Dr Muriel Newman Political opportunity knocks
New Zealanders were shocked and horrified by the tragic events in Christchurch, where 50 innocent men, women and children were mown down by a deranged Australian gunman as they prayed. The outpouring of national grief and support for the families and the people of Christchurch has been remarkable — a tribute to the kindness and generosity of Kiwis.
What is disturbing, however, is how the matter is now being politicised. The emotions of those in shock and grieving are being exploited by political opportunists and radicals.
Freelance journalist Karl du Fresne explains that in the days following the shooting, as Kiwis were responding with an outpouring of grief and compassion, an alternative narrative started to emerge:
“According to this alternative narrative, we are a hateful nation of racists, white supremacists and Islamophobes. Not only that, but the massacre was no surprise. A sudden outburst of violent race hatred was bound to happen. Rather like the cataclysmic earthquake we are constantly warned to be prepared for, it was not a question of if, but when. It was, we were told, the inevitable outcome of a society which condones hate speech.”
It is now accepted that the atrocity arose from the actions of a single person acting alone, who, it appears, had little regard for white supremacists. Despite this, radical Ma¯ori sovereignty activists are now using the tragedy to claim that anyone who doesn’t support their agenda, which is no less than the cogovernance of New Zealand, is not only a racist but a white supremacist as well.
It was reported that people walked out of a vigil in Auckland for those killed in the attack, because the speeches were all about racism, colonialism and white supremacy, instead of being about the victims.
A spokesman for the event, which was jointly-organised by Migrants Against Racism and Xenophobia (MARX), Racial Equity Aotearoa, Shakti NZ, Asians Supporting Tino Rangatiratanga and Auckland Peace Action, defended the speakers.
“This was perhaps not the Pa¯keha¯style vigil some people expected. We chose to centre the voices of people who have been most affected by white supremacist terrorism. Perhaps for the Pa¯keha¯ who left ‘in protest,’ this beautiful show of solidarity between tangata whenua, Muslims and migrants of colour is what threatened you the most.”
While the killer is widely described as a white supremacist, he has identified himself as an ‘eco-fascist’. An ardent admirer of Communist China, he has been heavily influenced by the scaremongering of extremist environmentalists who claim that humans are destroying the planet through overpopulation and climate change. This led to his obsession with population control and the impact that the mass migration of people with high birth rates is having on the culture of the countries they are settling in.
But while Green extremism was a factor fuelling the delusion that led to this terrible tragedy, the killer wanted his attack to result in a knee-jerk crackdown on law-abiding gun owners. He believed that if the New Zealand government forced through a hasty and unjust change to gun laws, they would trigger a chain reaction that would reverberate around the world.
By swiftly announcing a New Zealand ban on military-style weapons with immediate effect, Jacinda Ardern’s government is doing exactly what the killer wanted. If law changes are forced through under Parliamentary urgency, before the real problems have been identified — for instance, whether the gunman took advantage of laws that are inadequate, or whether he broke laws that are poorly enforced — then the Prime Minister will be doing the country a grave disservice by changing the law based on speculation.
That’s why the proposed changes to our gun laws should be postponed until the Royal Commission of Inquiry has identified the exact nature of any problems that exist with present legislation, so that a proper remedy can be designed and introduced.
But aside from reinforcing the gravity of the tragedy and giving the public comfort that this will never happen again, is there is an ulterior motive for the Prime Minister’s hasty action against gun owners? Perhaps she wants to shield herself from blame if it becomes more widely known that she was responsible for relaxing New Zealand’s gun laws in December.
With virtually no publicity, the Prime Minister presided over an executive committee that introduced significant changes to the gun laws late last year. Using an Order in Council to avoid Parliamentary scrutiny, she introduced the Arms (Electronic Transactions) Amendment Regulations 2018, which came into effect on January 20, 2019, to enable anyone applying to become a gun dealer, get a firearms licence, obtain an endorsement for a restricted firearm, secure a permit to buy a military-style semi-automatic firearm or import a restricted weapon to do so online through the internet.
As far as military-style semiautomatic firearms are concerned, the previous system was rigorous. Under the Prime Minister’s law changes, not only can applications for restricted weapons be carried out in relative anonymity through the internet — including the vetting of military-style firearms by video — but an endorsement to own a military-style semi-automatic firearm, pistol, or any other restricted weapon, can also be applied for online.
While the government is unlikely to admit it, saving money could have been an underlying motivation for the law change. According to a Police consultation document in January, 76 districtbased arms licensing officers and 280 firearms licensing vettors were to be disestablished and replaced with a centralised bureaucracy based at Ka¯piti.
If, as reported, the killer used the internet to buy guns, Jacinda Ardern’s law changes may well have contributed to the tragedy.
"Despite this, radical Ma¯ ori sovereignty activists are now using the tragedy to claim that anyone who doesn’t support their agenda, which is no less than the co-governance of New Zealand, is not only a racist but a white supremacist as well."