Understanding Te Tiriti o Waitangi | Let Me Explain

[@arifinhaque6698]

Who is here because of the recent protest in NZ Parliament?

[@Itz_Arya05]

Me

[@user-wr4jw6ec7p]

Listen to Paul Moon . Very good factual history that doesn't mix his emotions with evidence .

[@taniakean3131]

​@@Itz_Arya05me

[@taniakean3131]

Read the treaty o waitangi by Claudia orange..I've just started reading it

[@todretex]

The Waitangi Tribunal was set up in 1975, and was a big deal because it formalized the process for addressing Māori land claims relating to Te Tiriti. But to view it as the first time Māori grievances were addressed is oversimplifying history. As far back as the Te Tiriti signing, there were many attempts to deal with land issues, even if they weren’t perfect. In the 1840s and 1850s, Crown commissions investigated dodgy land deals, and later, the Native Land Court gave Māori a legal way to claim land-though, it also facilitated land loss. By the late 19th century, Māori leaders were regularly petitioning Parliament about land confiscations and Treaty breaches, and even some royal commissions, like the Sim Commission in the 1920s, recommended compensation and redress. Sure, these were band-aid solutions compared to what came later, but they prove the Crown was dealing with land issues long before the Waitangi Tribunal. So yeah, the Tribunal was groundbreaking, but it wasn’t the start of Māori fighting for justice or the Crown trying (and often failing) to put things right. Let’s give history and New Zealand a bit more credit

[@kiatupato182]

NZ History 101 Research Project - Google - 1. How much Maori Land Confiscated 2. Maori Land stuck in Perpetual Leases 3. Land Confiscated off Maori War veterans while they were out of the country serving for New Zealand Army. Maori War veterans returned home to find their Land Confiscated. Pakeha War veterans receive 100 acre blocks of land, gifts from the NZ Crown. This will take some deeper research. NZ tried to bury this History, hoping the sleeping dogs will never be woken up. Sir Bom Gillies recent News Article is a good place to start. These are just the tip of the iceberg. Warning - Please do not think you are an ‘expert’ after reading a couple of paragraphs. I am not an expert, my knowledge is just from the School of Life. Why are so many New Zealanders so ignorant?

[@todretex]

He whakaputanga was never adhered to? While He Whakaputanga aimed to establish a united and regular congress of Māori chiefs, the realities of ongoing intertribal conflicts, lack of organizational support, and the rapidly changing political landscape following the Treaty of Waitangi meant that the rangatira did not consistently meet as intended. While the declaration aimed to unite the Māori chiefs, tribal rivalries and conflicts persisted. The pre-existing intertribal wars (musket wars) had created deep divisions and competition for resources, which continued to influence relationships among the tribes. Not sure why this is never discussed. I find this period in New Zealand Aotearoa’s history fascinating. Truth really needs to be told in full though, and is often cumbersome to audiences.

[@Rokker61]

It's never discussed because those truths are most inconvenient and don't sit well in the newly written history of New Zealand.

[@broniabutler4166]

Those who signed did not have the nous to meet the commitment made, it went nowhere😊

[@willturbot1044]

Because Maori only believe their own narrative and are usually gaslit from other Maori about the real truth. Sssh don;t mention Hongi Hika.

[@missshante808]

No, He Whakaputanga was to establish the recognition of Maori Sovereignty (and aide in export trading). Te Wakaminenga were the governing body, which is still in place today and annually meet in Waitangi. Tikanga Maori provides space for differences to be placed aside and a kaupapa (issue) to take presidence. The birthing process of the Kingitanga is a good example.

[@I_Extinguish_I]

You’re absolutely right that He Whakaputanga didn’t achieve its full ambitions-organizing a united congress of rangatira across iwi in the midst of intertribal dynamics and shifting political landscapes was no small feat. But let’s be clear: its significance wasn’t diminished by those challenges. In fact, He Whakaputanga stands as a critical declaration of sovereignty, one that laid the foundation for how Māori viewed their relationship with the Crown leading into Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Yes, the musket wars created divisions among iwi, but He Whakaputanga wasn’t trying to erase those-it was about asserting Māori authority to the world, particularly in response to increasing foreign interest in Aotearoa. It formalized what already existed: Māori sovereignty. The 1835 declaration was recognized by the British Crown, cementing the rangatira as sovereign leaders over their respective lands and people. This recognition wasn’t dependent on the formation of a regular congress-it was a statement of sovereignty that still held weight in international relations. While the dynamics you mention-tribal rivalries and limited congresses-are important, they don’t negate the larger truth. He Whakaputanga was a clear assertion of Māori self-determination and independence. Its legacy isn’t that it was perfect or without challenges, but that it was a bold declaration of unity in sovereignty, which directly informed the discussions and promises made in Te Tiriti. To understand New Zealand’s history, we have to acknowledge the full picture-including the fact that He Whakaputanga remains a cornerstone of Māori expectations of partnership with the Crown. Truthfully, that’s a story worth telling in its entirety.

[@hughjanus3378]

The biggest issue facing the treaty creators was the concept that the Maori chiefs would become subjects of the queen. In other words..little chiefs…rather than big chiefs. This matter was discussed and documented at the time so is beyond dispute. The flavour that has subsequently added to the mix is a modern creation which has been conjured up by clever wordsmiths to suit their purposes. It does not reflect the intention of the document and is simply wrong.

[@richardcaves3601]

Barely a quarter right. Read Professor Orange's book for a full background of the Treaty, the translation difficulties, the AMS intentions, Hobson's instructions and the timeframes. Prepare to change your views.

[@hughjanus3378]

There is no “Professor” Orange…there is an historian with a PhD gained in the study of the Treaty of Waitangi…which contains opinions on the thinking of the main players in the creation of the treaty ….and she has written a book on the matter. The chiefs were indeed becoming “little chiefs” ….the explanation given at the time to make sure the chiefs understood what was about to happen if the British took control of New Zealand to establish some sort of desperately needed law and order. The talks were held…the document created and the deal done. Simple stuff…..until you get radical people with an agenda and access to tax payer money controlling a weak prime minister and funding lawyers to prepare a fairy tale story based on uncertainty around the definitions of Maori words. It’s toxic “Walt Disney”…..and I don’t buy into it……

[@djhemirukahemisphere8893]

No. The agreement was to ensure Britian had an agreement and not France or others. 500 plus chiefs did not choose to cede to 5 representatives of 2000 people. 😂 The crown could not afford to govern Maori and they had no intention to do so.

[@hughjanus3378]

Yes they did. Some of the chiefs had been to Britain and could have had a ride on Brunels railway… imagine the affect that would have had on the Stone Age Maori representative… A giant steam powered horse…. The smart chiefs would have seen that this Queen would advance their people hundreds of years with one signature.

[@GAL999]

Just an immigrant trying to understand.. Let's say we proceed with the Maori version on the context of 100% owned by Maori rather than 8% does it mean all land titles as of year 2024 will be null and void?

[@timmyers8802]

There is a responsibility as a Nation to resolve this issue and find a way to move forward as a whole. Yes the very fact that's the treaty has not been acknowledged is incomprehensible and we all have a right to acknowledge that. A written agreement should be and followed as such. We must find a way to resolve the issue in a collective manner. The world is changing and we as humanity are evolving. Therefore a agreement to settle the disputes must be addressed to deal with the issue's of the past and we as a Nation can move forward.

[@michellenicholls9039]

Yes proper acknowledgment and redress is needed in order to move forward.

[@terrynicol4548]

What do you mean it is not acknowledged? It is acknowledged by the overwhelming majority of New Zealanders as the founding document that formed the nation we live in. It is acknowledged that from that day forward we were allowed to live as brothers and sisters in this land. What other acknowledgement do you think it requires? Sure, you have the %.05 radicals who believe that our wise and beloved Queen Victoria fooled them out of sovereignty, that they only signed the Māori version, but what of the 39 Rangatira who signed the English version of the treaty? That is rather inconvenient isn't it? All this nonsense about only having 'a few hours of discussion' before signing, what a lot of rubbish, there were multiple copies of Te Tiriti that circulated the country for months after the original signing, some did not sign until September 1840. Is 'this' what you think requires acknowledging?

[@TeTai-u2c]

The only reason 39 Rangatira signed the English version is because the te reo Māori version wasn’t available at the time of signing.

[@kodybreakell7145]

So you think it's more likely that they willingly gave up sovereigty than they were fooled or forced under duress? Even so the treaty itself has been abused to the point Maori will never have just reparations for the broken promises in the English version. ​@@terrynicol4548

[@3tapsnu0ut87]

@@TeTai-u2c Did Maori have a written language?

[@illentertainment1993]

So what is the ultimate out come what would make it right?

[@user-po9mc1tv1e]

There is an issue with this korero. He Whakaputanga 1835 is the authority given to Hapu over all people acknowledged by King William IV of which is an international agreement. Te Tiriti O Waitangi was a trade agreement to lease the whenua for 150 years to the Crown that began in 1840 and ended in 1990. The new settlement agreements were then arranged by the New Zealand Government from 1990 to resettle on the whenua through a Crown creature of statute called the IWI. This meant bringing Hapu together to negotiate grievances. However settlements are not about grievances, they are about settling on the land and requesting permission from the land owners which are the Hapu. This is in the Westminster acts of settlement 1701.

[@shauntempley9757]

The Te Reo version mentions it specifically in the first article. Notice the English versions never do. The only time it shows up is if a translation of the Te Reo version is read.

[@Taepa5]

Maori Klansman

[@turangatohiariki3042]

IMPORT 😂😂😂​@@Taepa5

[@plumbus813]

You just made that up, wholecloth. There is no evidence of a 'lease', infact article one specifically cedes governance over all the land FOREVER: "ake tonu atu"

[@StoneWii]

​@@plumbus813No it doesn't hence the coat of arms Maori and queen eye level represents that's signifying the equal co governance.

[@andycy2226]

You forgot to mention the brutal intertribal warfare prior to the treaty. Maori committed atrocities that would be consdered crimes against humanity in modern times. 10-20% of the population were killed and equal number enslaved. Many of those who signed te tiriti were in possession of lands that they had captured by butchering the previous iwi only a few years earlier. Funny that Maori always forget to mention that part of history. Also when Russell was the hell hole of the south Pacific it was Maori chiefs who were taking young slave girls down to the beach and trading them for guns. Whalers were the customers but the Rangitira were the pimps.

[@charlesdugay--leyoudec8712]

You are just practicing whataboutism. As a western European, I can assure you that we were no better than them at the same period. We were still all practicing slavery in our colonies and fighting each others for land gains, power and riches. If a foreign invader told me I shouldn’t complain about my lower status because my ancestors practiced war and slavery, I would be really pissed. You are just trying to diminish their rights with invalid arguments.

[@djpomare]

Co-governance is in the treaty. Brits replaced rangatiratanga (run by Māori chiefs) with sovereignty (run by UK royals). My tipuna signed He Whakaputanga (Declaration of Independence) 28.10.1835 and Te Tiriti 17.2.1840. Pōmare believed he had not given up any sovereignty and stated that he was not able to in any case, as it belonged to all of his iwi. Focus on getting in the waka and working together - Kiingi Tuheitia. Kotahitanga ngā iwi Māori katoa.

[@I_Extinguish_I]

You’re absolutely right-co-governance is embedded in Te Tiriti. When Māori signed Te Tiriti, they didn’t see it as giving up sovereignty but as creating a partnership. The Crown was granted kāwanatanga to manage its settlers, while Māori retained authority over their lands, people, and taonga. This wasn’t a “handover” of power-it was an agreement to share responsibilities. He Whakaputanga in 1835 had already established Māori as sovereign entities, and rangatira like Pōmare made it clear that sovereignty was not theirs alone to give away-it belonged collectively to their iwi. The Treaty isn’t division; it’s kotahitanga-working together. The vision of leaders like Kiingi Tuheitia speaks directly to this: getting in the waka and rowing as one. Co-governance initiatives, like the Waikato River Authority, embody that spirit. Equal representation from iwi and the Crown has restored the mauri of the river while benefiting everyone who relies on it. It’s not separate laws or dividing people-it’s bringing perspectives together to get the best outcomes. Kotahitanga, unity, is the foundation of a stronger Aotearoa. Honoring the commitments of Te Tiriti means working as partners-Crown and Māori-because only by recognizing and respecting each other’s roles can we truly move forward. That’s what our tipuna envisioned when they signed both He Whakaputanga and Te Tiriti, and it’s a vision worth striving for today.

[@djpomare]

@@I_Extinguish_I Wow, it's great to have some agreement rather than hate. Thanks.

[@I_Extinguish_I]

@@djpomare Kia ora, absolutely! Working together is the key to building a stronger future. Co-governance isn’t just sharing decision-making-it’s achieving better outcomes by combining strengths. Take housing as an example. Look at the incredible work Te Puea Memorial Marae has done tackling homelessness. Through their Manaaki Tangata program, they housed 181 people-including over 100 children-within three months, all with just $125,000 in funding. Compare that to some government-led emergency housing initiatives, where families are stuck in motels for months at huge costs and with no long-term solutions. By integrating Māori leadership and values with practical support, Te Puea delivered faster, more efficient, and meaningful outcomes for whānau. This is what co-governance could look like: local expertise and cultural values combined with government support to solve problems collaboratively. Whether it’s rivers, housing, or beyond, the more we work together, the stronger we all become. That’s the future we should be aiming for. 😊

[@IAMPononga]

Hi Liam. You forgot to mention slavery, funny how everyone forgets to mention slavery, it's like it never happened. Or it doesn't matter somehow. Maybe to understand Te Tiriti o Waitangi we need to stop talking about what chefs did or did not think, but rather to open our hearts to what was actually happening to ordinary people at the time, to understand how slavery had infected every part of this land. But maybe it is safer for us to forget the past, not everything of course, just the bits that don't suit, like the bit about slavery. Te Ruki Kawiti, a prominent Māori chief and military leader of the Ngāpuhi tribe in the early 19th century. In his correspondence with missionaries, he described the impact of slavery on his own people. He mentioned the suffering of Māori slaves, who were taken captive during intertribal warfare and forced to work as laborers, often enduring harsh treatment. H. K. Taiaroa, a Māori chief and member of the New Zealand Parliament, described the experiences of the Ngāi Tahu people during the 1820s and 1830s. Taiaroa's account mentioned the devastating impact of warfare and slavery on the tribe, which led to significant population decline and dislocation. The Ngāi Tahu people were often targeted by the more heavily armed northern tribes, such as the Ngāpuhi, who took captives as slaves. Wiremu Tamihana Tarapipipi, a Māori chief and leader of the Ngāti Hauā tribe in the 19th century, played a crucial role in the establishment of the Māori King Movement (Kīngitanga). He was also known for advocating for peace and unity among Māori tribes. In his correspondence with Europeans and other Māori leaders, Wiremu Tamihana acknowledged the existence of slavery in Māori society and its negative effects. He promoted the abolition of slavery and encouraged peaceful resolutions to conflicts between tribes.Āpirana Ngata, an influential Māori politician, lawyer, and scholar in the early 20th century, collected and preserved Māori oral histories, traditional knowledge, and cultural practices. In his work "Nga Moteatea," a collection of traditional Māori songs and chants, Ngata included references to slavery and its impact on Māori society. The songs often describe the experiences of captive slaves, their longing for freedom, and the grief of their families. Te Puea Hērangi, a Māori leader and granddaughter of the Māori King Tāwhiao, was a prominent figure in the early 20th century. In her recorded oral histories, Te Puea recounted her ancestors' experiences with intertribal warfare and slavery. She described the devastating consequences of these practices on the Māori people, emphasizing the importance of unity and peace among the tribes. In 1836, the Church Missionary Society (CMS) missionary, William Yate, reported that around 50% of the Māori population of the North Island were slaves. Yate's report was based on his experiences and observations while working among the Māori population in New Zealand.Samuel Marsden, an Anglican missionary and one of the founding members of the Church Missionary Society (CMS), arrived in New Zealand in 1814. In his letters and journals, he described the existence of slavery among the Māori and the harsh treatment of slaves, particularly during intertribal warfare. John Savage, a British naval surgeon, visited New Zealand in 1805 and wrote about Māori society in his book "Some Account of New Zealand" (1807). He noted the existence of a distinct class of slaves, who were captives taken during warfare and subjected to hard labor and cruel treatment.Jules Dumont d'Urville, a French explorer, visited New Zealand in the 1820s and observed the practice of slavery among the Māori. In his accounts, he detailed how slaves were captured during warfare and were subjected to labor and other forms of exploitation. Joel Samuel Polack, a British-born New Zealand trader and writer, spent time in New Zealand in the 1830s. In his book "New Zealand: Being a Narrative of Travels and Adventures" (1838), he described the existence of slaves among the Māori, who were primarily prisoners of war, and their harsh treatment. Richard Taylor, an English missionary and naturalist, arrived in New Zealand in 1839. He documented Māori customs, including their practice of enslaving captives from other tribes, in his book "Te Ika a Maui, or, New Zealand and Its Inhabitants" (1855).Edward Shortland, an English ethnologist and New Zealand government official, wrote about Māori slavery in his book "Traditions and Superstitions of the New Zealanders" (1854). He described the status of slaves within Māori society and their treatment, which could be harsh, depending on the tribe and circumstances.Augustus Earle, a British painter and travel writer, visited New Zealand in the 1820s. In his book "A Narrative of a Nine Months' Residence in New Zealand in 1827" (1832), he recounted his observations of slavery among the Māori, including the treatment of slaves and their role in Māori society. James Busby was the first British Resident in New Zealand, appointed in 1833. He played a significant role in the development of the Treaty of Waitangi and was involved in the early interactions between Europeans and Māori people. Although his primary focus was on establishing British authority and promoting trade, he also had the opportunity to observe Māori customs and practices, including slavery. In a letter to Governor Bourke of New South Wales, dated April 5, 1834, Busby expressed his concerns about the slave trade in New Zealand. He noted that it was common for Māori tribes to engage in warfare, taking captives as slaves (known as taurekareka or mokai) and sometimes selling them to European settlers. Busby considered this practice to be a violation of British law and humanity, and he urged Governor Bourke to take action to suppress it. Charles Darwin, the renowned English naturalist, visited New Zealand during the voyage of the HMS Beagle in 1835. In his book "The Voyage of the Beagle" (1839), he briefly mentioned Māori slaves, noting that the Māori people he encountered treated their slaves with contempt. William Colenso, a missionary and botanist, arrived in New Zealand in 1834. He worked with the Church Missionary Society (CMS) and later wrote about his experiences, including Māori customs and the treatment of slaves. In his book "Excursion in the Northern Island of New Zealand" (1844), Colenso mentioned that slaves were used as laborers, cultivators, and even for cannibalistic purposes in times of war. George Clarke, another CMS missionary, arrived in New Zealand in the early 1830s. He served as a protector of aborigines, responsible for overseeing the welfare of Māori people under British influence. In his correspondence, Clarke mentioned the existence of slavery among Māori tribes and advocated for the abolition of the practice. Frederick Edward Maning, an early New Zealand settler, trader, and author, arrived in New Zealand in 1833. In his book "Old New Zealand: A Tale of the Good Old Times" (1863), Maning recounted his experiences living among the Māori people and the existence of slavery within their society. Just maybe the really important thing about Te Tiriti o Waitangi is that it was another important step in the elimination of the evil of slavery from this land. Funny how it never gets mentioned

[@overover..]

I've read a more modern un-cited version, that slavery by Maori was learned from the British, was only temporary during war, and generally ended in intermarriage into the tribe. There is no place for history like yours anymore, only narrative. Dismantling of power structures (the west, white men etc) is the goal, and any means, dishonesty, racism, bigotry, and most importantly, historical revisionism, are justified

[@overover..]

Very interesting commentary by the way

[@gmaulpker4765]

Also forgot to mention the slaughtering of Moriori by Maori. Moriori land was given to Maori by the British Crown too.

[@korocam9137]

You should have made a video like Liam has.

[@johnnyrarere]

Regardless of Slavery or the slaughter of Moriori the fact that a document signed by 500 was ignored for document signed by 39 with little resemblance to the 1st

[@pcmetro23ify]

The treaty was signed in 1840 with England not NZ. Self governing happen 17 years later in 1857.

[@richardcaves3601]

Both wrong, the Treaty was between each individual chief and the British Crown. That's explicit. Internal self governance came in 1857 and full independence from 1947 when we took up the 1931 statute. Then we also became a Commonwealth member; prior to that we were part of the British Empire.

[@anguslauder1250]

If sovereignty was mistranslated as governance, does that not mean the Maori would still have understood that they were ceding governance to the crown? The video's interpretation suggests the Maori didn't think they were ceding anything, be it sovereignty or governance.

[@Toni-vo3bi]

In 3:24 the video explains that Maori understood they were ceding governance to the crown to govern THEIR OWN British settlers NOT MAORI, and that is literally what Maori understood the crowns governance to be, over her own British subjects.

[@anguslauder1250]

@@Toni-vo3bi interesting, but my questions would be that the tiriti still stated that "governance over aotearoa" would be ceded to Britain. So that in either language is clearly not just limited to the pakeha settlers. Furthermore he mentions that the Maori "couldn't fathom the concept of one leader all of the land" frankly I find that a bit patronising, Maori iwi conquered each other as a standard, as well as the moriori, and Maori kings/queens have become a feature of their culture.

[@Toni-vo3bi]

@@anguslauder1250 I was just answering your first question in relation to the video. I'm not here to educate you on your ideas of the Treaty. There are plenty of resources online, at the library, seminars and lecturers you may be able to contact to answer your questions. I can see you've come to this video so keep going.

[@anguslauder1250]

@@Toni-vo3bi thanks for having the discussion with me regardless mate

[@eruerawalden3760]

@@anguslauder1250 the notion of kings and queens came with the endeavour. the maori community is based on debate and mandate over dictatorship rule. that doesnt mean people disagreed and fight, it was more common, but you would expect it in the context of the time.

[@klburroughsnz]

So 1) Some chiefs signed the Maori version and it could be argued have the strongest position to argue regarding the differences between the 2 versions. 2) Some signed the English version and so ceded sovereignty - which tribes need to be identified as shouldn't be part of Treaty claims 3) Some didn't sign at all - what is their relationship with crown & did they sign the Declaration of Independence of Untied Tribes Seems to me that it's important to know there are potentially 3 differing relationships between the various Maori tribes & Crown

[@richardcaves3601]

Wrong - so wrong it's nonesense. International law applies - no argument about that - and international law says the native language version is the only acceptable version in law. Learn the difference between the "R" word and the "K" word, then read Professor Orange's book. Prepare to swallow your pride and prejudices.😂😂

[@klburroughsnz]

@@richardcaves3601 Thanks 👍... So what's your thinking on the best way forward

[@richardcaves3601]

@@klburroughsnz By reading the same book I did, you'll see the history of the political and military actions of the settler government, until 1975, in far, far different light. You'll understand why the Principles of the Treaty are paramount to redressing the evil done. You'll be like me and most of Maori in this country, and see right through the BS assumptions of the average Pakeha, who have only a slight idea of the legacy left by successive governments from 1857 to 1975. You'll understand why Maori make up the bulk of the disgraceful statistics in NZ. Like me, you'll realise that restitution, proper restitution, is going to be a multi generational process. To answer your questions: co-governance is a nice simple FIRST STEP, but a first step only. Given the current state of property and business ownership and control by 1% of NZ, of over 90% of NZ assets, with the shrill and vocal of their 9% enablers, it's not difficult to persuade another 25% of sheep who are desperately afraid of losing what precious little they have, to racist bigotry. Maori ownership of the necessities of life: water, land and infrastructure, seems to be a far better alternative to what we have now. At least they recognise they hold things in trust and guardianship, on behalf of us all; not just for the few. Fortunately, international law gives Maori backing that can't be shifted.

[@jeremybell-connell5137]

The NZ government breached the terms of the English version in many cases because, for example, lots of land was confiscated. So the iwi that signed the English version arent necessarily prevented from bringing Treaty claims. You need to look at the specific facts in each case, which is what the Waitangi Tribunal does.

[@richardcaves3601]

Wrong Jeremy, it didn't matter about the English version because that version is a legal nullity. In law, the English version doesn't exist. Period. The breaches of the Treaty weren't just confined to land confiscation and swindle. Anyway, the whole point of the current debate is over co-governance and the right wing misrepresentation of it. It is now being used by Maori to protect public ownership of vital natural resources like water, something this government and the previous national government tried to sell off to the MNCs. Maori are using the Treaty to benefit all NZ, not just the wealthy 1%. It's all there in article 2 of the Treaty.

[@stevenstuart1442]

Tamati Waka Nene one of the first Chiefs to sign the Te tiriti ." I know no Sovereignty but the Queen, and never shall know any other" ..Conference of Maori Chiefs Kohimarama 1860. where close to 200 Maori Chiefs ratified the Queens Sovereignty..... you're trying to tell us Maori didn't cede Sovereignty...????

[@hokimoki3677]

That was one chief ....he does not speak for all māori...shall we address the other topics that arose during the meeting and what the concerns the other chiefs had to discuss?

[@stevenstuart1442]

@@hokimoki3677 seriously, he was only one of the chiefs that ratified the queens Sovereignty at the kohimarama Conf. in 1840 best you actually do some research...... or you telling me he was the only one ?????

[@I_Extinguish_I]

You’re absolutely right that He Whakaputanga didn’t achieve its full ambitions-organizing a united congress of rangatira across iwi in the midst of intertribal dynamics and shifting political landscapes was no small feat. But let’s be clear: its significance wasn’t diminished by those challenges. In fact, He Whakaputanga stands as a critical declaration of sovereignty, one that laid the foundation for how Māori viewed their relationship with the Crown leading into Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Yes, the musket wars created divisions among iwi, but He Whakaputanga wasn’t trying to erase those-it was about asserting Māori authority to the world, particularly in response to increasing foreign interest in Aotearoa. It formalized what already existed: Māori sovereignty. The 1835 declaration was recognized by the British Crown, cementing the rangatira as sovereign leaders over their respective lands and people. This recognition wasn’t dependent on the formation of a regular congress-it was a statement of sovereignty that still held weight in international relations. While the dynamics you mention-tribal rivalries and limited congresses-are important, they don’t negate the larger truth. He Whakaputanga was a clear assertion of Māori self-determination and independence. Its legacy isn’t that it was perfect or without challenges, but that it was a bold declaration of unity in sovereignty, which directly informed the discussions and promises made in Te Tiriti. To understand New Zealand’s history, we have to acknowledge the full picture-including the fact that He Whakaputanga remains a cornerstone of Māori expectations of partnership with the Crown. Truthfully, that’s a story worth telling in its entirety.

[@lilianabracanov239]

Has anyone thought about this one absolute truth Doctrine of Soverignty (one, sole, individual) The Sovereign Queen Victoria cannot govern with 500 Maori Chief in any co partnership, government or sign any co agreement treaty! I think that its well understood we have had One Soverign Parliamentary Representative Government in NZ since 1840 and that is our constitutional rule of a law of all equal before the law and representative jury.

[@miwaretumai9014]

And what a great job labour and national have done aye👀👀💀😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 weak

[@davedewsnap288]

He Whakaputanga was a declaration of self determination for a confederation of Iwi. 52 chiefs signed, and a copy went to London meaning ratification. Te Tiriti was built on He Whakaputanga, confirming ‘Kawanatanga’ or ‘custodianship’ for a governor (British Resident governing settlers) and TINO RANGATIRATANGA or self determination & independence for Maori. The articles of the treaty use both words because they have different meanings.

[@GeoffFischer-w6y]

I maintain that "rangatiratanga" equates to "sovereignty". Ref. Te Kawenata Hou, Ruka 3:1 "Na i te tekau ma rima o nga tau o te rangatiratanga o Taipiria Hiha, i a Ponotio Pirato e kawana i Huria..." clearly shows that kawanatanga is subordinate to rangatiratanga. Many other texts in Te Paipera Tapu show that rangatiratanga is the highest form of authority in heaven and on earth, therefore equivalent to sovereign authority.

[@burtcokain8439]

Also, the Lords Prayer in te reo Māori was taught at the time by missionaries. 'Kia tae mai tou Rangatiratanga'. May it arrive hither your Kingdom = Let thy Kingdom come.

[@TeTai-u2c]

@@burtcokain8439 exactly. And no Kawana is above “Thy Kingdom”. In the context of the British empire and their Christian roots, there is no way they would elevate a Governor or Government above God’s KINGDOM!

[@robdowsing3361]

This all happened about 100 years ago there has been lots of changes in the world since then so Māori people just get over it . Surely one country one people😂

[@valeraef9097]

So easy and on point. Doing my te tirity project today for course. Thank you. So helpful.

[@J.Smith-rc6wh]

find better sources, this one is very misleading

[@plumbus813]

He tells two bold faced lies! First, the wording of the first article, in Maori, gives the crown governance over ALL THE LANDS. Second, Maori SOLD THE VAST MAJORITY OF LAND LOST, as per article 2.

[@Digmen1]

Your version of the English version is the wrong one. That was written by James Freeman. But that was replaced by the one written by James Busby and approved by Governor Hobson. Then it was translated by the Williams into Maori, and that was the one most chiefs signed. Some people used the James Freeman earlier version which includes the words fisheries and forestries. So that is why we need to honour Ti Tiriri (the Maori wording) of the James Busby written treaty (now commonly known as The Littlewood treaty.

[@standstill0641]

Have you read the Sir Ngata Apirana version of an explanation.... How is it today's Maori reject this government minister's explanation..

[@shauntempley9757]

Because the Government of the time ignored his recommendations and twisted them to their benefit. The Maori seats were created to keep Maori votes out of elections, Maori men's' voting rights mind you, until 1967. When Maori women were first given voting rights. The women's vote in 1895 was for whites only. He was also told by the Government of the day that if his people fought in WW2, they would get their land back. When they came home after the war, they refused to acknowledge the decision. Which every other veteran said was an ANZAC betrayal, because they fully supported the announcement. 20 years after they gave Islamic worshippers an official Mosque in Christchurch, called Alnor Mosque, for fighting in WW1 under the NZ flag, no less. This Government is no different than the one then.

[@andycy2226]

@@shauntempley9757 bollocks, over 4000 maori women voted in the Maori electorates on 20th December 1893, an unknown number who had some European ancestry voted in the general electorates three weeks earlier. Where do you get this bullshit from and why are you spreading it around?

[@shauntempley9757]

No, they did not. The reason, is because the Government of the time passed legislation that stated only Maori that owned land as a Pakeha could vote, and they specifically stated that only Maori men would be accepted.@@andycy2226

[@shauntempley9757]

All of which owned land as Pakeha men did. Which did not last long, because the Government of the time banned those women from owning land after the one election they voted in.@@andycy2226

[@liondixon1156]

My favourite vid on the internet

[@REALHUNDR]

You boomers NEED to stop WHINING! EXCUSES, EXCUSES!! This guy gave a great short explanation about the treaty. We need to move on and work together to bulid a better future for our children. Maori and Pakeha alike. To do that Maori need to have MORE say and representation. ONLY THEN we are equals!

[@tmolicios]

Nō sweeping u der the rug here, that shits been going on 4 waaaay too long...until the government makes things right, then we move on and become one

[@phoenix_NZ]

This sentence is a complete contradiction "We need to move on and work together to build a better future for our children. To do that Maori need to have MORE say and representation. ONLY THEN we are equals!". To move on we need to stop looking at everything through a race lens. "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." martin luther king

[@rexamus75f54]

Right the wrongs that were placed upon us buy decisions made before us.

[@saxdearing3395]

No mention here of the Te Raupraha massacre and cannibalism that decimated Maori prior to this. Nor the Kohimaramara Conference in 1860 of around 100 Maori Chiefs which confirmed that sovereignty had indeed been ceded. Nor the subsequent statement by Sir Apirana Ngata around 1940 that also confirmed that Maori had understood the succession of sovereignty. Incomplete reviewing of history is misinformation.

[@saxdearing3395]

@@robintamihere4550 Utter nonsense

[@robintamihere4550]

@@saxdearing3395 YOUR SAYING Historian and academic, Paul Moon is speaking utter nonsense DUDE get real!!!

[@saxdearing3395]

@@robintamihere4550 Well for a start, you're apparently quoting Paul Moon out of context because that is the antithesis of the thrust of his book "the path to the Treaty Of Waitangi." Then there is the issue of historical scholarship which can only ever be opinion. Time to look forward, not back, and change mine to ours. We are all New Zealanders.

[@robintamihere4550]

@@saxdearing3395 NO I'm not misquoting Paul Moon. I am merely backing up what Mr Moon has said as being correct from my own research back in 2012.Queen Victoria only wanted to govern over the new Settlers and not the Maori therefore sovereignty was not ceded by Maori. The misunderstandings all began with her official she left in charge who had ulterior motives right from the start. This attitude is documented in Court cases that were overturned by the Privy Counsel right back in the 1800s coming forward.

[@CapitalistKiwi]

I PROTEST. There are innacuracies in this video. Briefly 1) There are 3 or more english versions of the Maori Language Tiriti i) The Littlewood document of 4 Feb 1840 ii) The Freeman (royal style) of after 6 Feb 1840 iii) the 1975 version by Professor Sir Hugh Kawharu. 2) He Whakaputanga is local to north of the Bombay Hills and questionable includes some part of Hawke's Bay and not so questionably parts of Waikato/Taranaki. It is LOCAL, rather than country wide 3) Sovereignty was recognized (not granted) by King William who gifted the Chiefs of the Confederation of the United Tribes Te Kara which is the flag with a white field with a red cross and in the top left quadrant has another red cross and with an 8 point star in each sub-quadrant in that top left quadrant. 3) Definition of Taonga is that which can be gained by the tip of a spear. Therefore radio waves, sea beds are questionable. 4) Land ownership. The deal was that ONLY the Monarch could buy the land off the local tribes. It is legally valid to say that not one piece of land was sold to the Monarch. It was defrauded from local tribes by parliamentarians and the Governor and "agents" and none of these puchases were validated by the Monarch. I am told that ONLY the Monarch may own land and that the Monarch can grant subjects an area to rule over. No SUBJECT of the Monarch may OWN land, but they may hold a deed of title or be granted a fiefdom. 5) "The Pakeha" is a blanket labelling that includes settlers who co-existed very closely with their local tribe and also covers the pirates who stole lands by force or trickery from settlers and local tribes alike. It is an injustice to label settlers who were fooled by these pirates as being complicit with the breaking of Ti Tiriti. We are left with this can of worms we now hold. . I will say no more but there is plenty more to say.

[@joeylim7473]

The same thing happen in Sulu

[@user-wq3jj4zk8i]

Very incorrect story. It is not the treaty it is Te Tiriti (Māori version). There is only one version the translation is not a version.

[@Rokker61]

You seem to forget that Te Tiriti is the translation. The English text was written first, and then translated into Te Tiriti.

[@taniakean3131]

​@@Rokker61but how's that tho? We know that they are in fact different tho. Hence the confusion

[@Rokker61]

​@@taniakean3131 The Treaty of Waitangi was first drafted in English by Hobson and Busby on January 29, 1840. It was then translated into Māori by the missionary Henry Williams and his son. The translation into Māori, though, was criticised because of the understandings of the terms Kawanatanga and Rangatiratanga and what they were intended to convey. There is a lot of discussion about this in various places online, and the confusion that the words have created. Google is your friend! 😀

[@jamescrydeman540]

The document assures equality under the law, end of story. The document produces a “whole” that whole being the equality spoken of. No one clause has ascendency and it has to be read as a whole. Little more to know.

[@stephenhoward7454]

Kaimanawa Wall NZ needs to have a full history pre-Maori these are significant

[@gregwaghorn8496]

The truth us hidden in Te Papa museum. It's going to be revealed in 2063. It will change everything. Peruvian people were here before natives. Small people were found in coffins in caves. Iwi of 1900 say, these were OT there people. They had the skeletons crushed for fertiliser. Which erased history

[@honeyholly001]

The wall is probably pre reset.

[@tmolicios]

That wall was built by maori

[@stephenhoward7454]

@@tmolicios Nelson Sea wall (Boulder bank), Waipoua Forest stone buildings....busy as bro's.

[@jamescrydeman540]

What is to explain the document assures that all will be treated equally under the law and that is the sum of it, any distancing from that equality on whatever grounds is to attack democracy and endeavour to supplant equality with supremacy. What is sought Democracy or Supremacy?

[@CaptainKuki]

Tangata whenua and tangata tiriti are caretakers of the land. We ain’t doing too well 😢😢

[@user-wr4jw6ec7p]

The British weren't that interested in New Zealand. The treaty was to give the English government jurisdiction over the English Settlers living here .

[@michellenicholls9039]

I have not heard of anyone signing the English version where did you get that information? I have not heard a Treaty expert say that so where did that come from?

[@tmolicios]

Lols do your research, some maori chiefs signed the Pākehā version wich i wish they didnt

[@wy2907]

Just can't believe the PM etc put themselves through this

[@ISBayHudson]

Luxon is obviously crap with negotiation :) I think it says a lot about the way he thinks. Known this was going to be divisive - he allowed it. He either doesn't care or underestimated the uproar. They way Luxon says that he "doesn't support it in it's current form" (the bill) is also be a concern

[@marjnikora6761]

Tama iti said the people who were traveling around the country for signatories didn't make it to Tuhoe as their neighboring hapu said not go to them.

[@enumeratenz]

If Maori Chiefs were able to claim sovereignty in 1835, then they were able to cede it in 1840. Article 1: " ... cede to Her Majesty the Queen of England absolutely and without reservation all the rights and powers of Sovereignty which the said Confederation or Individual Chiefs respectively exercise or possess ..."

[@EpicTyme]

So much of what you say is just factually wrong. The document of independence was drawn up to enable trade (ship registration) and at the request of Maori Chiefs who feared French invasion. Tired of NZ history being misrepresented by people, purposely for their own benefit. One Country all are equal.

[@michellenicholls9039]

Shut up you don’t know a damn thing foreigner

[@FAMEROB]

@@michellenicholls9039 hes right

[@shauntempley9757]

He is wrong. What he says is what was said during the Land Wars to justify the killing. No different than what Israel says about Gaza right now.@@FAMEROB

[@TheRustyBox]

Very clear vid. Thank you :)

[@stepheneast8792]

This video is factually incorrect there is not mention in the English or Māori version of the Treaty about forestry's or fisheries. Part of the reason is that the true original and authentic English version i.e., the Littlewood draft, of the Treaty from which the Māori version was back translated to form Te Tiriti has not in the past several decades been used and this continues today. What has been used is the Freman's version which is incorrect. And it is inconceivable that woke people believe that Māori didn't cede to the Crown.

[@awhesian]

Littlewood has been entirely debunked bro

[@karlharrison2449]

This is missing quite a bit of the truth. Dishonest comes to mind. This is just opinion not fact.

[@kanakamakapalua6097]

You're absolutely right!! this shit is full of shit.

[@kanakamakapalua6097]

@@liamratana855 The shit was created by the colonial missionary toerags marsden & kendall who had just committed mass murder by supplying their cook island christians with over a 1000 muskets imported from sydney in 1820 c/o fake ass frog baron charlie de thierry......kupapa toerags were hika & manukau and every other toerag tribe created in new plymouth....

[@kanakamakapalua6097]

@@liamratana855 Hawaiians (Kānaka Māoli) from Maui were the first to settle Aokealoa (universal islands) nz maoris (tahiti/raro) didn't get their shit (title) until 1839.......thanks to their missionary slave masters.

[@kanakamakapalua6097]

@@liamratana855 I am tangata whenua, I am also sovereign and descend from the twin hull Makapālua Tohunga Te Whioke Te Fīoke 845.BC.

[@kanakamakapalua6097]

proof of these events can be found on the pompous ''kiwi coblers'' youtube doco: hoongi hika goes to london, pre musket genocides.

[@JackieAdams-v6d]

Meaning David Seymours changing of the wording of the treaty is not to benefit Maori more for Pakeha.

[@shauntempley9757]

Bingo.

[@RaewynTairi]

Yes he wants to take from Maori and leave them with no rights

[@shauntempley9757]

Correction. He wants to take from Maori their rights as Maori, and replace them with Pakeha rights only. Genocide by referendum, or failing that, legislation, and a full blown civil war as a consequence of any of that. Which is why the King is coming here in March.@@RaewynTairi

[@richardbruce8111]

nuts ...he IS "maori"@@RaewynTairi

[@markturner2971]

Propaganda, two years after signing the Dec. Of ind. Maori were warring. Maori turned to the crown who said, no, you're to violent. They wiped out a number of French marines and captain, so France wanted to annex New Zealand 🇳🇿, wiping Maori out. They pleaded a second time to England who said , cessation of sovereignty or nothing. It took the chiefs 1 day to sign. Since 1975 activists have hijacked the treaty, and kiwis have woken up. This will end.

[@Tupunaforever]

There are no solutions only trade offs....Thomas Sowell. Maori nor the Crown will ever get there own way I believe, if it went to a referendum that will be a disaster for Maori being the minority. My thoughts are that Maori leaders and the Crown sit around the table and trade.

[@JaimeeandAmoClifton]

of course there is a Maori word for sovereignty.. its called mana. Mana means absolute power and sovereignty comes from the word sovereign which refers to the sovereign (absolute) power of the Crown. Therefore, sovereignty refers to the Crown. Maori would never sign there mana away to a King or Queen on the other side of the world.

[@andrewchristison2575]

Until there is clarity regarding the Treaty, it's all just up for interpretation. When the Treaty was written, there wasn't even one national maori language, different tribes from different areas had differing dialects. The concept of co-governance in relation to the Treaty of Waitangi is largely down to interpretation, as the Treaty itself contains language that can be understood in different ways. This ambiguity stems from differences between the English and Māori versions of the Treaty, as well as evolving interpretations over time. Here’s a breakdown: The Treaty Texts and Ambiguities 1. English Version: Emphasizes the transfer of sovereignty to the British Crown. Promises Māori full possession of their lands, forests, and resources, along with rights as British subjects. 2. Māori Version (Te Tiriti o Waitangi): The term kāwanatanga is used, which is often interpreted as governance but not necessarily full sovereignty. Māori were promised tino rangatiratanga, often translated as absolute chieftainship or self-determination, over their lands, resources, and taonga (treasures). These differences in translation and meaning leave room for debate about the intended balance of power between the Crown and Māori. Co-Governance as a Modern Concept Co-governance isn't explicitly mentioned in the Treaty but has emerged as a framework for honoring tino rangatiratanga while balancing it with the Crown’s kāwanatanga. It reflects attempts to address historical breaches of the Treaty and ensure Māori have meaningful participation in decision-making about resources and governance. Interpretation in Practice Some see co-governance as aligning with the Treaty’s principles of partnership, protection, and participation. Others argue that co-governance is a modern construct not directly derived from the Treaty’s original text. Legal and Political Recognition The Treaty principles, rather than the text itself, guide modern legal interpretations and policies. These principles emphasize partnership between the Crown and Māori, providing a foundation for co-governance in areas like natural resource management and health. Debates around co-governance often hinge on differing views of sovereignty, partnership, and what it means to uphold the Treaty in contemporary New Zealand.

[@SasanquaTea]

There were people in NZ before Maori, a new Video called "Poukawa Revisited" shows human occupation at 7170yrs radiocarbon dated and under the Taupo ashbands and deeper .. some of the dating goes back 10,000 years .. anyway it has only just been released to the public

[@ihimaera7424]

🤣🤣🤣there goes the white lies again....Treaton Russell Price excavated Poukawa in the 1930s Why are you telling lies🤷‍♂️

[@SasanquaTea]

@@ihimaera7424 brown lies, you also have white blood

[@ihimaera7424]

@@SasanquaTea that still doesn't explain why your telling lies. Like your ancestors lie steal rape and pillage. Then tell the indigenous people they are the liars.

[@AndorianBlues]

All archaeological, genetic, linguistic etc. data disproves this pre-Māori population BS and no one except a few nutters and useful idiots believes it. It's flat eartherism or creationism for racists. Not that me saying this will convince anyone, of course. Sam as with flat earthers, you'll ignore 1000 pieces of evidence to the contrary and focus on one invented piece of evidence that confirms your pre-determined belief no matter what.

[@michellenicholls9039]

@@ihimaera7424more white myths aye? 😂 these people trynna get out of admitting to their wrongdoings lol😅

[@JackieAdams-v6d]

So breaking the Treaty down Maori have been ripped off by the Pakeha/Crown. No wonder David Seymour wants wording changed in it. Talk about Breach at its worse and accusing Maori as being racist. More like the Pakehas are and if some Maori are you can't blame them look at what Pakehas have done to them. Absolutely disgraceful. They should be ashamed of themselves.

[@rihipaeahughes9831]

Kia ora

[@moonms94]

How have maori been ripped off.the maori of today have been ripping off the system for years.they have been very well compensated for something that wasnt even legally theirs anyway.just cant let it go

[@tama5570]

Typical divisive tunnel visioned rhetoric.

[@chrismac7447]

THE MORIORI ARE THE TRUE OWNERS OF NZ‼️

[@ttamihana7879]

Wrong stop believing that BS. narrative ffs!!

[@oriwiascott219]

For y'all that think we can just let go of what happened, just think about what actually happened, like truly, and then think if that happened to someone you loved CLOSE AS FUCK TO cause you're telling me to let go of the land that was stolen from us and the massive profit they make of our land, the history around how they treated my family and culture for their entertainment or for their twisted, evil agendas, the loss of speaking Te Reo as my grandparents would've been tortured or killed for speaking it, the constant disrespect to my culture, the dawn raids, the legislations, the government? I'm fighting for what is right and everyone should understand that just because it was in the past, it doesn't mean the history doesn't affect me today because I see it in my grandparents now who don't speak it due to what happened. So no I won't just move on, I will be one with many to help make Maori culture thrive again.

[@michellenicholls9039]

Churr brother

[@unclejoe7958]

Firstly you are an individual who should be independent of ancestral culture. There’s nothing wrong with acknowledging it, but everyone around the world has ancestors who succumbed to defeat. Conquest was a natural part of history and an evolving world. The Romans occupied England, but today’s English aren’t grieving. When the Māoris invaded and colonised NZ and committed genocide towards the Moriori . That was a historical conquest. Without the treaty and British mediators the Maori would have wiped themselves out.

[@RaewynTairi]

Well spoken

[@RaewynTairi]

​@unclejoe795

[@rihipaeahughes9831]

🎉❤😊 tautoko, some awesomeness being expressed never mind the racist crap of so called nzers

[@davidfentonhancock6646]

Perhaps we now need a constitution for all New Zealanders and a winding down of the Tribunal. There are currently 17 members and some 60 staff. It’s cost millions if not billions and the real inequalities have never been resolved but the pockets of lawyers, advocates and Māori elite have been well and truly lined.

[@64humble33]

Your right there some flash maoris around

[@lesley9463]

So Māori are not entitled to be " elite" ( I assume by that you mean weathy, educated?) You think the elite should only be white people? Ridiculous comment.... and the one under. Kind of proves the point that racists are uneducated.

[@royalcrumble2384]

What Maori elite? Maori who speak their own language and know their culture and have high paying jobs? Do you get similarly furious at white people who engage in politics or hold high paying jobs or are you only angry that some Maori have the impunity to do well for themselves?

[@royalcrumble2384]

The inequalities have gotten much better since it was established. The reason they haven't improved more is because of racist laws made by people like you.

[@gregwaghorn8496]

The Maori chiefs wanted sovereignty. All 11 signed the document. Plus the document signed 2 days before. The Livingstone treaty. Chiefs wanted to trade and use European industry. Maori were not owners of Nz. They were freedom camping on bareland. To own land, is to purchase land. This program is based on the Maori today. Not in 1840. Maori were not farmers, businessman, forestry, fisheries, education. They fought there neighbours, and slaughtered the people here before them. Te Papa has a locked room, with the history hidden from nz.

[@dallynstevens7855]

So who were the Maori going to pay and with what?

[@shauntempley9757]

Those are Maori artefacts in that room, you ding a ling!!! Artefacts you cannot look at, because you do not respect them. Anyway, they are in there, because the last Pakeha couple that believed as you did had the husband die in that room, and his wife miscarry their kid at the same time. No coroner can explain what happened, because their were no physical aliments that caused it.

[@puhigeoffreywaynefuimaonok8656]

lies inuendo character assassination belittling of tangata whenua

[@jakejackson4179]

What the English did was disgraceful And Aotearoa wasn't the only place they did it to

[@dnlbr]

nobody cares move on its been almost 200 years let it go

[@ihimaera7424]

@@dnlbr millions of people care donut that's why even today they are one of the most hated people on the planet.

[@michellenicholls9039]

@@dnlbr stupid comment. Ignorant

[@FAMEROB]

it was worse for "Maori" before the English came to New Zealand, if you knew about the history you would know that

[@unclejoe7958]

Luckily it was the English and not the French or Spanish. Maori would be non existent.

[@goingblindmusic]

PaI rawa tēnei.

[@ourpeople-g7r]

waitaru o te haputangi e matarua te eketapato

[@user-wr4jw6ec7p]

Listen to a Historian to get the truth . Not one sided rubbish .

[@kanakamakapalua6097]

Irritating to see the early pakeha missionaries DUMBED DOWN SHIT in the present time.....

[@dnlbr]

nobody cares move on its been almost 200 years let it go

[@RaewynTairi]

​@@dnlbrno body cares about you

[@delinquentinparadise]

I am sick and tired of Māori lies. And so are most New Zealanders. And there was never a Country called Aotearoa. Thats Just another Māori lie.

[@mauic3884]

Well informed video to help educate people that want to learn the history of our beautiful Te tiriti. The crown had been making and dishonouring treaties over hundreds of years before the “Treaty of Waitangi”. They’ve been unscrupulous then as they are now in the form of this current government. Honour Te tiriti ✊🏽

[@terrynicol4548]

That is not true, please name a single treaty Britain had broken "hundreds of years before"??

[@lesley9463]

Great vid and explanation. I especially love how you've triggered all the usual trolls and racists lol. Note; nost of them cannot even spell English words correctly 😂

[@ourpeople-g7r]

A windscreen wiper (Commonwealth English) or windshield wiper (American English) is a device used to remove rain, snow, ice, washer fluid, water, or debris from a vehicle's front window. Almost all motor vehicles, including cars, trucks, buses, train locomotives, and watercraft with a cabin-and some aircraft-are equipped with one or more such wipers, which are usually a legal requirement. A wiper generally consists of a metal arm; one end pivots, and the other end has a long rubber blade attached to it. The arm is powered by a motor, often an electric motor, although pneumatic power is also used for some vehicles. The blade is swung back and forth over the glass, pushing water, other precipitation, or any other impediments to visibility from its surface. The speed is usually adjustable on vehicles made after 1969, with several continuous rates and often one or more intermittent settings. Most personal automobiles use two synchronized radial-type arms, while many commercial vehicles use one or more pantograph arms.

[@georgesheweiry3492]

What a load of rubbish!

[@kanakamakapalua6097]

The whakaputanga may have been a legal document in the eye's of the invaders but to Sovereign Aokealoa Aboriginal that declaration & the treaty were worthless missionary concepts that held no legal authority in Aokealoa or under any International Court of Law.

[@dnlbr]

nobody cares move on its been almost 200 years let it go

[@henzypenzy8216]

Not nice dannyy!😥

[@Rurijadeisa19]

I love this video

[@johnathantepairi7728]

In today’s society settlement in court would play out like,,,, hey if you sign this paper I can legally steal your land sell your house if I want oh and by the way I get to be in charge not you ,,,, imagine what would happen to that guy trying to get that paper signed ,,,,if that wasn’t a land grab then what’s going on,,,,, 1840 100%Māori land ownership to 1920 and just 8%Māori ownership hmmm

[@SOULSISTAnz]

mauri ora whānau, he Tino pai te whakamārama nei!! ngā mihi!!! such a great resource for our people (all our people) I have a quick question & would like to contact if poss!

[@John-c7i4m]

Nice try😂😂😂😂

[@waynebond419]

You speak as if the Maori were ignorant and had little understanding of the English language. If fact three of the chiefs that were at the signing had visited England and were met by Queen Victoria. They understood the English version.

[@wayneiremonger1635]

It was never Maori Land in the first place as they Came from overseas just like hose that followed only difference is Maori just took the land ..

[@BobModelige]

In your opinion , your home is never is your home . Can I go and sleep tonight at your home?

[@jonathantepairi2664]

By your words, the treaty is like me saying cuz ,I got this paper from the queen it says I can have your land ....in this case your house by the wording of this paper it guarantees me the right to have governance over your wife and kids and it gives me the right to take your car and whatever else you have in your yard ,,,, so in the modern terms would you sign my paper and let me rule your house ,,,,I'm assuming you wouldn't and in doing so,,,,I'm saying me and my paper would have had to con you into signing it,,tell you that you would be given extra special status ,in effect I would lie to you first to gain your consent then use that wording to trick you ,,,,,would you not want to fight me,,,, also while true we came from Hawaiki which even today is still regarded as a mythical place even though there is evidence world wide that polynesian seafarers sailed to and from Hawaiki to trade here sailing over vast oceans of the pacific by the star map and other celestial bodies using the sea currents and other determining factors to arrive on these shores there is also mention of kupes arrival some 20 generations earlier,, the last migration only reflects history of those that took that journey yet doesn't ever say maori was not already here just that they intermarried and wars were fought had those early people been Chinese or German then I would think as you do but our claim is 600 years in the telling ,,,,,,,just saying my point of view ,,kia ora

[@444TripleH]

What stupid logic. This is the same logic the colonising and te**orist Idf clowns are using

[@rameshkumarpenmetsa]

90% of the land is empty and these tiny people with vast land still not come to terms and fighting for their so called rights.. shameful humanity.

[@garyc1384]

Appropriate clown music in background. Cherry-picked facts.

[@J.Smith-rc6wh]

very misleading representation , no wonder everyone here is so confused, one nation, same rights and duties, one king, no preferential rights based on the colour of skin or partial ancestry. this is a great country, we need to come together as one people and love it together like we USED to do

[@richardbruce8111]

All this Babble about fine meanings & their interpretation 200 years AFTER the signing! yet TOTAL ignorance & disregard of the actual conditions of NZ at the actual times! Worse few are looking at the VERY complete history which exists... particularly the so wise "academics! VERY briefly ..Maori from a state of "new stone age" were introduced to the then "western " culture for @ 40 years increasingly mass killing ensued as muskets cannon(150 +) , introduced tools plants (potato, fruit etc) AND DISEASES ravaged the population numbers dropped from @ 120000 to @ 40+. REMEMBER ALSO TRIBES UTTERLY DECIMATED & CLEARED HISTORICAL LANDS ! This was mostly done BEFORE the arrival of huge numbers of Terrible colonists! .Many of them fleeing the awful conditions of their home countries! Remember kids this was 150 years ago the world was NOT the comfy place it is today! British rule may look different today but back 1840 it looked attractive ,French, Spanish, German study up these life realities , REAL history (verified) and NZ situation become much better understood

[@michaelpayne8419]

How is it misleading? I'm a Kiwi and thought he explained in a fairly non-bias way quite well.

[@Grinzmoke]

Your comment started off misleading tbh

[@jamesm.b4810]

Māori have the right to self governance to their own people and land which isn’t respected.

[@apollotheimpaler5407]

he explained it in a good way; for the time, this was revolutionary, but as usual, colonial empire will exploit loopholes to gain maximum value. sure, there was much less tragedy this way, but the flaws still exist and it’s fair to point them out.

[@stephenhoward7454]

Maori wrote or had a common language?

[@getsorted0185]

Maori did not have a written language

[@kanakamakapalua6097]

In 1807 Sovereign Aokealoa Aboriginal REJECT the colonialists proposed civilian government, religious order & foreign Sovereignty, by 1840 over 18.000 unarmed Sovereign Aboriginal Kānaka Mā'oli had been slaughtered' there's a documentary here on youtube called Hongi Hika goes to England try to figure out for yourselves the mechanics of their journey and their heinous intentions.

[@dnlbr]

nobody cares move on its been almost 200 years let it go

[@kanakamakapalua6097]

@@dnlbr 200 years ain't that long ago considering human history has been documented over a hundred thousand years ago, but yeh that would be a typical remark from an ignorant immigrant such as yourself. There's an old adage that goes ''In order to move forward we must first acknowledge the past. Justice will prevail whether you like it or not.

[@erina4586]

YES 👍 AGREE 'The MAORI never gave the British SOVEREIGNTY to Maoriland Aotearoa (Land of the Long White Cloud) New Zealand Truth be told.

[@ReiSpitz]

The Gravy document. Ask them.

[@tama5570]

unfortunately 1/4 baked interpretation.

[@janette2500]

the audacity of Britain , the complete disregard of culture and the language barrier and the arrogance, im offended and im British, cannot imagine how the Maori feel.

[@Digmen1]

Why do you use the word Aoteroa? There was no such concept in those days Your bias is obvious

[@RaewynTairi]

Why not use Aotearoa what's the problem. If Maori want to say Aotearoa then that's their right

[@RaewynTairi]

This isn't an english country. It's a Maori country so if people want to use Aotearoa they can and they shouldn't be judged

[@Digmen1]

The natives of New Zealand did not know what a country was. They did not even have a name for themselves - the refereed to themselves by their tribes name not maori. And there was no maori language And New Zealand was never called Aoteoroa And New Zealand is not a maori country - its a sovereign country with some maori in it.

[@RaewynTairi]

@Digmen1 sorry buddy your wrong Maori didn't cede sovereignty. But I bet you wish they did. Dreamer

[@getsorted0185]

This video is incorrect Maori did cede sovereignty or there would have been no treaty Maori would have anialated themselves or the French would have another sanitized version of the truth I'm afraid

[@56364]

This is an ancient document and no longer relevant

[@ambuman]

this little doco, hosted by someone, with probably a bias view of another side, will always make things sound in favour of a particular side.

[@raulmenedez2427]

Nice try. How are facts bias? He just speaking facts. It is what it is.

[@hfhso37ndnks]

e te ra e tuku panui e te rangitira, e he kia kaha, tehei maori ora, kia kaha kia ponamu.

[@Digmen1]

But Maori did cede their soverinty The treaty never mentioned Aoteoroa You can sit there and say what you want, but people know the truth.

[@darkparker7500]

Māori aren't indigenous to New Zealand. They migrated from other countries, just like the British/Europeans.

[@dave24-73]

Propaganda at its best

[@moanat6701]

Uses Maoris don't own any land...we were bought into this world on borrow time ...No no one owes these lands..no one so why uses Maoris thinks this land belong to uses.. God owns all humans...lands...forests...Waters...mountains...he God made all these lands..waters...trees..mountains..forests...so why uses think it's yours...uses Maoris are a greedy for what is not yours...stop trying to make us learn Maoris...we has humans are wanting more than we should have in life....there will be argues...hater...jealousy ...wars over lands...racial .. than this world will be at war not now...talks speechs over ownership over lands that don't belong to uses Maoris.. It God world..lands.. No one should own any things that is not yours in the begin.. GODS LANDS...I REST MY CASES..😢😢😢

[@RaewynTairi]

God gifted nz to Maori. Just like God gifted britain to pakeha but that wasn't enough for yous.

[@imbtmn9836]

This is misinformation. How about you comment on the treaty preamble?

[@richardcaves3601]

Easy - read Professor Orange's book and be prepared to change your views.

[@imbtmn9836]

​@@richardcaves3601 What does give the Queen governance forever mean? Also. Maori retained fully authority of lands etc they owned. But. Then they sold it to the crown.

[@richardcaves3601]

@@imbtmn9836 if you did as I suggested, you'd find that it's beyond any doubt, any conceivable doubt, that the only thing Maori conceded in the Treaty was to allow Pakeha to make laws for themselves and to govern themselves in only those areas they resided. This was because prior to the Treaty they were technically subject to Maori law. Read about Hobson's instructions and the AMS translators difficulties. In return for this, Maori got protection from the British Crown from other European countries AND they got a guarantee FOREVER of Maori ownership of land forest and "treasure" - taonga. That was pretty much respected by all Governors until Grey. Then the theft started.

[@andycy2226]

Slaves are Taonga, did the treaty guarantee Māori the continued possession of their slaves? Around 20% of Maori were enslaved at the time te tiriti was signed.

[@richardcaves3601]

Now complete your education. What happened to them after the treaty was signed. Don't be afraid to publicly answer as you are to publish the the things we now find reprehensible.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂​@@andycy2226

[@richardbruce8111]

Wow You really really have been in La La land! the treaty was best thing in 1840 to rescue Maori from complete self disappearance . Study genuine history! fighting over interpretation of word meanings 200 years later is crazy! We are now in 2024 our (YES OUR) country is no longer a new stone age society! trying to create a ruling ethnic entitled tribal grouping is insane . Focus on bits of history which claim to support your view is crazy! crazy! WE are here together tribalism in this century has NO PLACE. Pride in ancestors is one thing but to ignore the fact that they were humans of a different time & were by todays standards REGULARLY MONSTERS is stupid! (all our ancestors what ever colour.) Most languages have flaws ...Russian -poor tenses.. --- Maori ---not enough words ...so you communicate Feelings! .......arabic -20+ meanings of same word! ...(really good to discuss religion ..NOT) ...french Everything is sex defined male/female ... chair. male table.female (hmmmm) ENGLISH ..lots of specific words ..&..shaded word meanings! ...really good IF used wisely ! thats why business likes it! ..STOP FIGHTING get along well today past is for guidance NOT RECREATION ever notice how genuine recreated historical stuff makes you GLAD you are NOT stuck back there!

[@thomasr246]

You seem to think like the Maori of the Time had the same understanding of Governance, Laws or society foundations as the British who was 1000 years ahead of Maori. Also Maori Owned NO land, you are making up stories here and you completely Missed out the most important Fact that Williams changed the wording without the Crowns knowledge to suit his own Views and needs not the Crown hence a 26 year war followed after signing. why sit and make a video behind a nice back drop if you just going to Miss Lead?

[@scottmitchell8273]

The strong win ! The weak loose ! Mauri couldn't run a chook raffle 😂

[@rihipaeahughes9831]

Mauri ora 😅

[@tjhawe-cm1lg]

Racist crybaby

[@PakehaParker]

Bull dust.

[@callumn3353]

this is og dont stop posting

[@robintamihere4550]

FORGET all the Maori elders who have mistakenly made claims in ERROR of ceded sovereignty.. because AS recent as 2020-22 Britain has said they did not claim Sovereignty over NZ in the signing of Te Tiriti. reference Historian and academic, Paul Moon ''Māori sovereignty and the Treaty of Waitangi'' and Mānuka Hēnare - He Tohu interview

[@LisiateLea]

Goofy ahh