worldview, it just doesn’t work.
Ah, I think you might be referring to the Health NZ article? I found out afterwards it was most likely a hoax so I deleted it as soon as I could, while at the local farmers market. I will make a note on both Substack and X today to clarify why I deleted it.
Consistently "on point". Whatever else can we say. We do not like these "rahui" dictates either. We do not like them at all..........
By all means, if you're Māori and believe in the mythical realm of tikanga, that's your choice. You’re free not to swim, fish, or go sailing. I see things differently. If I died in floodwaters, the last thing I'd want is for my passing to stop others from enjoying the water or gathering kai to feed their whānau.
Bullseye! “Why isn’t the iwi’s placing rāhui’s on the streets where Māori kids are being murdered”
Over on X, a bunch of left-wing Māori extremists are claiming a rāhui isn’t a ban - and technically, they’re right, it’s not legally binding. But if you actually read the press release, it clearly states: “It covers all coastlines, river mouths, and floodwaters, and prevents the gathering of seafood and kai in these areas as well as swimming and entering the water.” Sounds like a ban to me.
Most people reading that on the Nelson City Council website would assume the rāhui is a legal restriction. Here’s the link - https://www.nelson.govt.nz/news-and-media-releases/all-news-notices-and-media-releases?item=id:2unda553017q9szv6448
Ignore it. It's customary.
If anyone tries to enforce it, ignore it. Rahui has no legal standing.
And when everyone ignores them because they need to make their living will the police stop them? Because Hurty wordsdand cultural demands don't matter when the bills are due.
So very well said good Sir. Rahuis are a total crock of shit. What gives a bunch of superstitious pagans the right to dictate what others do? Nothing. Except that Doc & local Govt play the stupid cultural pandering game, giving these bogus edicts some legal legitimacy. It’s a crock, a power game. Like most of the cultural cringing. Your Church example is flawed cos most churches don’t believe in dead spirits roaming the Earth, but were they to demand an exorcism here & there, imagine the outcry. You can’t take food in the lift at Auckland hospital if it’s had a dead body in it. Rooms have to be Maori-blessed after a patient dies & sit idle until they are. This is superstitious bunkum. Why it’s tolerated I’ll never understand.
Agreed, the standard you walk past is the standard you accept. By abiding by these arbitrary bans, your implying iwi ownership of these features and your acceptance of their authority, no matter how illegitimate it is. If anything, New Zealanders should be conducting a "freedom of navigation" exercise of these features to make the point that iwi do not control the coasts and rivers.
The takeover of the rights of ordinary folks just gets worse and worse.
If the Rahui is due to a death it's one thing, if it's due to a perceived contamination it's another. It's up to Councils and MPI to decide on the latter AFAIK ..
Just to confirm: Are you saying contamination is a good reason to close a beach (I’d obviously agree), but a death is not a valid reason for a swimming ban? (I’d agree again unless due to shark presence etc obviously!).
Yes, that's what I'm saying. Of course any death is sad and unfortunate, however if that one flooding death is the reason for the Rahui on swimming and fishing in such a big area, it's a religious reason, and should not be applicable to those who do not follow that particular religion.
Indeed, well said. It ultimately comes down to whether your worldview supports animism, residual evil spirits & the like, or if you base a society on science - in a Judeo Christian desacralised world (and allow people to hold private religious beliefs). The former is the exact bullshit being forced upon us and it’s just madness cos as a worldview, it just doesn’t work.
Te Tauihu, whak ya’ Rāhui!
I don’t speak Te Reo, but think I get exactly what you’re saying! 🤣
Why are some of your pages "Not found" when I go to post on them??
Ah, I think you might be referring to the Health NZ article? I found out afterwards it was most likely a hoax so I deleted it as soon as I could, while at the local farmers market. I will make a note on both Substack and X today to clarify why I deleted it.
Glad I got to read it … Spot on, yet again 🙌🏻
Thanks.