This is disingenuous. Clearly there has to be a line somewhere. To throw out an absolute crazed example, at various points in Peru’s history, there were rites with child sacrifice. Should we allow Peruvians to “express disagreement in their own idiom”?
To me, this is like how in the USA we are purported to have “freedom of speech”, yet that doesn’t enable you to say “FIRE” in a crowded theater.
May I suggest that these ‘hakas’ could be performed in the manner of a protest, outside the doors of the active legislative session?
There are rules about what behavior is permissible and not permissible on their parliamentary floors. Each and every elected person in that room would have agreed to these rules. They violated them by staging this scene. I would hope and wish that any other person from any other culture that was loud and disruptive in the session would be cited by the same rules.
Sometimes to illustrate a point, it is best taken to the extreme to see what a logical extension of this would look like. You’re supposed to go “LOL child sacrifice” because that IS the point. There is a line drawn somewhere.
You are missing the context of Maori culture being alive and well in NZ, in NZ Parliament and that the haka was a response to the erosion of Maori rights… In NZ.
No one was harmed by the haka.
Before you go calling folks disingenuous, you may want to get more background information.
The vote was delayed. You also don’t know the reaction of other parliamentary members. The context of the haka is a dance done to intimidate enemies. Maybe some of the other members feel intimidated now.
If I was a parliament member and stood up with 3 of my pals and loudly threatened another member, what do you think would happen to me?
You can consider whatever the heck you want but please don’t assert as fact your understanding of the cultural context of an art form from the other side of the globe.
This is disingenuous. Clearly there has to be a line somewhere. To throw out an absolute crazed example, at various points in Peru’s history, there were rites with child sacrifice. Should we allow Peruvians to “express disagreement in their own idiom”?
To me, this is like how in the USA we are purported to have “freedom of speech”, yet that doesn’t enable you to say “FIRE” in a crowded theater.
May I suggest that these ‘hakas’ could be performed in the manner of a protest, outside the doors of the active legislative session?
There are rules about what behavior is permissible and not permissible on their parliamentary floors. Each and every elected person in that room would have agreed to these rules. They violated them by staging this scene. I would hope and wish that any other person from any other culture that was loud and disruptive in the session would be cited by the same rules.
lol that’s a hell of a strawman
“you’re being disingenuous, what about child sacrifice”
Sometimes to illustrate a point, it is best taken to the extreme to see what a logical extension of this would look like. You’re supposed to go “LOL child sacrifice” because that IS the point. There is a line drawn somewhere.
You are missing the context of Maori culture being alive and well in NZ, in NZ Parliament and that the haka was a response to the erosion of Maori rights… In NZ.
No one was harmed by the haka.
Before you go calling folks disingenuous, you may want to get more background information.
The vote was delayed. You also don’t know the reaction of other parliamentary members. The context of the haka is a dance done to intimidate enemies. Maybe some of the other members feel intimidated now.
If I was a parliament member and stood up with 3 of my pals and loudly threatened another member, what do you think would happen to me?
Did he fucking stutter? If anything, it sounds like delaying the vote was an attempt to prevent harm.
That doesn’t count as “harm” either, you dishonest ass.
Can you elaborate further on the cultural context of the haka, fellow American?
I really hate this “you’re an outsider so you can’t have an opinion”. Am I only allowed to consider things in America?
You can consider whatever the heck you want but please don’t assert as fact your understanding of the cultural context of an art form from the other side of the globe.
Wouldn’t want parliamentary process to be disrupted in any way by Maori’s expressing concern about laws that are going to affect them negatively.
/s