Maori leaders traditional treatment of slaves: Can take fruits of their labour without reciprocity Violence acceptable for backchat Can denigrate whakapapa due to past grievance Babies had with slave not slaves bc mana Maori leaders treatment of non-Maori taxpayers: See above.

TWO LEADING PRINCETON, MIT SCIENTISTS SAY EPA CLIMATE REGULATIONS BASED ON A ‘HOAX’: "William Happer, Professor Emeritus in physics at Princeton University, and Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of atmospheric science at MIT: “The unscientific method of analysis, relying on consensus, peer review, government opinion, models that do not work, cherry-picking data and omitting voluminous contradictory data, is commonly employed in these studies and by the EPA in the Proposed Rule. All of the models that predict catastrophic global warming fail the key test of the scientific method: they grossly overpredict the warming versus actual data. The scientific method proves there is no risk that fossil fuels and carbon dioxide will cause catastrophic warming and extreme weather. Climate models such as the ones that the EPA is using have been consistently wrong for decades in predicting actual outcomes. To illustrate his point, he presented the EPA with a table showing the difference between those models’ predictions and the observed data." The Epoch Times

Every obedience experiment in history had the same overlooked finding. Not everyone complied. In Milgram’s lab, 35% refused to deliver the final shock. In Asch’s line experiments, 25% never conformed, not once, across any trial. In Zimbardo’s prison, at least one guard refused to dehumanize. One prisoner demanded a lawyer instead of a doctor and broke the psychological frame entirely. We spent decades studying the ones who obeyed. We barely asked what made the others different. That question matters more now than it ever has. The resisters in the COVID era were not difficult to find. Physicians who filed exemptions and lost their licenses. Nurses who walked away from careers rather than mandate patients into decisions they hadn’t genuinely chosen. Scientists who published contrary data knowing what it would cost them. Parents who stood alone at school board meetings. Ordinary people who simply said, quietly, without drama , no. What made them different? Research consistently identifies a cluster of factors. Not personality traits you either have or don’t. Situational and cognitive patterns that can be cultivated. First: prior reflection on authority. The resisters had usually thought, before the crisis, about the limits of institutional trust. They weren’t cynics. They were people who had already asked the question “under what conditions would I refuse?” before anyone was asking them to comply. Second: a concrete reference point outside the consensus. A value, a principle, an oath, a relationship that existed independently of the institutional structure demanding compliance. Something the system couldn’t reach. Third: at least one other person. Milgram found that a single dissenting confederate reduced compliance dramatically. The resisters rarely stood entirely alone. They found each other. Sustained each other. Gave each other permission. Fourth: the willingness to tolerate social pain. Not immunity to it. Tolerance of it. They felt the pressure. They felt the exclusion. They chose the discomfort of integrity over the comfort of belonging. None of this is innate. All of it is learnable. The most important thing Milgram, Asch, and Zimbardo taught us is not how fragile conscience is. It’s that conscience can hold, if you’ve trained it, named its limits, and found even one other person willing to hold theirs beside you. Build that now. Because the experiment is always running. Until then stay humble.

Ah, buttering us up for the grand coalition of effeminate big-government socialists I see. Klaus will be proud. Hope he’s got the blackmail tapes lined up to keep you “laser-focused” and “fixated” on all the anti-human globohomo bullshit that we don’t vote for, but get anyway.

Luxon triples down on the Paris Agreement. Nationals “Blue Greens” advisory group is a group of progressive (which is nearly all of National) MP’s within the party that lobby National for woke rubbish policy. On their website National proudly states the “Blue Greens is the most active Advisory group within the party” and is Chaired by Northland MP Grant McCullum - The Northland electorate voted for this guy over Shane Jones FFS 🤦‍♂️ Here’s a clip of Luxon at the Blue Greens conference, here he reaffirms National’s commitment to the climate change hoax and the party’s commitment to Paris and net zero is “NON NEGOTIABLE” even if it’s politically difficult . He even admits he is guided by environmental NGO’s… He refers to “populist infrastructure ideas” code word for Marsden Point/ Oil and Gas as not sustainable nor viable. He claims that NZ leading the way and showing the world how bloody stupid and woke we are by committing economic suicide it will influence other countries to join the death cult 🥴 I particularly like how he ends his speech with claiming it’s the people! they want the action on climate change! they want the ridiculous unworkable and mega expensive globalist con game! It’s the politicians who need to catch up to the people’s demands!” So is he saying the Paris agreement and net zero is populist ? This little clown needs to get on his trike and get outta the tent. Watch his David Brent impersonation at the start. Blue Greens link : national.org.nz/sig-bluegree…