679
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
679 points (100.0% liked)
World News
48842 readers
1754 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Do you believe that every party in every parliament in the world should be able to just stop parliament from working instead of trying to actually vote for laws/bills the way they think is right because they are sure that they are right and their voice aren't being heard (even if they are minority in the said parliament or don't have quorum)?
It was a performance point of which was disruption of parliament session, which was achieved. (I have 0 stakes in this, NZ might as well be in another universe)
These people are underrepresented and standing up for their constituents, suspend them so they can stop doing that!
If they are underrepresented, why other Maori don't vote for their party? Is there some kind of voter suppression scheme going on? If there is that's probably was a right move that can move this problem out of unspoken/shadow consensus, if there isn't then it's just one party disrupting parliament because they can't get what they want.
Even if all Maori voted for them, they only would have 19%. That means they would still not be able to have political power.
The system is rigged, giving the huge number of colonizers an advantage over the native population. Australia has a similar problem.
Regretfully, democracy can be viewed as a dictature of majority over minority. I don't think that there can be any clear cut answer to it. As for colonizers vs colonized, how far back do you consider this should go? As in any person of european descent forever in the future will be considered colonizer instead of people born on this land?
I think as long as the colonizers maintain an economically superior position, and keep the political power, there can be no real integration.
A good democracy has checks and balances to protect minorities from mob rule /tyrrany of the majority.
That is actually what this protest is about - the ruling party wants to remove some of those legal safeguards.
New Zealand's political system has proportional representation. Maori will most likely be in partial control after their next election.
No. If you had even the most basic theoretical background on the subject you'd know how wrong this statement is. Yet people like you dangerously believe this surface level third grade understanding of democratic systems somehow makes them an expert.
This is an extremely vague statement that focuses on me instead of showing me and people like me where exactly we are wrong. Majority rule absolutely is common denominator in most democratic systems, so show me how it isn't.
It's 2025, I'm not your middle school teacher, I'm not going to "show you" anything. Go learn the subject yourself, or don't and keep repeating nonsense as if it were some deep insight, either way I'm fine.
Of course you won't. 🤡
As far as I can see 26% of New Zealand's politicians identify as Maori, including the man who was Deputy Prime Minister during this haka.
Indigenous people are not monolithic.
New Zealand also has a carve out of Maori seats which is meaningful because it has proportional representation. This is what Australia could have eventually done with Indigenous Voice but there is no political appetite for it in Australia, plus the Aboriginal and Torres Straits people make up a far smaller percentage.
Protest MUST disrupt something or it will be ignored. That’s why riots and boycotts get shit done while normal protests fizzle out.
Every major social policy change I’m aware of was accompanied by riots.
Disrupting parliament is far less violent than a riot yet still makes the point effectively.
...animal noises?
Sorry bud, comparing the haka to animal noises is not “tone”, so fuck off with the disingenuous bullshit.
“Animal noises“… Damn that’s some racist shit
What does protest mean to you?
I see no one has ever rold you the anecdote about how a bar turns into a nazi bar.
I think the issue is more that they went from a 3 day suspension being the record high for disruptive behavior to suddenly 21 for these minority members.
A lawmaker during the arguments said that they had previously given zero suspension to a fistfight, someone driving their truck onto the buildings steps in protest, another member crossing the floor to bump another members desk. But this dance is 21 days.
This does look like they are specifically singled out, true.
So don't comment with ignorant babble then.
Please, educate me what did I get wrong from reading the article? Or was your comment just for public shaming?
Either you're a shill, a turfer, or a moron, or maybe you have legit said something stupid and dont understand why.
I dont know where you are from, or what culture you are but, what would you propose to do to indicate that something is unacceptable, after having stated that many many times, and the people who have traditionally murdered your people for being "savages"opt to ignore you many times, and are the people that hold power? Just say "this is unacceptable" and take the loss, while just allowing your constituents to get fucked?
I do not disagree with their action, in contrary it's refreshing to see politician with consciense that try to actually do what they are hired to do. Question is - what now? If other parties would do the same and just stop session without any reprecussion (because they hold majority, or due to other reasons).
Tap for spoiler
Please stop with personal attacks.My legislative body has the filibuster and I think it has a useful function, so yes!
BTW, there's no good reason whatsoever the NZ parliament couldn't have resumed business after the haka. None at all.
The only reason they didn't was because the leadership decided to feign performative fear and end the session in order to manufacture an excuse to punish the native legislators and exclude them from influencing the budget.
Plenty of parliamentarians getting kicked out of western parliaments for wearing t-shirts with slogans, holding up signs, suchlike. Suspensions generally are extraordinarily short and little more than "ok we'll give you some time to change into respectable attire". Also make a scene? Add a day. Make them watch from the visitor's benches. Pay attention they don't miss (relevant) votes.
That would have been the proper reaction: The proper way to handle ritual stunts (and they're a ritual, also the t-shirt thing) is with ritual slaps on the wrist.
The NZ reaction? They're suspending parliamentarians for unprecedented amounts of time, and on top of that while the budget is being passed. That is, they're fucking with the distribution of votes, which is fucking with the foundations of democracy. That is, for a parliament, nothing less than a declaration of bankruptcy.
Good lord dot world is filled with the most pathetic fucking losers imaginable
Hey! He's from .cafe, not .world.
Elaborate, what exactly do you think is wrong with my post?
At least your instance is shutting down.
Ohhh nooo not “my instance” lol you dork
You sound like Hillary Clinton talking about being pragmatic (while completely missing the point.) Like people who complain about protesters blocking roads because it inconveniences their commute. Maybe that's your intent or maybe you don't understand that civility can be a form of oppression?
What's a filibuster?
Thank you, I've learned a new english word today. 😺
Conceptually it looks like a flaw in the system and in my opinion is undesirable, do you disagree?
Did that really go right over your head? Unbelievable!
they're right, filibusters are bullshit and shouldn't exist. it's an exploit that was never intended and never fixed.
You are missing the point. Reread the thread.
i didn't miss anything, you presented a bad example and it got shut down immediately.
I'm so shut down. Look at me shut down. What a buffoon.
let me be clear:
the events in the OP article are some racist fuckery. the penalty is far too severe, and it's being maliciously timed to exclude the maori from being represented in critical government processes.
i do agree that disruptive protest has a place in any society and i am supportive of any instance of indigenous people in a colonizer state employing such (and other) measures by default. more please, i will always side with indigenous peoples over colonials.
so yeah i get the broad point and the way it relates back to the article. we see eye-to-eye on the important stuff i think.
my nitpick about comparing this to a filibuster (and it is a nitpick) is that i think the filibuster is a crap exploit exercised in bad faith, and is mostly wielded by bad actors to the detriment of the common person. i believe it is fundamentally a bug in my country's government, as it is not explicitly described but supposedly "implied" by a certain open-endedness in one section of the constitution. it is a dark perversion of disruptive protest, not an example of it. it is an undesirable flaw, the other user is right about that.
i do not agree with them broadly that any disruption of government processes is undesirable. it is often very necessary and appropriate, and increasingly so as the world succumbs further to the grip of fascism.
anyway, both our efforts are better spent elsewhere than arguing over a nitpick in the fine details of an evil empire's increasingly obsolete constitution.
american here. you're entirely right, it's out-and-out an exploit of some vagueness in our constitution but we're conditioned to see it as a somehow important feature of our democracy. there's even a famous movie called Mr Smith Goes To Washington where the good guy saves the day with a filibuster. in real life it's usually used to fuck us over anytime something meaningful looks like it might pass.
that said, the response what happened in the NZ parliament remains some disproportionate and corrupt BS.
A tactic used when the person speaking has been recognized to speak according to the rules of the legislature. I don't really see why that's relevant here though?
It was rhetorical but go on queen.
No, see, it should be allowed when we agree with the people making the disruption. Otherwise absolutely not!
But fillerbusters are appropriate process of disturbing voting that are not a treats to democracy, right?
There is more to voting than casting a vote.