The true history of the Moriori 

All history is politically charged. The version you correctly say was inadequate and inaccurate was the product of a much more politically driven process. Spend a bit of time looking into modern historical method development since 1900 to see how academia has tried to reduce bias of various forms.

I'm a new Zealander living in Ireland, I've got no interest in returning as my country has turned Asian, good luck new Zealand

@@user-uy6uc5ey5q bullshit

history is written by the victory

@@user-uy6uc5ey5q My schooling was in the 1950s, 60s plus I had the "schooling" from family and relatives that went back a very long way, essentially to the 1820s for Pakeha, longer for Maori family. I was brought up knowing Te Reo and customs. I still see little wrong with it overall and if you are properly "schooled" you consider multiple points of view and make your own conclusions, after doing your own reading and questioning. I once argued with the Head of my High School's Science Department over a statement that didn't seem reasonable. I asked my dad, he said prove it in a 3 month experiment aided by his colleagues in NZ's best agricultural research establishment who gave me everything necessary to do so. I did. I proved her statement wrong and verified by NZ's best but realistically, I spent 3 months of effort to prove she was wrong but not by very much! I have learnt many things in life, the first is that you cannot change the past, only learn lessons. Second, I recall the "last Moriori" either by newspaper, radio, Newsreel or TV. I can't recall the name, just the speech and his image. A sad thing. Maybe his name was Solomon? As child, I remember his anguish, a last survivor, his people brutalised and dead, the culture gone. The sadness of a man. Third, the English were terrible as imperialistic power in the 1800s but the Maori were no better. Maori were probably worse to other Maori in tribal aggression that the English settlers were but yes, when the Crown went to war, well it was war of conquest, Might is Right and often the Crown armed Maori to subdue other Maori. Fourth, NZ Academia is quite sick, lacking perspective, heavily, heavily influenced and captured by a restricted narrative. Essentially biased and uncritical, an industry of self-serving nonsense crafted to perpetuate a mis-truth equally as bad as the English Crown did 100 years ago that was also mindless, wrongful propaganda. This is inevitable when there is no accountability and politics prevail. Personal note, I worked in NZ Tertiary Education funding and read or listened to advocacy statements of intent, queried some points that didn't seem right, had my very respected, authoritive Maori co-worker launch into a "highly critical analysis" that left no doubt that they were talking absolute nonsense. Not her actually dismissive words that she used! Personal note2, I was brought up to be analytical, scientific, consider everything, to question, frequently to swap sides to articulate the opposition's view. I simply reject anyone "telling" me what the truth is. I prefer facts. Lastly, WTF is it that Kiwis demand to use the same flag as Aussies! NZ is no longer a "Protectorate" administered by NSW. Kiwis rejected Australian Commonwealth Statehood in 1901 essentially because NZ was proudly bi-cultural while Australia denied "black" indigenous Aussies the Vote, was basically racist! NZ needs its own flag, the English Crown is nothing but a nod to the past. Everyone in the World knows NZ as the little country with a big voice and a black flag, Enough said!

Same with the south island, aside from.the strongholds. got their guns and thought they were tough,

Whilst what you say makes perfect common sense. Leftist politicians will find it very inconvenient and ignore it.

You are correct. It's wrong to blame others for the actions commited by others. However, alot of pakeha refuse to acknowledge maori grievances and tell us we benefitted from colonialism without acknowledging that it was in fact done w the betterment of Europeans not maori. To improve their quality of life not ours and the systems still set in place to this day still benefits pakeha more than any other people (not just maori). When educated on matters if contention, it's often viewed from pakeha as blaming present day people. Were often told the British were better options than the Spanish or french, when in reality it was just as bad - no more or less. In the early 2000s i was sent to detention numerous times for simply correcting a teacher about maori history and also about the endeavours of cook (like how gisborne wasn't his first point of contact w maori, but Waikawa in mahia better known as Portland island. He was intimidated by what he perceived as warriors on Waikawa - they were tohunga and Waikawa was a school for tohunga. So he headed over to gisborne kidnapped young boys, got them drunk, molested them and tried to bargain their return to gisborne for food and goods. Contrary to popular belief this didn't happen by the port, but by the beach near the warehouse in gisborne. The Maori did not give him anything, hence the name 'poverty bay'. Apparently this didn't align w what was taught in school so I was punished.) The rape of children in the wairarapa and hawkes bay to help farmers 'landlock' maori assets. I can go on for awhile, but don't feel like it as most people don't want to hear it BC it doesn't fit their narrative. They say we would have roads, midwives, hospitals, teachers, schools etc. When we already had our own variant of all the stated examples above. It's quite sad really. I wouldn't say I blame present day pakeha, but often enlightenment is seen as confrontational to those that are happy w blind ignorance. I've had to tell maori family to chill out w how aggressive they get as it really won't help get the message across, and I've also had to do the same for pakeha family members. I have my own mother an earful for calling what she perceived as strangers in our town as tourists - I was disgusted as the girl she pointed out she used to take care of as a child and she was my friends little sister and is just a fair skinned maori BC her dad is white, her mum is actually my mother's aunty. And the boys family were farmers in the area for awhile and I was friends w his older brother. My mother hated it and tried to kick me out of my own car, BC I need to learnt i respect my mother😂 equally so I've had the displeasure of trying to correct my white partner's family on their ways and views but this is falling on deaf ears and they keep playing victim. They race bait and then throw snide comments and hideous stares or just refuse to talk after correction or enlightenment. I told them not to sweat it BC obviously their ancestors weren't the industrious folk that colonised NZ, but rather just British common folk. However his lastname does descend from a pretty well known colonial figure, but I can't judge when my ancestor was the ammunition dealer for the landwars, so he provided the bullets that were fired at both sides. His actions aren't my family's, but I always bring it up as acknowledgement to the raruraru caused for all people involved. I always make it known while in his day he was seen as good, I personally don't agree and will apologise to any descendants that knows their family tree or whakapapa BC it's just the right thing to do. It'd be abit different if I didn't know those facts about my lineage like most pakeha, but I won't feign ignorance just to make myself feel better. I think it's good to be able to acknowledge but distance yourself from the shackles of taking responsibility for someone else's actions. If I retained assets or land acquired through deception or squatting by my ancestor, I'd action the process to get it transferred but ask for perhaps a 10-20 year grace period to move off the said land or return the assets to the rightful owners so I could have an opportunity to get my affairs in order and so my family could all come and say their goodbyes to where we made memories and then id take the time to educate them on why the return is necessary. As it stands we've had to transfer a few maori land titles to the right owners anyways BC of admin errors when it was originally divvied up - I don't feel as though my family lost out on those land parcels as it'd be wrong to keep it from the rightful owners while we're still crying in our corner about unreturned land. This isn't blame, but rather doing what's right from wrong. I'd do it for pakeha too if we went over to Britain and colonised it and took what was rightfully the Britishs assets, Id give it all back without expecting payment if they allowed for the grace period.

if people of today: who i have met; behave as do with colonialistic attitudes of yesterdays; bringing it into today and tomorrows, there lies the stain.

The concept that the land has a price and that we own it is far from anything maori tanga.

What you are doing when you "buy" a parcel of land is you are paying for the right to use the land plus any "improvements" that are done t or placed on the land. The land always belongs to New Zealand. If you were to "buy" a parcel of leasehold land the price is usually split into two parts. The first part is the unimproved value the second part is for any development and or buildings. @@MTT-ic3ci

first, the word is "Māori". That's the correct spelling in English, let alone in Te Reo. Second everyone with Moriori descent also has either Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Mutunga or Ngāti Toa (who aren't technically a Taranaki iwi by the way) blood in them as well and the two communities like everyone on the Chathams are so intermingled at this stage essentially you'd have all chatham islanders basically paying and apologising to themselves. Obviously absurd. The reason why on other claims in NZ are settled with apology and compensation is because the Crown and Government are the same entities under whose authority and power the confiscation happened. As the invasion happened in 1835 the crown ( and therefore the legal system) has zero ability decide or enforce anything to do with the events. Lastly regarding European responsibility, suggest look into the full details of the voyages of the Sydney registered Rodney, the ship which transported the 3 iwi from Wellington to the Chathams. While its possible to believe the first trip across, the officers and crew of the Rodney were unaware of the purpose of the trip, there was a second trip they made which took reinforcements across and they certainly knew on this voyage what they were helping to do. There certainly a shared part moral responsibility by the crew of the Rodney then followed by the Colonial authorities in Sydney and London who failed to hold the Rodney crew to account for their support of the invasion.

@@user-uy6uc5ey5q And following the logic of your first paragraph - given the extreme inter-marriage of Māori with later settlers - at this stage essentially you have all New Zealanders basically paying and apologising to themselves. Obviously absurd.

Māori should start a revolution its happening everywhere where the British empire invaded

Bit of an own goal there

​@@user-uy6uc5ey5q thank you for bringing up the Rodney. Sometimes it feels as though no one else is willing to acknowledge this very real aspect of the occupation of rekohu, I'm pretty sure one of the reasons they went over there too was to see if it was fit for European settlement but the conditions were too harsh for them to survive also, so to me it kind of feels as though those two hapu were commissioned by the govt aswell.

Well that isn't a fact... did you watch the video? Ask living Moriori like at the moriori trust. The moriori were the occupants of the Chatham islands, not mainland nz. That is the myth this video was made to counteract

@@TuiPolitics I don't believe stuff just because I read it on the internet. I'm willing to set the government made them sign something to explain away the unfortunate parts in exchange for a settlement. Lots of history has been rewritten to suit woke academics, we have been essentially conquered by Marxists from within.

Take off the tinfoil hat bro

@@TuiPolitics if you've been through the last couple years with media and academics straight up just lying or omitting facts and haven't caught on yet I'm afraid I can't help you. I'm not overly confident it won't continue when the next government comes in regardless of who it is.

There are written accounts of Taranaki Maori eating Moriori. Why is it so hard for modern people to accept accounts of cannibalism? All cultures are guilty of it at some stage.

no of course not. can we expect the government to address the inequalities that resulted from generations of land theft and colonisation? absolutely.

you're missing the point bud

The Moris may have been better conservationists,too,but I guess well never know.

Not at the cost of new zealand's taxkpayers​@@eeeaten

@@mateopribyl9218 who else is going to pay for it? if a group of new zealanders is disproportionately disadvantaged because of the government's actions, isn't it the responsibility of all new zealanders to address it? even if a group was not affected by the government's actions we would expect to use tax money to help them. for example if we had a group of ukranian refugees come to nz we would expect to support them to overcome their disadvantages, no?

why, they need to strengthen the Māori culture first.

Geeess!!! I thought they would have done that sounds different because in the Torres strait, Thursday Island this was a report in our history lesson at primary school and High school back in the 70s and 80s very interesting thank you ☺️👍.

I was and it was all lies

i was taught in primary school in the 70s that Moriori were overcome from the two main islands of new zealand by maori and yes eaten by maori.

@@aischaparker9471 Yes, correct very sad.

@tsa3b who wer thy attacked by?

@tsa3bok whats the relation?

@tsa3b what you are claiming about maori attacking moriori on the nz mainland is nonsense that was debunked a hundred years ago. moriori were/are the people of the chatham islands, and were not attacked until 1835.

@tsa3b ok sorry you're right, i misread your post. i'm sure some earlier arrivals were displaced by later arrivals, but there are few stories if that happening. generally there was little conflict in the first few hundred years, as evidenced by the lack of pa-building until later. the people who attacked moriori were themselves displaced by waikato maori who had access to guns. when guns arrived inter-tribal warfare really took off.

@tsa3b what events and time frame are you talking about?

How can you argue against the European linguists who discovered that the mori ori share between 70 and 80% of the same vocabulary further reinforcing the european theory that the mori ori and Maori are the same. Apart from the language, the carvings, the way they prepared hangi, customs etc. I'm not a professional in this field by any means but I do read and research a lot. I've also researched my own Irish heritage.

@@ustorm9 1. The words are English, which replicate the sound used do describe them. 2. Maori still do not have their own written communications, the Moriori did. 3. Moriori women held as sex slaves by the Maori taught Maori children the Moriori language. 4. even today the different Maori tribes argue over how to pronounce their own named places. 5. A theory is just someone's opinion, and the theory you refer to would require the DNA testings done on everyone in the entire world to be wrong. 6. There is no similar comparisons whatsoever that can be made between anything these 2 races do, or did. The entire existence of the Maori is that they are the greatest warriors in the world, and the Moriori was that they would welcome even the devil ( which they did ) with open arms. There is even a rugby league team called the "Warriors" and watch the movie to see how they live in New Zealand today. Do not believe anything anyone says, and that includes so-called university "experts" who read something, then write a book about it or make a RU-vid channel video. They think that it makes them "important".

@@user-jx1mc7du8v I definitely won't believe anything anyone says including you. They are 100% Polynesian people and that's a fact. There are multiple professors who have dedicated their whole lives to this and you're telling me that now you're retired and have read a few things you're a specialist in this field. You're a comedian mate 🤣🤣🤣

@@ustorm9 A typical reaction from someone who has been confronted over their claims and cannot handle the truth. Multiple professors also wasted their lives repeating another "professor" Charles Darwin"s theory on how an ape apparently became a man after deciding he was not going to remain an ape. ( despite those "professors" all agreeing that a crossover from one species to another is atomically impossible ) No, I am not telling you or anyone else that I am retired and "...have read a few things" or that I am "...a specialist in this field..." either. THAT is your incorrect opinion as a result of your incorrect TFAR processing ability, caused by your bad habit forming mentality obviously. Only when you change your thought assessment capacity and break the bad habit of negativity will your life actually change, and only then will you actually be able to listen to facts, not fiction.

@@user-jx1mc7du8v Absolute rubbish. Maybe if you were qualified to speak on this matter might actually care about your opinion. So sorry mate, you have no authority and expertise to be in the know. 🤦

Maori have NEVER disputed the claim that mori ori were here first infact its a ghosts argument that has been designed to further invoke a phony contridiction towards the Maori people hence giving the colonizer a justified stand point to being invaders here an continuing to portray there disguisting outlook on human beings as a whole...people have to remember Maori did not loose the battles in being colonized this disguisting act here is what the invaders have to resort to to combat the war theyre obviously still fighting...slander at the heart of a people

​@@Mr_Riffman08You need to use more positive words and have optimism about your self. Nobody likes the hate in your talk. You can still part a message to people in a uplifting manner. ✨️

@@senseisaitama8684 yep agreed I made the mistake of assuming this here was another attempt at slandering my peoples History without even watching it,never in a million years would I actually think there was anybody out there trying to reverse the I'll informed education bred against my people in the world I totally jumped the gun and went wild with it.. I'm man enough to admit it tho and If anybody paid attention to how dispicable this colonization truely is I'm sure someone out there could see past the mistakes and understand the hateful manner..not pretty but does colonialism have a pretty side?

@@Mr_Riffman08 couldn't help yourself could ya? Blah blah blah colonization blah! What did Maori do before Europeans arrived here? The stronger factions "COLONIZED" the weaker factions. Just as all other factions of human beings from around the world do. Unfortunately it's in all humans nature. Colonize that.

🤣🤣🤣 internet is your friend

1, the Celtic theory is based on one Celtic looking skeleton that no one has dated prior to 1250, its was probably a settler who died. 2. Did you watch the video? Read the Moriori settlement act, moriori were not on mainland nz. They may have been on the Chatham islands prior to Maori in nz but not on the mainland. This is historical fact that every politician party agreed on

I don't think you watched more than 30 seconds of the video! Moriori were not here first. They are polynesians who happened to settle in the Chatams.

Bollocks

@@TuiPolitics A number of stones unearthed when forming the Waipapa earth dam... and more found along the Waikato river had a language that appeared early Celt... they predated Maori... I myself saw them along with most of the village I lived in, they were photographed and many taken off to the Ak. Museum. My cousin a surveyor on the dam was fascinated with the fact that when climbing to inspect or construct trig stations he would find stone structures..predating Maori already established. Maori elders at the time said they belonged to the people who were here when they came.. the stones were unearthed in 1958. Possibly they link to the Raglan stones was the thought... others near Aratimuru were bulldozed into the Waikato but there are still surviving stones I am told. A lot of work was done researching the early navigational sites by a number of historians out of Ak University but as they were Govt. funded their funds were taken from them citing it was too sensitive to Maori...it is every kiwis right to know the origins of our first peoples.

@@TuiPolitics At 80 we were taught the Moriori first landed in the north and stone art found in the Kaipara is said to be theirs... held in Dargaville and some in Auckland museums... we were taught that they took refuge from Maori and settled in the Chathams. Some of the very early historians whose books that were studied dated 1880+ and I feel that they would have had an accurate picture of these people as it was only 45 years after the genocide of the Moriori... I take no value in the fact you say most politicians today agree that the Moriori only settled the Chatham Is as I doubt that any of them would have availed themselves of early history books (if they could find them) and historical crown records.

No real historian or anthropologist would agree with the statement "there is no such thing as indigenous people"

@@TuiPoliticsistorians’ opinions on the matter don’t matter lmao; only anthropologists’ do and their is no such thing as indigenous people anthropologically or biologically. It is a political term. We are all from Africa and have all settled new lands and colonized other people.

@@TuiPolitics They dont have to agree with it in order for it to be true, the fact is, nothing here is ours, you just live on it until you die like everything else. The land was here long before us and will be here long after we're gone

@@TuiPolitics lol thts a non argument

False! You need to look up what indigenous actually means. Yes we all came from somewhere else originally, but in terms of colonialism there are such a thing as indigenous and who was there 1st! So doesn’t matter. Nice try to justify colonialism!

The UNs definition of indigenous "Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body. Instead the system has developed a modern understanding of this term based on the following: • Self- identification as indigenous peoples at the individual level and accepted by the community as their member. • Historical continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies • Strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources • Distinct social, economic or political systems • Distinct language, culture and beliefs • Form non-dominant groups of society • Resolve to maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as distinctive peoples and communitie

simple, GREED. Its only a minority of elite (Marxist) Maori who are making good money out of this coloniser guilt trip.

The UN is not a dictionary. The dictionary definition of indigenous is, " born or originating in a country ; native. " We are all indigenous or native as we were all born somewhere. But we all come from people groups who migrated, since the beginning of time. Everyone of us is indigenous with an immigrant heritage.

​@@jaspervanp2346an aristocratic society (britain) cuts a deal with an aristocratic society (moari) guess what the aristocrats win!

@@jaspervanp2346 Nothing says reasonable considered opinion more than far right propaganda insults. By the way by political science terms you can't be an elite Marxist.Thats the reason why communist countries said they 'pre-marxist' societies.

Māori did not all arrive at once or from one island, but over many years. Obviously the later arrivals found people (also Māori) already here.

@tsa3b explained in my comment above

@@eeeaten ummm nope, you are wrong. The people that were already here were not like Maori, apparently, unless there is an error in the oral history

@@Yeahright666- obviously oral histories are not 100% accurate. Most cultures have stories of mythical creatures- you think they’re all real?

because that's not true. it was made up by percy smith. he has fooled you.

Or, ya know, they understand the archaeologists and historians have done the work.

​@@AholeAtheistAre these the same historians that are black washing history elsewhere?

Im 60+ and i think i got a reasonable education of maoridom it taught us to respect the culture and i think all cultures .Gotta say the soundtrack to this vid i found very irritating but then im irritated by most soundtracks cant see the need for them .

At 80 we learnt all about early Maori history... Hongi Hika's musket wars, land wars the lot, we learnt that the Moriori had originally settled in the north and beaten down until they took refuge in the Chatham... so sometime between your education and mine they dropped off Maori history.

@@valeriehughes1008 As you've writing complete dribble here in lots of posts you didn't learn nothing. You're spouting far right propaganda.

@@user-uy6uc5ey5q NOPE BUDDY she is right we did get lots of maori history! I collect books & I STILL HAVE THEM >>They are much better than a lot of slanted drivel taught today! Why we have a prime minister who thinks you can change sex with paper!...... Not only did we learn we actually met some of the grandchildren of noted historical folks..but do not listen to me --I am just racist,homophobic ,misoginistic.rightwing conservative,closedminded,senile old coot.( but I got a hug rom Pixie Williams, slept with Te Puia, was friend with Honi Repohipi.shared fish & chips with Honi Tuwhari &oiled Major ROPATAS Sword!,)

@@user-uy6uc5ey5q I'm afraid it is you who is spouting activist propaganda... my family have been here since 1812, and lived and recorded our early history, they were amongst the first missionary linguist to give Maori their written language, they lived among many tribes and recorded their early tribal dialects and their histories... so to quote your badly worded prose "it is you who didn't learn nothing"! Don't rely on the newly created activists' sanitised version of your history - instead study every written document from our national archives - there is a wealth of material. The writings of Maori and the recordings of the crown alike. - then you can say you know history.

Moriori WERE INDIGENOUS to the Islands know officially since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, as New Zealand. They WERE CHASED TO the Chatham Islands, where they eventually perished as a race. They CANNOT BE your "brothers and sisters" you send greetings of "Kia Kaha" to, and we must assume that you are a Maori and are sending greetings to Maoris that may be on the Chatham Islands now.

Homie there are still Moriori to this day. A simple Google would help or you know you could just watch the video

@@TuiPolitics The Moriori of today are not full blooded Moriori, they are part Moriori and part something else. The scientific definition of extinction is when there are no full blooded specimens of the race or species left alive. A simple Google would have let you know before you made the video. And another point that you may find interesting: I am part Moriori and know my history very well.

You sound like you're educated but spilling false information. I know their are no full blooded Moriori now but like I said the last full blooded Moriori was Tommy Soloman who passed in 1933 his bloodline still lives on through his children and many others that survived during that time, even if it's a drop of blood they're still Moriori and FYI their are still Moriori alive and kicking my sister in laws being some of them. You seriously need to chill. Kia kaha my brothers and sisters ❤

Moriori are Maori dna proved this Bro the closets migration path that I can agree with to date based on DNA and archeological finds ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cdnibPOwLWs.html&si=VNtKKq4RBlJ0kcw_

Which Māori people should apologise?

@@eeeaten the tribes who genocided them

@@RadenYohanesGunawan should modern germans apologise for the actions of the nazis? The people who did those things are long dead.

@@eeeaten by your logic… so are the Brits that currently occupying NZ? Come on.

@@RadenYohanesGunawan don’t see your point. Do you mean why did the government apologise if the attackers did not? Again those people are long dead. The government remains as an entity.

That’s made up fantasy nonsense. The Kaimanawa wall is a natural formation. The first people of nz were the eastern Polynesian ancestors of Māori.

@@eeeaten you sound like another lost angry soul in the narrative.

@@jey369 it’s angry to state the facts now? This is just reality as per science and history. Your claims are mythology and conspiracy theories.

What facts where? Lol natural formation 🤣😂 eastern polynesian😂🤣

@@jey369 geologists have inspected the wall and concluded it’s a 300,000 year old ignimbrite. Is here any irrational nonsense you don’t believe?

@@chieftama1825 the moriori genocide could be considered tribal warfare (although there was no war, on group just attacked and slaughtered the other). but europeans did not do anything like this, let alone "worse at the time".

@@chieftama1825 Nah bro, the Maori were a race of savages who killed and ate a very large percentage of their own population. Hongi Hika sat at the base of a cliff for example at Ruapuke while an entire tribe was thrown off the top to smash next to him and cover himself in their blood/brains. This countries history has been murdered by the murderers in order to protect their egos. The Europeans saved the Maori from their own. Admittedly the weapons were given to them in full knowledge that they would commit such bloodshed on their own kind so some blame can be given to the English for fanning the flames of cannabilism.

@@chieftama1825 maori and moriori are completely different

after i forwarded my great aunt's name (jane hough) through to michael king: he interviewed her, noting info shared in his book but after interview i showed aunty a pic in a book she identified as herself as a child in moriori reserve even telling me names of most of those around her. this info: changed some of earlier dialogue shared in interview; as aunty continued with quite a bit of excitement sharing childhood memories, she said she had not to day we shared that day. thank you aunty jane.

But the grammar is angry!

The science is NEVER settled. That fact that you utter such nonsense tells anyone with a functioning brain that you have no understanding of what science is.

Science is never settled. That saying is total rubbish presented by the snake oil salesmen.

what a load pf crap🤣

Japanese matrilineal lineage all the way in the south Pacific?? Sounds very unlikely to me.

Stop lying ur name says ur maori

Okay... course i am, and im moriori, and im bloody english and german as well.. ​@@rickrubin8049

When the crown had security concerns in mainland nz it just ordered soldiers. In 1842 the Chathams were British territory, so moriori were subjects and therefore had a right to be protected from slavery.

Your ignorance here is just astonishing. You don't test DNA to work out ancient ethic background, but use maternal RNA dummy. Thats the testing they done from lots of different Māori iwi (and Polynesians in the pacific as wel) tracing back to ingenious Taiwanese groups. It would also be extremely difficult to isolate ancient Persian RNA as it was a very ethnically diverse empire and Persian culture itself was mostly a land based culture till the took over the eastern mediterranean societies of the Phoenicians, Greeks and Egyptians, who almost exclusively crewed Persian vessels, which we know would have been unable to reach Australia let alone the much more challenging sea conditions to make it to Aotearoa. Stop spouting unscientific nonsense.

Who is Ngai Hou and who are the other east coast tribe u speak of ???,descendents of Maui Tikitiki A Taranga arrived here some 2500 years ago most east coast tribes whakapapa back to him as for the muskets war they were given by pakeha for the purpose of divide and rule a great british military plan executed not only here but all over the world moriori settled chatham island not nz

Nice try but no Polynesian came from Persia/Middle East or Africa! Afrocentric, and Pakeha BS propaganda to lay claims to cultures that isn’t theirs. No Persian ships ever reached Polynesia let alone Aotearoa. DNA (humans, animals and crops/plants), linguistic, and archeological evidence doesn’t lie! The ancestors of all Polynesians can be traced back to one single Igorot woman in the Philippines, the ground zero of Austronesian expansion into the Pacific, on the maternal side X thousands of years ago. We have been in the Philippines as far back as 4000 years. At least that’s how far they have carbonated our tattoo tools!

I wonder where you got that idea from @@darrylwikohika9068 ? muskets were an expensive item...NOBODY GAVE THEM AWAY!! certainly not "the great british military"!.... anyhow the brits were interested in TRADE not simply fighting wars to get land....that came much later when improved hygiene allowed more kids to survive ..as it does in ALL places where health education is introduced. If you try to understand history you will find the first job of the evil colonists was to establish PEACE!! ..yes bad stuff happened also as tribal folks who did not "fit in" with the new establishment conflicted. Many ,in some cases all local maori took up new practices , even labouring enabled many to have a better life, but yes there was discrimination. Cast social layers are a usual thing in most societies its not just an english custom! A maori taken prisoner became a slave & was worked hard if they had skills they were valued but still a slave! The past was crap don't try to recreate it live well today!

Also known as the potato wars because the more productive potato allowed for more time away from gardening, which gave more time for campaigning.

Firstly the nz mainland is not on the way from hawaiki, it’s actually further to the west from there. Secondly the evidence suggests moriori ancestry (maybe all of it) is from mainland New Zealand, from the same peoples as Maori. Around 1250AD the eastern Polynesian ancestors of Maori (and moriori) started arriving in nz. Around 1400-1500AD a group went from nz to the Chathams and became culturally distinct from Maori there. It’s possible other ancestors arrived direct from hawaiki.

What doesn't make sense to me is that the mori ori share between 70 - 80% of the same vocabulary as Kai Tahu. Notwhich reinforces that European linguists were right. Mori ori and Maori are from the same line. Although being separated some time ago

@@ustorm9 why is that confusing?

@@eeeaten I correct myself. I was confused but will confirm this makes me understand things a lot better. The mori ori and Maori are one in the same. Same customs, language etc.

​@chieftama1825 Tena koe Chief. Maori is a fairly recent term of description in the histories of nz. Many varied tribes traveled here over many centuries from many varied embarkation spots. These tribes weren't all the same, they had unique ancestry. Some pacifist, some warlike. The islands known now as NZ was the melting pot of these tribes through interbreeding, conquest, and genocide pre europeans arrival. Some tribes disappeared completely, stories and whakapapa gone. The early term "maori" was created as a result to differentiate from europeans with their very different life and culture style. Unfortunately most history is written by the conquerors, "maori" or european. This is then entrenched through education, treaties, censorship and deception. Truthful intentions are also easily put on the wrong tangents through innocent use of wrong information. Truth is an individual pursuit as it involves putting ego to the side. Just my current thoughts on this fascinating topic.

Trust me you are still misinformed. The 900 ?? Taranaki Iwi (who had been displaced by a Waikato Tribe led by Hone Hika - thats right they had their sacred lands stolen by another tribe) did not "sail the ship to the Chatham Islands". They hijacked it and forced the British crew to sail it there for them under the threat of death and being dinner. They absolutely 100% cannibalised some numbers of the enslaved Moriori this was well documented by eye witnesses, so I dont know why this guy is trying to cast doubt on that.

what

You have misunderstood. The British were not responsible for what those attackers did, they were responsible for their inaction after slavery was banned in nz, and for failing to protect their moriori subjects. The attackers were responsible for what the attackers did.

Its in the works. Haven't worked on it in a while, hard to find motivation. Will hopefully be my next video

@@TuiPolitics Can't wait, Te Pāti Māori is the party in parliament I know the least about so it'll be cool to see how it came to be

Simple history for you. Some Maoris decided to ignore the Human Rights Act of New Zealand, plus the United Nations International Convention on Human Rights, that makes racist actions an offence, and they setup a Maoris only political party, of which led to several Maoris getting seats in the New Zealand Parliament. They have not even got their own written language, use the English alphabet letters in a hashed up manner, and don't even know the basic workings of a democratic society. But wait, there's more. They sided with the Labour Political Party, got handouts and promises of "co-governance" from them, and the Maori "language" being given to every single thing in New Zealand that is written in English. As well as that, they got to change New Zealand's name without a democratic vote, which is necessary under New Zealand, British, United Nations LAWS. HOWEVER, the Maori Party, the Labour Party, and the Green Party, are ALL HISTORY. THEY HAVE ALL BEEN FIRED. The new Political Parties that will govern NEW ZEALAND are going to CHANGE EVERYTHING BACK to what it was, should be, and WILL BE. A group of New Zealand Lawyers are preparing a Legal Claim against the racist "Te Pati Maori" Political Party, to be lodged in the Hague, with damages sought being in the multi-millions of NZD. A Court Order for the dissolvement of this racist organisation, and all the other racist Maori only Organisations, is also being sought. Not the type of publicity that they were hoping for, but any publicity is good publicity, isn't it ? And so far as their "signage" ? Maybe it's time they came up with their own written "signage" for the sounds that they make for things that they want to communicate to others, instead of stealing the English written language.

@@user-jx1mc7du8v Take a shower, bro and touch grass

When were iwi from taranaki shipped to rekohu?

@@boltang what? When?

the story is online@@eeeaten

Ngati mutunga .

So on the 19 November 1835, no one hijacked the European ship Lord Rodney? The book on the Moriori I read that was written by Maoriori stated they were the same as mainland Maori.

Māori were the first people of nz. Brailsford is a notorious kook. Māori did not attack moriori until 1835.

And the celtic stone carvings and the Maori stories of pale red heads who were already on the islands when they arrived.

Now one is saying pakeha should be blamed for the settlement of nz. The argument is we have to follow the agreement made in the treaty and as a society we should make up for past wrongs, such as racist laws that have allowed pakeha to succeed but allow Maori and other polynesians to fail in every measurement of success

@@TuiPolitics why other polynesians ? they did not sign anything??

Because the Government has taken actions and inactions that has lead to many groups being disadvantaged in this country. There is a reason why Maori and Pacific islanders are less educated, poorer and more likely to go to jail. It is decades of public policy that has made our society so uneven. It's more than just the treaty

@@TuiPolitics genuine question, what are the racist laws we currently have that are not allowing Maori to have any measure of success?

It isn't about what laws are currently on the books, it is about the laws and the society we lived in a few decades ago. Changing laws to make everyone equal doesn't just fix everything. To badly quote MLK "Extraordinary discrimination cannot be solve without Extraordinary representations". Most wealth in this country is inherited, and legal discrimination made it so malri were less likely to go to university, less likely to own a home, more likely to go to prison, more likely to die before collecting super.

Everything you say is false. Why are you spreading this bullshit?

so you agree with the video?

The issue is the nz government did not put a stop to it because they were a colonial government, who did not care about the natives. They claimed to have brought in order and good government, yet did not expand rights to brown people. That is the issue

@@TuiPolitics I understand the sentiment, but I cannot think of a way for the British to have intervened in the intertribal wars that would not have been imperialistic; ultimately the ones who chose to enslave the Moriori were the Māori themselves and I would place the actual genocide of their people at their feet. Mokai/taurekareka are precolonial as is slavery to many cultures. Obviously, during the Musket wars there was a sharp increase of them along with Mokomokai, but that was in response to the widening capability they had when they gained more complex technology through trade

⁠@@Thegrimforest the treaty meant all New Zealanders (including chatham islanders) had rights as British subjects, so that includes freedom from slavery. The crown had a responsibility to enforce this and did not.

@@Thegrimforest the people responsible for the genocide were the people who carried it out. when you say “the Māori”, who are you talking about? Are you implying ALL Māori were responsible? One group of people did it.

@@eeeaten the Māori did not see themselves as British subjects, they considered themselves under British occupation which is why they fought them tooth and nail before they capitulated to a stronger power. It would be analogous to impugn the British for the Holocaust because of the various commitments to the League of Nations. Ultimately, it was the Māori who carried it out and bare the brunt of the blame for the Genocide on the Chatham Islands

What is pacifism?

Moriori came to the mainland after Europeans were here, after the invasion of the Chatham islands. I encourage you to read the moriori settlement act, it's in the description of the video

Talk to me we still here

Could use please stop telling bullshit

@@TuiPolitics Europeans are johnny come lately

Maori had many reasons for consuming human flesh One main one was it destroyed the mana/spirit of the victim ,also making the bones into cooking utensils' was another way to destroy mana/sprit of the victim as well. Mana was everything to the Maori people it can be gained and destroyed . What little actual witnessed cannibal feasts that happened ,it was noted in one feast of a human body the heart was separated ,I think a chief would get to eat that .Hone Hiki on a Rotorua campaign ,heard from some of his warrior's an emery chief had being killed ,but the body was left behind ,he proclaimed he wanted to eat the brain of that chief and sent his warriors to collect it ,but the body had being removed by that chiefs people.

they have no history, the only they got is stealing other peoples history.

pakeha are the ones always covering their shit under the carpet everywhere they go. did you forget about the genicide pakeha men did to the Maori women and little 12 year old little girls at Parehaka that time? or do you wanna just blain Maori for everything? what a clown lol

No, that is made up nonsense

Bullshit

Of what?

No there isn't

Prove it!

Who's blaming white people now? The blame is with the Institution that is the NZ government/ crown

you sure seem confused there ian

@TuiPolitics what I was meaning was an inallagy by saying that we rightly shouldn't blame,guilt or demonize all maori for the actions of 900 when those 900 attacked the mori ori I was using the same example re the treaty & land stealing I was saying that 3.2 million white kiwis shouldn't be blamed, guilted or demonized for the actions of afew thousand over land stealing 180+ years ago sorry should have messaged it clearer

Again noone is saying that. Noone is calling for white people in general fo apologize. They are calling for the nz government to uphold the treaty that they signed and are bound to

Every race has bad buggers and there is stuff still happening to this very day by bad pakeha to maori. Crime right now. The smoke and mirrors hides it and portrays Maori as bludgers and wingers. Youll remember my words one day and think to yourself- OH this is what she meant, I never Knew I was never told. Until then , Maori dont hold any nz citizens accountable at all the treaty is with the crown. Not Indians , Chinese , only Maori and the Crown Corporation.

The thing is the government allowed slavery to happen in their country because they didn't care. Then they gave away their land due to incompetence

The nz government didn’t apologise for what happened to moriori but for the part they played in it. After 1840 they had a responsibility to protect moriori from slavery, they didn’t. In the 1870s the government awarded moriori lands to Māori, so today the government apologises for that error.

Sure, the Crown didn't end the enslavement of Moriori and force the Maori to release them until 1863. But at least they did THAT, albeit rather late. So, if it hadn't been for the British colonial authorities, the Moriori would have never been released from slavery at all. And who invaded, murdered and enslaved the Moriori in the first place?? Seems to me, that it was those Taranaki Iwi who were most culpable for what happened, so why haven't their descendants been called upon to apologise for what their ancestors did?? I've studied the historical accounts of what happened in the Chathams in 1835 and it was horrific. I noticed in those parliamentary readings in your video, how the politicians tend to gloss over the sheer levels of savagery of the Maori invasion of the Chathams. Worse than anything the British ever did in NZ. Andrew Little even referring to it as "settlement" by the Maori. Please.

@@andy2550 do you hold modern Germans responsible for the acts of the nazis?

Genetics shows Māori ancestry is from the western pacific, not the east. Not even a little bit.

Typical tankie comment

Dance monkey dance @@tedheath9018 Woke

Bollocks where

@@malcolmhayward4431you have the Internet, so don't expect me to spoon feed you Information.

Doesnt happen, maori cope

Got a source for that? Or is it just "trust me bro"

Nope. Māori are eastern Polynesian with whakapapa to Māori. Māori are the first people of nz. Moriori are the first people of the Chatham Islands.

​@@eeeatenIt appears Moriori were the first and were genocided by a distinctly different lighter race of people Maori who came to New Zealand later. Racist ethnic-genocide aided by the British no?

@@knothyselfknotruth no. Please look it up. The eastern Polynesian ancestors of Māori began arriving in nz from around 1250AD. There were no previous people. Moriori are the eastern Polynesian people of the Chatham Islands, and were not attacked there until about 600 years later, in 1835. It’s true that moriori were the first people of the Chatham Islands and where genocided there in 1835, by a group of Māori warriors who were displaced by other Māori in nz. They hijacked a British ship to get the chathams, and were not aided by the British.

A complete different culture. This is as if you are saying what is the difference between a Tongan and Samoan

Like Nga Puhi to Te Arawa???😂😂😂

​@TuiPolitics Actually Moriori speak Maori just in a different dialect. They are the same people, obviously time on chattam changes the cultures a very small amount. Not enough to say they are a complete new culture. DNA does not lie, Maori and MoriOri are one in the same 😂. So sad to see lies being regurgitated, this is what perpetuates racism and hate.

​@@TuiPoliticsGood video. Thanks for the effort.

The difference is genetic.

you are agreeing with the video

Maoris always consider themselvs as one entity when it is to their advantage. But as soon as there is something negative....no no. That was those other maoris. 😂😂😂

@@user-oh4yd5uh4e vague racist nonsense. You have no clue.

Nope. Moriori were not attacked until 1835. Most Māori have no moriori ancestry, it’s mostly just the taranaki/Wellington iwi who assimilated them.

@eeeaten and the whole of the south Island....rikirangi te kooti bought moriori back with him when he came back for revenge after being banished. Wiping out a whole hapu of maori and starting his own brand hence the followers of ringatu. Maori were adventurers and had the tools to do so they travelled in the name of Tumatauenga they thirsted for battle and I quote "the men would get erections at the thought of a fight" maori culture didn't become what it is today without moriori and vice versa, we are no diffrent from the Tongan and Raro Tongan

@@MTT-ic3ci what are you talking about? Te kooti didn’t go to the South Island and didn’t “wipe out a hapu of Māori”. Maybe you’re confusing him with te rauparaha? Anyway, back to moriori, they were not attacked until 1835. Māori are the first people of nz.

@eeeaten was banished to the chatham island by his own people, ngati porou sent their own man ropata wehewehe for him te kooti was caught and sent to the chathams, he stole a waka sailed home and sought revenge on our iwi...the people of ngai tahu are majority decedants of the ngati porou iwi, as ngati porou was the first to join the arms of the Pakeha milatary and conquered other iwi for them streching all the way down to the south Island until nga puhi had taken a stand and fought back. The warriors left down there resided there...hence the tipuna connection to maori of the ngai tahu region. I mean this is knowledge shared in an unbiased manner...I'm not trying to make one culture better then the other just telling it like it was written.

@@MTT-ic3ci again this was not in the South Island, but on the east coast of the north island. You are confused. Please look it up. Getting back to moriori, they were not at war with Māori, they were attacked in rekohu in 1835. Nothing to do with te kooti.

this is total nonsense sorry. moriori lived _only_ in the chatham islands. maori were the first people in new zealand. after europeans arrived they then "discovered" moriori in the chathams around 1790AD. a group of maori warriors, whose people had been displaced from their home in taranaki, took a british ship to the chathams in 1835, to take the land and people there. those warriors were the people who committed the slaughter and genocide. the treaty of waitangi was signed after that, and that gave protection to the moriori in the chatham islands as new zealand subjects. for decades, the government didn't protect them from slavery, and even awarded moriori lands to their invaders. back in mainland nz the british/maori wars didn't even start until after the treaty was signed. i recommend reading the te ara online encyclopedia entry for moriori, ref maui solomon and denise davis.

More fairyrtales just like moriori spining thier lies..... they are Maori if you think about it they didnt by devine intervention become peaceful non violent people the size of the land dictAted thAt.

@@rewirapana941 sorry what point are you making? Moriori are liars? What lie?

@@eeeaten that they are not Maori..... yet they have 2 marae and a pou (Maori)thier waka and Tupuna named are Te reo as the language used only has a slite difference and the futher you go back it reverts back to te reo archeologist have concluded settlement of NZ by Maori at 1200 ad and chattems 1500ad

@@rewirapana941 i guess it depends what your definition of "maori" is? some iwi maori reject that label because they think it implies colonisation or acquiescence to the crown. genetically all eastern polynesians (including hawaiians, tahitians, cook islanders, maori, moriori) are the same. i don't know if moriori really reject their ancestral ties with maori?

are you saying you disagreed with something in the video?

the fact is they were the only people in new zealand until cook's arrival in 1769

@barneyboy2008 yeah. in terms of the treaty, people from all sides of politics need to realise that the history of whether or not maori's were the first peoples of NZ is irrelevant (although it does seem to be the case that they were). The reality is, the British signed a treaty with the Maori's because neither side could win, and that contract between the crown and the Maori needs to be respected and upheld.

Yeah but it turns out that Maori had no authority to sign a treaty as the land was actually owned by the Moriori people .

@@stewatparkpark2933 nope. moriori lived only on the chatham islands, which were annexed by the british government in 1842, therefore the treaty covered the chathams from that point onwards.

nope.

I think you should look into European history before making claims about cultures coming from rape and pillaging

Did you watch the video? There are living moriori telling their tales

The chatham Islands are in nz

@@TuiPolitics according to the demograph today but back in those days Wharekauri or Rēkohu the Moriori name for it did not come under the colonised umbrella of NZ

@@YIUDUUB you should watch the video. the misconception is stated then refuted.

@@eeeaten I read your comment so I watched it and yes, it's a great video. I was blinded by my tiresome anger of constant Māori bashing that I turned it off as soon as I heard the statement of Moriori being first peoples of Aotearoa. Well done @TuiPolitics your work is thorough and well presented. Mauri Ora

Do you mean tuhoe?

obviously the crown is funded by taxes.

Lol is there any irrational nonsense you don’t believe? Science shows Māori were the first people of New Zealand.

the treaty means all new zealanders have rights as citizens, including protection from slavery.

@@eeeaten Right, though activists citing revisionist versions of Tino Rangatiratanga as a right, is what racist separatists like the Maori Party Greens and Labour want. Would this give Maori their traditional customary right to keep slaves and practice infanticide? To burn down forests? Or does Tino Rangatiratanga not mean what they say it does?

@@kingfillins4117 i guess you'd better ask those extremists. what they'd probably say is those were different times. in europe in 1769 it was pretty brutal, too - life expectancy was about the same in britain and nz. slavery was still going strong in america at that time, but has ended since - do you imagine that without british rule pacific islands would have stayed as they were, not progressing through trade and cultural exchanges? if you want to know more about what tino rangatiratanga would look like, you can probably google it rather than relying on racist assumptions?

What you describe as customary Maori rights is colonialism in its own form so what's the difference? Every human has the same instinct, it's called survival. An ideal society it was not

​@@eeeaten racist assumptions? It's a principle the similar to any other from any other culture. Slavery was practiced all over the world. There are still slave markets in the middle east. Without British influence the islands would have likely progressed very very slowly. Like Scotland who resisted Roman influence stayed technologically stunted. Colonisation is a gift not a curse if the colonisers offering innovation rather than acting as a leach. Maori were a stone age culture. Europe had moved out of that phase something like 4000 years before. Steel, the wheel, wool and potatoes' alone offered greater ease, warmth and food security. NZ based Maori culture was around 700 years old. It would have progressed, though to what? Higher population for one thing... which would have put greater pressure on native birds etc.As peninsula Aztecs population grew they built on their farmland and eventually starved. Greater deforestation. In a few hundred years Maori burned down 7 Million hectares. Maori had the blessing of colonisation. Now that means nothing and they want cash when they were given the world.

you are still grouping people together by race. maori were very diverse and regarded themselves as different peoples. there was conflict in nz like there was conflict in many parts of the world.

@eeeaten regardless if a group of people THINK they are different based on tribal views, genetically, they were the same people. And yes, no ones saying conflict is confined to Maori. Conflict was and still is, a human trait. I look at Maori back when they came here as a Stone Age peoples to those that roamed the Britanic region thousands of years ago. They fought with clubs, sticks, they took lands, slaves, they cannabalised eachother. All our ancestors did that at some point over our history, its not just Maori. Others just developed faster then Maori which in its own is fascinating. What kept Maori so isolated from other sea going travelers is a big question.

"Just like you cant blame the ancestors today, of those English who colonised NZ, for what happened back then." @eeeaten won´t let you get away with that comment.😂 @eeeaten, just like all maoris, puts the blame onto others. @eeeaten will tell you that it´s not the fault of the maoris that they killed the Moriori but that is was the fault of the collonisers. And that makes it ok. Blame it on someone else. That preservs their mana.

Source

Made up fantasy nonsense

Bro wtf did I just read fantasy for sure😂

This is incorrect. You got a source for that?

Cool story bro

There are no such rat bones. Your information is out of date. Look it up.

Source?

@robintamihere4550 Barry fell is an obvious anti science kook

?? The musket wars happened before the king movement

@@eeeaten The holocaust of the musket wars [inter-tribal warfare] was the two decades before the signing of the Treaty [the Treaty largely bought those wars to an end]. The King movement started a decade and a half after the Treaty [ a rejection of Brit sovereignty by central North Island tribes].

@@davethewave7248 yes, that's in line with what i said above. your first comment implied it was peaceful until after the king movement. most violence occurred before the king movement. i guess you mean british-maori relations were mostly peaceful until after the coronation of the maori king?

@@eeeaten Yes, roughly speaking there was a break in the violence between 1840 - and the mid 1850s. Before 1840, the most massive violence in the inter-tribal musket wars... and after the mid 1850s... violence increasinbly built between Maori and Europeans.... an opportunity lost, where the increasing tension culminated in the NZ wars. It's interesting that most of the focus on NZ history is with the Treaty and the subsequent wars between Europeans and Maori... whent the earlier two decades of musket wars between the Maori tribes is absolutely pivotal to understanding NZ history. It contextualizes, and provides a background for, the treaty and subsequent settlement.