9 Blogs‎ > ‎

Colin Rawle

For many years Colin and his wife have been involved with education (Steiner education). He has studied (without seeing the inside of a university) sociology, anthropology, psychology, theology / religion and related subjects including esotericism in it's many aspects. Being extremely interested in history (real history), led Colin inevitably into the whirlwind of lies which underlie the "Treaty industry" battle.


(A three part essay followed by a conclusion based upon a 1995 submission to the government.)

All rights reserved.

When the people applauded him wildly, he, (Phocion) turned to one of his friends and asked, "have I said something foolish? -Diogenes Laertius (circa 150 B.C.)

It is with mixed feelings that I write this introduction to this essay. The reason for my ambivalence is that I am acutely aware that due to longstanding indoctrination my arguments will meet with strong resistance, especially among those under forty years of age. Nevertheless there are times when it is necessary to introduce an alternative perspective into an important controversy, regardless of its reception.

The present divisive and destructive atmosphere surrounding all matters racial is a global phenomenon which New Zealand has proved incapable transcending. The problem should not be seen in isolation but as just one symptom of a modern humanity which has lost touch with its essential nature and consequently with all sense of proportion and direction.

The thinking at the root of this divisive delirium is of the type which produced Marxism, Bolshevism, Communism, false socialism etc. but it is rarely recognised as such. Like so many world changing upheavals throughout human history this phenomenon too was born out of idealism - albeit a totally materialistic and distorted idealism. Even so, be it true or distorted, nothing can inspire and motivate human beings more powerfully than idealism, hence its awful potency. The dilemma is that good and genuine social impulses and ideals are by no means always expressed in realistic, or even sensible social theories.

There is endless scope for justified criticism of all things human, and Western culture is no exception, but a more objective, even handed approach would not have so obviously singled out Western civilisation for attack and nor would the failings of non-Western cultures have been so studiously ignored. Furthermore, each new generation of fervent social reformers who so self righteously deplore modern social problems still remain quite oblivious to the enormous contribution to Western moral and social decline their own rejection of "old fashioned" values has been. While innumerable theories in the course of time become obsolete, true values cannot.

Social change is not only necessary and desirable, it is unstoppable. All we can hope to do is guide it in the right direction. Arriving at some consensus of just what the "right direction" might be is nowadays hugely complicated by the new, and socially lethal doctrine of "moral relativism". Certainly, an inner knowledge of what is "right" and "good" can only arise out of self won ethical individualism, never out of ideological indoctrination of any persuasion. Despite the fact that social injustice has been a part of human experience since time immemorial, many modern intellectuals seem to believe that the West invented it. It is abundantly clear that many modern Left leaning historians and academics in this field by no means take their start with a clean slate. On the contrary their antipathy towards "Western Christendom" in their work reveals itself at a glance.

"Three minutes thought would suffice to find this out, but thought is irksome and three minutes is a long time". - A. E. Housman - (1859 -1936)

It is a widely held view that the 1960's were a turning point in Western culture. This watershed in Western consciousness has been variously described by social commentators as a "psycho/social revolution", an "upheaval", and even as the "The Great Disruption" by the Japanese/American social analyst Francis Fukyama. It was during the tumultuous 1960's - 70's that the final emancipation of the West's then younger generation from all past moral restraints and guidelines became (in general terms) complete. For a few short years the doors were wide open to every possible good and evil. Right and wrong, good and evil were no longer seen as absolutes. Over the following two to three decades they became for many a matter of personal opinion. The so called permissive society was born. Into the moral vacuum thereby created the socially lethal seeds of what was to grow into moral relativism were sown.
The instant one assumes complete moral and spiritual freedom, one (knowingly or unknowingly) takes upon ones own shoulders the full burden of responsibility and accountability which has historically been enforced by traditional institutions sanctioned by general social consensus. Assumption of this higher kind of individual freedom is either a deed of true wisdom or of true ignorance, for it carries with it the greatest possible responsibility. The accelerating rate of moral and social decline dating from the 1960's provides the answer to this question. Clearly an insufficient proportion of the population have adequately met the inner challenge of unfettered moral freedom. The void created by the rejection of "old" values has not been replenished by the same self won values, nor by any viable alternative. (which is not surprising - as there are none.) It is a mistake to believe that the so called old values are in any way restrictive. On the contrary, they are simply the indispensable foundation for all successful human aspiration and endeavour.

"....... I draw the following conclusions. This thing which I have called for convenience the TAO, and which others may call The Natural Law, or Traditional Morality, or the first principles of Practical Reason, or the First Platitudes, is not one among a series of possible systems of value. It is the sole source of all value judgements. If it is rejected, all value is rejected. If any value is retained, it is retained. The effort to refute it and raise a new system of value in its place is self-contradictory. There has never been, and never will be, a radical new judgement of value in the history of the world. What purports to be new systems or (as they now call them) "ideologies", all consist of fragments from the TAO itself, arbitrarily wrenched from their context in the whole and then swollen to madness in their isolation, yet still owing to the TAO and to it alone such validity as they possess........the human mind has no more power of inventing a new value than of imagining a new primary colour, or indeed, of creating a new sun and a new sky for it to move in " C.S.Lewis, "The Way" - (The Abolition Of Man")

"However, in early democracies, as in American democracy at the time of its birth, all individual human rights were granted because Man is God's creature. That is, freedom was given to the individual conditionally, in the assumption of his constant religious responsibility. Such was the heritage of the preceding thousand years. Two hundred, or even fifty years ago, it would have seemed quite impossible in America, that an individual could be granted boundless freedom simply for the satisfaction of his instincts or whims". - Alexander Solzenitsyn

At the same time that the 1960's socio/psychological upheaval was occurring, higher education became accessible to ever increasing numbers of students who proved to be highly susceptible to abstract Left wing humanistic ideas which, precisely as a result of the psycho/social revolution, had by then gained the ascendancy throughout education - at all levels. Insofar as these ideas have captured the ardent but immature forces of youthful idealism they work both subliminally at the psychological level, and consciously at the intellectual/theoretical (ideological), level. In keeping with its very nature and revolutionary origin, Left-wing ideology is anti-establishment. From such an ideological perspective "the establishment" is the "Patriarchal"/Judeao/Christian West.
In the case of New Zealand the British colonists, their descendants and their culture have been cast as "the establishment" which must be overthrown by the Maori revolutionaries, feminists, "the workers", and other fashionable and allegedly "marginalised" groups collectively cast as a neo - "proletariat". Thus the stage was set.

"Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity." from "The Second Coming". W.B.Yeats.

Given a more rational and objective social climate I would be no apologist for Western European civilisation. I am just as aware of its many failings as I am of its astounding achievements and significance in world history. From about the 1930's however, criticism of Western civilisation has increasingly taken on a dangerous colouring. Much of this criticism fails to take a differentiated, objective approach to a whole complex of quite unprecedented moral dilemmas which are inherently a part of today's highly technological "global village". In other words there are many today who would throw out the baby with the bathwater. In the case of New Zealand the Maori radicals think that the treaty/grievance/compensatory claims phenomenon is all about them. It is not. Insofar as the Left-wing anti-establishment mentality has captured the Western intelligentsia it now permeates all spheres of Western culture and at a deeper, (albeit not necessarily at a fully conscious) level, the aim is the complete "deconstruction" and moral/ethical and political reformation of Western society. This deconstruction (destruction), of former "western Christendom" and its founding values (which include freedom of spirit, thought, and action, and the personal responsibility which attends such freedoms), is seen by the shadowy international groups who orchestrate it (largely via their "useful tool"), the Left wing, as a necessary prerequisite to an ever narrowing centralisation of world political and financial power, leading ultimately to world government.

As an exploration of this particular subject is far beyond the scope of this essay it must suffice to say that confident, content, harmonious and self-determining societies are of no help at all to this undeclared "new world order" agenda.
History demonstrates that even in developed, sophisticated societies public emotion can be manipulated to evil purposes. It is far easier to similarly exploit, by means of disinformation, revisionist history and unrelenting propaganda the comparatively innocent, unworldly, and unrestrained emotion life of tribal peoples. Thus, the contrived "indigenous peoples" issues can be recognised as but one tactic in the wider agenda of creating social disorder and destabilisation.

While there is admittedly a dark side to Western civilisation it is by no means all darkness, and in the process of this "deconstruction" many bedrock guiding philosophies and principles of inestimable value to future healthy social evolution have already been lost. The continuing erosion by factions among the Western peoples themselves of their own core Christian principles, (principles as distinct from religion), is both an example of the foregoing and clear evidence of the near complete triumph of Left-wing ideology which has always been radically anti-spiritual/religious. While there is no doubt that society as it is today is in urgent need of fundamental renewal, this can only come about through an entirely new way of thinking, never out of ideologies of any persuasion, infantile political correctness, nor out of backward and divisive tribal instincts which are the driving force of Maori radicalism.

"No one can eliminate prejudices - just recognise them". - Edward. R. Murrow.

I have not attempted to list the endless examples of radical claims, grievances, accusations, beliefs and actions etc which are both a clear breach of the treaty, democracy, and of plain commonsense. This has already been done by other excellent books recently published, such as : - "The Travesty Of Waitangi" and "Travesty After Travesty", by Stuart.C.Scott, "Treaty Issues", by Walter Christie, "Waitangi - Morality and Reality", by Kenneth Minogue,"The Musket Wars" by R.D.Crosby, (introduction by Michael King), and several others of a similar and growing genre. The fact that the arguments presented in these books are both indisputable and totally without effect upon radicalism comes as no surprise to those who know that the driving force of radicalism is not rationality or real history, but emotion and propaganda. For these same reasons I have not commented in depth upon the Maori radicals "version" of the treaty. Anyone who can give any credibility to such interpretations is far beyond the reach of truth and reason. Again, for the same reasons I have not attempted to substantially add to the impressive body of meticulous historical research presented by the above mentioned genre of books, which, if unprejudiced consideration could be relied upon, would settle the matter.

Conscious of this, and therefore of the need for a diversified appeal to reason, I have taken an approach which may strike a chord among those of a more philosophical leaning. In view of the highly pertinent, and largely overlooked difference between the European and Maori psyche, I have also attempted to explore this important aspect of the problem.

I am quite sure, that as in my own case, the increasing number of people who in recent times have felt compelled to oppose the current treaty/grievance mania, take no pleasure in doing so. It would be far more rewarding to direct ones time and energy into something more pleasant than to feel duty bound to fight a lonely rearguard action against an almost entirely concocted and now looming social calamity. It is only out of a sense of foreboding for the welfare of the nation that one feels constrained to such a course of action.

While the Maori radicals and their supporters remain seriously committed to their racially divisive and anti-democratic agenda, and while they are, (incredibly) taken seriously by significant numbers of people, then it is imperative that the threat they represent, if not their rhetoric, is also taken seriously. What should be borne in mind at every moment with regard to these matters, is that the world view of the Maori at the time of colonisation was, for obvious reasons, extremely narrow. The defining characteristic of present day radical mentality is that it still is. For the future welfare of this country, these narrow, anachronistic attitudes must be balanced by a more cosmopolitan, and considered perspective.

"Nothing is so firmly believed as that which is least known" - Michel de Montaigne (1533 - 1592).

Any hope of truly understanding the dilemmas of life outside of their full and proper context is doomed to failure. New Zealand, its peoples, and its colonisation, (both Polynesian and European), are an inseparable part of the greater world and its history, and it is only against this living, human, and inclusive background that a proper analysis of such matters can be undertaken. This would be a daunting task even for a major treatise by an experienced author. Therefore my attempt to take this approach in this essay can only be a gesture towards what is really required.

It is probably inevitable that given current social attitudes, much of what I say in the essay will be labelled as racist. However, a careful reader will notice that I criticise Maori radicalism, not Maori, and my other main target, "political correctness", is almost exclusively a failing of the international Western/English speaking world. I regard my analysis of pre colonial Maori culture as more characterisation than criticism.

As a consequence of certain widespread attitudes, which have inevitable arisen out of equally widespread political, sociological, and historical illusions, serious social problems have been created, of which the current Maori/racial dilemma in New Zealand is but one example. Obviously the type of thinking which has led us into this dangerous situation cannot lead us out of it. Therefore if this essay achieves nothing more than to identify some of these socially destructive illusions, and clearly establishes that an alternative and more realistic point of view does exist, then it will have served its purpose.

If some of the points I cover have a familiar ring to readers, this is not necessarily a reflection of the truism that "Great minds think alike", but is certainly evidence that commonsense, by its very nature is also a unifying faculty.

I hope the reader can believe that my concern in this matter is not racial, but social. I say this because I am quite certain that if present undemocratic social/political trends continue, then we can expect a great increase in racial/social problems in the near future, and with the question of democracy we arrive at our subject: the treaty of Waitangi, colonisation, and associated matters.


Colin's essay follows - Please click on sublinks below (start with Part One as links are in random order)