ROBERT ALLEN
Durie Hill
Racial disdain
GT Parker, Whangarei, and B Moon, Nelson (letters, January 11) separately dispute my statements of fact (letters, January 9). But they were actually refuting the work of renowned historians -- such as James Belich, Judith Binney, James Cowan, IH Kawharu, Danny Keenan, Michael King, Gordon McLauchlan, Paul Moon, Claudia Orange, Matthew SR Palmer, K Sinclair, E Schwimmer, MPK Sorrenson and RK (Raj) Vasil, all renowned historians whose work is backed by known, reliable sources, are consistent, have been closely critiqued and peer-reviewed, and are available to all.
Their opinions, on the other hand, are based on Dr John Robinson's writings and self-published books. John Robinson has a Master's degree in mathematics (MSc) and physics (DipHons).
His self-published books, Corruption of New Zealand Dem-ocracy: a Treaty industry overview (2011); When Two Peoples Meet (2012) and Twisting the Treaty (2013), however, are not in his field of academic expertise, and on a theme that has nothing to do with mathematics or physics.
He is not an historian and his social commentaries have no more validity than any other unqualified, untested commentary. His opinions are unsubstantiated (merely centred on disputing our legislation, the findings of tribunals, our law courts, our acknowledged historians and, not least, the people who live it) and are simply expressions of racial disdain and belittlement.
H NORTON
Kaitoke
Ours to break?
I see from the letters of Messrs Lally and Robinson (Chronicle, January 6) that the proclivity to post-rationalise our colonial history is alive and well still.
I think that when a group of soldiers arrives on your farm, shoots the place up and tells you "It has been sold, so off you go", then warns you that you will be shot on sight if you return, it qualifies as ethnic cleansing, wouldn't you say?
The English didn't come here in an enlightened crusade to save Maori from themselves, they came for the land. Like Julius Caesar in our own history, they got it.
The Treaty made Maori British citizens and was honoured mainly in the breach to define them as "rebels" whenever they resisted land-grabs, and confiscated even more land as a result.
You can't tell me that a people who had endured conquest by Romans, Vikings and Normans didn't know exactly what they were doing when they came here -- they had been taught well.
The fact that Maori survived as a people was due to their own fortitude and ability to adapt rather than the ministrations of the colonists who had them written off as a "dying race" 50 years after the Treaty was signed.
They have had to come to terms with what happened, so why can't the rest of us? After all, the Treaty was our idea, not theirs. Ours to make so ours to break, perhaps?
LE FITTON
Whanganui
French film ban
I would like to thank you for publishing my letter (January 10) about the French banning a film for showing people with Down syndrome smiling. This is an atrocious situation and yet has received very little press coverage.
You note my letter was "Abridged", although it did still contain many of the important points, but it would be more correct to say that it was "Edited". Possibly the most interesting changes were in the part about eugenics, a very popular movement in the first half of the 20th century, which you changed to a "popular idea".
You left out the fact that Margaret Sanger was a leading proponent of eugenics in the US and the founder of Planned Parenthood. You also left out the quote listing some of the "unfit" people Sanger wanted to get rid of, ie, all "Hebrews, Slavs, Catholics, and negroes". You made it appear that it was only Hitler who wanted to eliminate "lesser" races, yet Sanger and many others in the US and other Western nations wanted the same thing.
Margaret Sanger is still held up today as a role model and leader for all, and especially women, to look up to. If an accurate representation of the woman and her ideals was given, it is likely that far less people would have any respect for her and what she stood for.
K A BENFELL
Gonville
�Editor's note: Mr Benfell's letter was abridged because it was well in excess of our word limit of 350. The material about birth control campaigner Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood, the organisation she founded, was not immediately relevant to the main subject matter of censorship and abortion. Sanger was criticised for her support for eugenics but was opposed to abortion, which remained illegal in the US during her lifetime. Planned Parenthood continued that stance for many years after it was legalised.