OK, before I start, I would like to point out that the questions below are not in any way meant to be discriminating to anybody of any race. I am all for equality of rights among everybody and every citizen of every country.
Here goes, what does the international (i.e. outside NZ) community think about these questions...

1a. Would you think it's fair to have a political party based solely for the interests of one ethnic race?

1b. Would you say that is unfair, racist etc, if so, why?

1c. Do you think a political party should get free "seats" in parliament allocated to them based on their ethnic race?

2. Do you think it is fair that one ethnic race should be able have a earlier retirement age than another ethnic race, based solely on life expectancy?

3. Should students of a particular ethnic race be allowed priority over another ethnic race in universities, high schools, colleges, just because they statistically perform worse educationally?

4. Based on the ethnic race of someone, should they be allowed to hold shorter jail sentences, because the ethnic race as a whole has statistically higher crime rates?

5. Should a particular ethnic race be able to claim land solely as theirs because "they were here first"?

6a. Do you think it should take 6 months and $140 million of taxpayers dollars to decide what flag should be flown on top of a bridge?

6b. What is your opinion on the above question?

7. What would your views be on all of the above questions if they were national law?

For Americans (based on my vague knowledge of American rights):

8a. Does any of the above questions break any of the American Constitution or Amendments?

8b. If so, why and how?

To re-iterate, I am not trying to be hateful or racist or anything like that. I'd just like to gauge an outsiders view on the topic.

Answer however you want. Yes or No, Paragraph or Page.

Regards All.

---

- Luke.

A lot to go on here, but I'll touch on each briefly.

1a. Fair? No. Legal? It should be. In a democratic system, it will be the public that determines the success or failure of such an organization.

b. I say it's unfair because it uses race as a factor. Again however, if it's what the public wants, then the public should have it.

c. No seats should be free. Any member of government should meet the same requirements for their position as any other.

2. A lower life expectancy among races is usually due to racial prejudices within a system. Economic and other systems play a bigger role in life expectancy than ethnicity does. A good example of this is Russia; males live an average of 59 years; a 15 year decline since the fall of the Soviet Union. By contrast, neighboring countries with very similar ethnic backgrounds are on average 10 years higher. Here we can clearly see that conditions within a system play the biggest role in life expectancy.
Some races live longer because they have better opportunities and pay within a system. Earlier retirement based on life expectancy addresses a symptom, not the cause of the problem itself.

3. No.

4. Higher crime rates are only statistically accurate when based on conviction rates. If racial oppression is at play, minorities will have higher crime rates because they are convicted more often. Again, lowering sentences addresses a symptom of a problem within a society, not the problem itself.

5. Solely on that? No.

6a. No.

6b. My opinion is that there isn't enough information about it to make an accurate reflection.

7. I'd have a problem with some, not with others.

8a. Yes.

8b. Too many to list. But there are specific rules in the constitution as to how government is organized. But as an example; giving free seats to people and circumventing the election process is contrary to the guidelines of the US Constitution.

OK, before I start, I would like to point out that the questions below are not in any way meant to be discriminating to anybody of any race. I am all for equality of rights among everybody and every citizen of every country.
Here goes, what does the international (i.e. outside NZ) community think about these questions...

1a. Would you think it's fair to have a political party based solely for the interests of one ethnic race?

Right of free association.

1b. Would you say that is unfair, racist etc, if so, why?

Right of free association.

1c. Do you think a political party should get free "seats" in parliament allocated to them based on their ethnic race?

I don't think enforcing caste systems or class systems is a good idea.

2. Do you think it is fair that one ethnic race should be able have a earlier retirement age than another ethnic race, based solely on life expectancy?

If you do then you are saying that there is a biologic difference between the races and are in a sense validating William Shockley's ideas

3. Should students of a particular ethnic race be allowed priority over another ethnic race in universities, high schools, colleges, just because they statistically perform worse educationally?

All men are created equal. Universities prepare graduates to function in society as it exists and so called measurement bias of statistical tests to the society as it exists is not a bias when the graduate must function in that society as it exists.

The question being if you take people who are functional in quark society and educate them, but they must earn a living in mork society, are you doing them a favor? Or should you teach the quarks how to be morks?

4. Based on the ethnic race of someone, should they be allowed to hold shorter jail sentences, because the ethnic race as a whole has statistically higher crime rates?

All men are created equal.

5. Should a particular ethnic race be able to claim land solely as theirs because "they were here first"?

Israel vs. Palestine. Native American vs. European invaders. Every European Colony.

6a. Do you think it should take 6 months and $140 million of taxpayers dollars to decide what flag should be flown on top of a bridge?

NO!, but it will because that is politics.

6b. What is your opinion on the above question?

A smart man would have ripped out the flag pole.

7. What would your views be on all of the above questions if they were national law?

Emigrate (before the civil war.)

For Americans (based on my vague knowledge of American rights):

8a. Does any of the above questions break any of the American Constitution or Amendments?

Yes.

8b. If so, why and how?

Fourteenth Amendment:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

To re-iterate, I am not trying to be hateful or racist or anything like that. I'd just like to gauge an outsiders view on the topic.

Answer however you want. Yes or No, Paragraph or Page.

Regards All.

American's aren't permitted to comment on how other countries run their governments. If we do then we are meddling and imposing our will on them by force. So anything said here is not advice. That country is free to be as racist as the Confederacy. After all it is that country's choice to make and not ours.

Nothing said here applies to any individual or actual country, just in case there was any doubt.

---

the probem with question 3 is that in American History minorities typically were kept out of Universities by grades(judgments by teachers potentially uneven grading due to race) and money(institutionalized poverty) both of which were pervasively created by white men to intentionally stack the deck.

That being said Affirmative action did lower expectations for minorities just so that they could get into college(see above about grades)
Now AA has been in action for some time. I don't think AA should be eliminated completely but there is room to start relaxing the rules just a bit.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Nothing said here applies to any individual or actual country, just in case there was any doubt.

Oh, in actual fact it does. These are just some of the policies the Maori Party of New Zealand wants to implement. Shorter jail sentences, priority to Maori for graduate spots over others in some areas of academia.

The land issue can be looked at by googling "Foreshore & Seabed Act New Zealand".

Regards,
Luke.

---

- Luke.