A fap in a teacup. Think I mean a flap? No, I mean fap...

There's nothing more fascinating than watching a train-wreck in action and I say this with due apologies to the people of Lac Megantic who suffered such a literal thing in the last week. I mean the metaphorical train-wreck that is the establishment of the Facebook group The Pakeha Party, who have pledged to get 500 paying members and become an actual functioning political party. Most reports have cited that the page already has X number of likes, but by the time the report is published that figure is obsolete due to the astronomical response to people who either approve of its foundation or who like the page merely to get continuous updates on this fiasco.

Pakeha Party co-founder David Ruck.
Nice eyebrow piercing Dave.

The founders of the page did so with a simple ethos: any additional benefits the Maori ask for exclusively for Maori - we ask the for the same things for Pakeha. This is rather simplistic and as their popularity grew and the party gained media attention it was highlighted as being a rather unrealistic basis to form a party. One of the founders, Ashley Sargeant, was interviewed on Radio Live by Duncan Garner who asked if they were opposed to the Treaty of Waitangi and treaty settlements. Our interviewee responded by saying he wasn't opposed in principle. Garner pounced, because any additional benefits Maori gain are based upon redress and the the principles of the Treaty, the Pakeha Party doesn't really stand for anything. A considerable amount of the benefits the Pakeha Party allude to directly arise out of the Treaty settlement process. Ngai Tahu are an example of a tribe that was settled perhaps 5-10% of what their claim would otherwise be worth (as a tribe, their iwi held around 90% of the land mass of the South Island). With that settlement the tribe invested in commercial property and a number of other commercial ventures. With careful management, this portfolio has achieved enviable success with profits used to extend the tribe's holdings as well as being used for social benefits for tribe members across a broad range of areas including scholarships for higher education. Ngai Tahu are an example of good management of their assets being used for the benefit of their people. There are of course shining examples of bad management of settlements meaning that certain tribes receive less individual benefit and are more reliant on social services that are available to all. A number of the causes of social issues arising among Maori are unique to Maori and it would be remiss of the government not tailor its efforts to deal with them based upon ethnicity. Even if it were likely that the Pakeha Party group could gain the same benefits as Maori, they certainly wouldn't want to inherit all the social ills that Maori face including lower life expectancy, higher infant mortality, unemployment, drug and alcohol addiction, domestic violence and incarceration rates.
Duncan Garner therefore could legitimately question whether the Pakeha Party stood for anything at all.

And then there is the Pakeha Party's catch-cry that it is not a racist party (no doubt pronounced ray-shist, by  the page's adherents). It does not stand for ethnic divisiveness, rather wants to highlight inequality in the treatment of between Maori and Pakeha in New Zealand. Well, the group is struggling with the paradoxical nature of that statement because by highlighting the division and poorly enunciating its rather clouded intentions, it has immediately attracted consideration that it is a group motivated by bigotry rather than any more laudable intention. It is a page of largely incoherent ranting and poorly informed and poorly spelled boorish diatribes. It claims not to be divisive, but there is as much traffic on the page decrying the concept of the Pakeha Party by a torrent of Maori and non-Maori. 
But there is a Mana Party and a Maori Party, the page's authors argue. Why should there not be Pakeha Party? In the case of the Mana Party, it is not exclusively a party for Maori. It just so happens that it didn't capture the imagination of non-Maori, probably because Hone Harawira can't do up his fucking tie properly. As for the foundation of the Maori Party, the answer is a bit more complex. The party exists to act as a representative of a very different social society within a Westminster government. Maori society has key differences in an array of areas, for example land ownership - the European model holds that the underlying title of all land is held by the Crown but can be purchased and sold. Maori never really own land, they are stewards for it. A principle called kaitiakitanga unless I'm much mistaken. The Maori Party was founded to be a conduit between the two systems as well as providing representation, although that representation has been severely eroded due to the machinations of party politics. Why should there be a Pakeha Party when the system of government is based upon a European model, conducted in English and with considerable ethnic representation of European New Zealanders across most parties? It is comically naive to suggest that Pakeha is under-represented in parliament.

The Pakeha Party page thinks 'this guy is Epic! lol'

So if the Pakeha Party is on course to become a political party I think it nicely underlines my opinion in this post. Stupid people should be denied the vote because they just can't use it properly. If the number of likes this page has as of this morning were converted into votes, it would gain around 2.5% of the electoral vote. The threshold for gaining seats in parliament is currently 5% and there is every chance that the Pakeha Party could eventually capitalise on the stupidity of it's members and get into parliament, having a say in how our country is run. Were the Pakeha Party to follow through on its threat to incorporate, this could be quite a worrying thing especially in an election where a minor party holds the balance of power. Will it get that far? As I mentioned earlier, fifty thousand Facebook likes comprise people who genuinely believe that their interests will be best represented by the Pakeha Party but may also consist of people who are content watching this lunacy unfold. I haven't liked the page, but I'm in this camp.

There now follows a selection of quotations and comments from the Pakeha Party Facebook page. Then we'll hold a moment of silence for the death of written English:

Bill Ruffwater

have to say thank you,the war that has been brewing is now closer,cant wait to go to battle with my maori brothers

And this isn't divisive?

Matt Bowden

hell yeah love this page!!! for all out there calling this "racist" , pull finger. WE ARE pakeha and we shall REPRESENT ourselves as pakeha no questions asked, why should we not? while the politics of our countries past are very important in knowing WHERE we came from we dont have to take on our ancestors wars. You or I or any other kiwi living today didnt fight in 1845-1872 did ya? just as we didnt ask to be born here (even though i woulda picked here anyways if i could) we still share this country and live together. if this is racist then having a "maori" party is too. dont hate us just koz we white :)

I don't hate you because you are white. I hate you because of your tiny mind and your appalling spelling and grammar.

Emma Burns

How about a name like One People or One Nation?

Anyone remember the Australian One Nation party led by Pauline Hansen?

Pene Rakau

‎#TE Wā Patai!!! ZZZZZZZ Wh@'z The Connectionzzz Between "Simon POWER" "ASSET SALEZ" "TANGATA WENUA" @ "WEZTPAC???" # ^^200 MILLION DOLLAR CARZ???? ZZZZZ####

No, I have no idea what this one says either, but I'm fairly certain they don't support the Pakeha Party.

Natasha Blackbourn

I'm all for this, but could we change the name to The White Party or something like that??!! I hate the word Pakeha, it's like they own us.

There's a grand idea. Call it the White Party instead. I'll go and get the Klan hoods.

Jack Lean

yes a very good party, oh it is very ,udy cold, Here to the Pakeha Party

What? Oh never mind.