I watched a documentary in New Zealand about fish stocks. It was talking about how the fish around New Zealand are overfished and numbers are low. Had experts talking about issues with boats and how they need no fishing areas. They had Maori on there talking about how much abundance of fish there was before the white people came. They talked about how in tune the Maori were with the land and had ways to manage stock.
The documentary finished saying the issue is still ongoing and not enough has been done. Didn’t really go into why.
Well I looked it up after the majority of fishing companies are owned by the Maori and the reason the scientifically justified areas were not set as a sanctuary was because the Maori didnt agree and wanted to do things there own way that would allow them to fish at levels higher than what the science was saying is possible. On this matter New Zealand cared more about what Maori incorrectly believed over what the scientific evidence was saying to them.
People need to get off their high horse. People suck all over the world. Yea shock the people that live in mountains which remain untouched because it is shit farmland is going to have the most nature. But go to other countries and you see it’s the same, well worse than white countries. Places like UK has had protected land for hundreds of years. They set up protected land in the new places they went. Areas they left like Malaysia and India are full of rubbish and monoculture. They didn’t get better. Go to Indonesia and look at their beautiful islands. The tour guide said to us “look no littering sign. Only in Indonesian. Westerners don’t litter but the locals do”.
Not really related, but in Japan, I came across a monolingual sign that said: “In Japanese culture, it is considered impolite to piss in public”.
Westerners don’t litter but the locals do
Have you not seen how westerners behave on vacation? Maybe you got lucky, but there’s a reason the tourist part of nearly every city has the most litter
No, they’re often less dense and smaller than residential areas, and more walkable, but they attract people who don’t give a shit because they’re in a mindset where they don’t give a shit. They require a lot more cleaning too.
When you go to Asia
Already there. Also you should be more specific, EA and even Central Asian countries are reasonably clean. When you’re talking about places with monumental amounts of trash, you mean SEA and India, and even there, lots of places aren’t like that.
Places that are a bit more affluent tend to have the resources to dedicate to keeping the streets clean. Westerners on vacation don’t have an excuse.
The Japanese are better than the westerners
Maybe, in cities, but there’s a bit of a littering problem in more rural areas and in rivers. Also in the poorer areas of cities.
So the Wikipedia article claims that Māori control about 30% of fisheries, with many citations, do you have real evidence which contradicts this? This includes things like Sealord which is one of the biggest quota owners, but is only half owned by iwi, so a genuine number would be quite a lot lower than that 30%. That’s not to say that there aren’t problems with the management, we agree about that.
Well that’s silly. England is full of monoculture fields too, and India has plenty of wild areas. I bet they only looked at the touristy areas and assumed the whole country is like that.
There’s another layer of complexity here that you’re glossing over, I think, and that’s class dynamics within the Maori population.
It could both be true that traditional Maori lifeways were more sustainable, and that modern, Maori owned fishing companies are over fishing. Let’s assume all of that is correct for a minute
The coming of the white man didn’t ruin the sustainability of fishing, because of something ontologically bad with white people, but because they enforced an extractive, capitalist, economic system onto the region.
Colonialism pulled the Maori into a broader world system which generated a group of Maori with enough capital to, say, found fishing companies, and a wide swathe of Maori who can’t.
And paradoxically, that capital generation from unsustainable, capitalist, fishing practices is probably one of the things that allows Maori communities to have a degree of sovereignty, all the while said fishing practices are undermining their ability to continue to sustain themselves.
I watched a documentary in New Zealand about fish stocks. It was talking about how the fish around New Zealand are overfished and numbers are low. Had experts talking about issues with boats and how they need no fishing areas. They had Maori on there talking about how much abundance of fish there was before the white people came. They talked about how in tune the Maori were with the land and had ways to manage stock.
The documentary finished saying the issue is still ongoing and not enough has been done. Didn’t really go into why.
Well I looked it up after the majority of fishing companies are owned by the Maori and the reason the scientifically justified areas were not set as a sanctuary was because the Maori didnt agree and wanted to do things there own way that would allow them to fish at levels higher than what the science was saying is possible. On this matter New Zealand cared more about what Maori incorrectly believed over what the scientific evidence was saying to them.
People need to get off their high horse. People suck all over the world. Yea shock the people that live in mountains which remain untouched because it is shit farmland is going to have the most nature. But go to other countries and you see it’s the same, well worse than white countries. Places like UK has had protected land for hundreds of years. They set up protected land in the new places they went. Areas they left like Malaysia and India are full of rubbish and monoculture. They didn’t get better. Go to Indonesia and look at their beautiful islands. The tour guide said to us “look no littering sign. Only in Indonesian. Westerners don’t litter but the locals do”.
Not really related, but in Japan, I came across a monolingual sign that said: “In Japanese culture, it is considered impolite to piss in public”.
Have you not seen how westerners behave on vacation? Maybe you got lucky, but there’s a reason the tourist part of nearly every city has the most litter
The Japanese are better than the westerners I’m not denying that.
Probably because thats where the most people are.
When you go to Asia most people are locals. Even driving through areas buses and trains don’t stop the amount of trash is monumental.
No, they’re often less dense and smaller than residential areas, and more walkable, but they attract people who don’t give a shit because they’re in a mindset where they don’t give a shit. They require a lot more cleaning too.
Already there. Also you should be more specific, EA and even Central Asian countries are reasonably clean. When you’re talking about places with monumental amounts of trash, you mean SEA and India, and even there, lots of places aren’t like that.
Places that are a bit more affluent tend to have the resources to dedicate to keeping the streets clean. Westerners on vacation don’t have an excuse.
Maybe, in cities, but there’s a bit of a littering problem in more rural areas and in rivers. Also in the poorer areas of cities.
It’s not cultural, it’s moral and intelligence-related
As with all good vs bad discussions…
That documentary is embarrassingly wrong, the overwhelming majority of companies fishing in NZ waters are huge multinationals, not owned by Māori.
Well I can’t see how thats the case when you can easily look up catch right and special areas where only Maori can fish.
They must be selling off their rights or not using it then because the internet says otherwise. Or you are just making things up.
So the Wikipedia article claims that Māori control about 30% of fisheries, with many citations, do you have real evidence which contradicts this? This includes things like Sealord which is one of the biggest quota owners, but is only half owned by iwi, so a genuine number would be quite a lot lower than that 30%. That’s not to say that there aren’t problems with the management, we agree about that.
“Altogether, Māori enterprises account for 40 percent of New Zealand’s forestry, 50 percent of the country’s fishing quota,”
https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements-in-force/regional-comprehensive-economic-partnership-rcep/maori-interests
They are also allowed to fish in ways white people aren’t and in place they aren’t.
If you google iwi veto sanctuary I’m sure would will find that easy enough. So I’m done with the back and forth now.
India has 120 languages
I assume they mean crops not cultures
Well that’s silly. England is full of monoculture fields too, and India has plenty of wild areas. I bet they only looked at the touristy areas and assumed the whole country is like that.
There’s another layer of complexity here that you’re glossing over, I think, and that’s class dynamics within the Maori population.
It could both be true that traditional Maori lifeways were more sustainable, and that modern, Maori owned fishing companies are over fishing. Let’s assume all of that is correct for a minute
The coming of the white man didn’t ruin the sustainability of fishing, because of something ontologically bad with white people, but because they enforced an extractive, capitalist, economic system onto the region.
Colonialism pulled the Maori into a broader world system which generated a group of Maori with enough capital to, say, found fishing companies, and a wide swathe of Maori who can’t.
And paradoxically, that capital generation from unsustainable, capitalist, fishing practices is probably one of the things that allows Maori communities to have a degree of sovereignty, all the while said fishing practices are undermining their ability to continue to sustain themselves.