Ya, hence why i say check the mass loss of species after human arrivals. Our bringing rats and other things are just part of our destruction of natural habitats. One of my favourite animals on earth, a NZ endemic, the tuatara is now just isolated on protected i slands precisely due to this issue.
All people being the same isnt just hat we are all brutal and cruel, we are also excessively careless 
Unfortunately it is still used quite commonly. And it is still very rude and disliked…
Haven’t heard it for years- OTOH most people who know me know my wife is aborigine, so may be careful about using it.
However, the Maori people didn’t deliberately bring rats to Aotearoa. The rats that they accidentally brought to New Zealand also didn’t make as much of an impact as other invasive species intentionally introduced by the Pakeha such as stoats, Euroasian rats, ferrets, weasels, and even hares, deers, and goats which prevent reforestation and rehabilitation of important habitats.
The whites didn’t intentionally bring rats to New Zealand either.
Seems to be a long list of animals made extinct by the Maori
Pakeha propaganda?
And they did all of this with the scientific knowledge of the 21st century, shame on them.
And no one else in this world contributes to the extinction of animals at this moment.
The Maori hasn’t been there for much of the Holocene, some of those animals are going extinct with or without people being there. Most extinct birds on that list are moas, and Maori certainly slaughtered those to extinction to their own detriment.
So you agree then? Its a devastation.
That would explian why probably. However han groups are still using it quite commonly. The fact you dont hear it proves people know its rude and censor themselves around you guys (which is good) but also kind of shows people know they are being rude not just being ignorant, which is a worse problem. It also goes to show the people in Taitung tend to be healthy little more respectfull to other cultures, generally speaking. We have noticed that quite a lot. However, on jobs, i still hear han people calling their aboriginal coworkers mountian people right in fron of them. Its very strange.
I’m not saying they did it in purpose or knew what they were doing- most extinctions before probably the middle of the 20th C. weren’t.
Like Australia, the Americas, or the rest of the Pacific Islands, they didn’t envisioning wiping out the existing wildlife- there were plenty of them, until there weren’t.
I know, just trying to be funny.
But I wonder why the Maori being responsible for the extinction of animals is being mentioned at all here.
This probably isn’t the thread for it, but there is a similar attitude I’ve seen in northern Canada, Alaska and the northern plains states in the US, northern and outback Australia, and Taitung and mountain areas here. There’s a sort of familiarity breeds contempt attitude among older people, morphing in younger people into resentment against modern city-dwellers whether in Vancouver, Ottawa, San Francisco,Washington, Sydney, Canberra, Taipei, Taichung- who are seen as giving special treatment to indigenous over members of the majority who live there. “They don’t know them like we who live with them.” Big city liberals are seen as not seeing the problem.
People resent affirmative action for the natives- I’ve certainly seen that against special preferences given my own children in the college entrance exams, for example.
On several occasions people have switched to Taiwanese in front of me so they could complain about aborigines freely.
It’s probably more common among workers to use the term ‘shan di ren’ because ‘yuanzhumin’ has filtered down from above, and the people first objecting to it were the more educated among the aborigines- the way ‘natives’ or ‘first nations’ spread in the States and Canada.
Or the way Aotearoa is used in New Zealand. and by whom? (To get back on thread 
)
Because of the thread title, about a nation or geographic region. The genocide of various environmental aspects is arguably the most important thing to be talking about in regards to any country. Maori arent the only ones guilty, but they dont get a free pass either.
Very much agree. Hence the intentional use of words used to degrade a group passively aggressive. It happens everywhere, on all sides. Thye arent innocent either, though they have far more reason to be upset vs the han. Same as the first nations in canada against the various foreign colonizers. And indeed amongst “each other”. Surely it is absurd to lump a nations first nations (meaning firs humans to occupy te territory) together when thye have been mixing and murdering for centuries, if not millenia, when we are using borders that are described merely in a couple hundred years of human cultural history. They rape and pillage each other as much as colonizers do, hence my point all people are mor or less the same. I feel we really ought to move away from this insistence on pointing.out race to describe ourselves, our points or how we should cooperate. It only proves how retarded we are species wide. Like watchung national geographic and different tribes, groups etc having the equivelant of gang wars. Its really just very primitive, although we have pretty fancy tools now. How amazing would it be to have evolved socially a muh as we have technologically
I am get this feeling that you don’t know what Pakeha means…
A group of people, no? Though its funny the name All Blacks, it still always makes me grin…especially when people mention things as you did. Language is never boring!
Perhaps you arent getting my point that all groups of people, well nearly all, live lives of sellfish habits and have all had their hand blodied in new zealands environmental degradation. Be it hunting out wild species, introducing exotic species, logging, farming, genocide/war and etc. Dependig on ones timeline definition of native species perhaps, humans are considred an exotic and invasive species in new zealand by any metric. So it seems funny to say ABC group killed that bird, DEF introduced this rat, GHI cut all the forests, JKL started massive agriculture, MNO wiped out that group and so on. I see no saints, i guess is my point haha. At least on a community basis.
It means anyone not Maori.
Most Polynesian settlers left environmental impacts on the islands they migrated to. The extinction of Moa in Aotearoa and the deforestation of Rapa Nui are definitely the most well known because the environmental impact brought great cultural and societal changes for the inhabitants.
For the Maori, it meant that they were no longer able to live too far inland or too far South on Te Waka a Māui, since they have to rely on the sea to provide them with most of the protein. Not having the right crops to grow in the cold weather was the main reason they had to lean in to the Moa. Taro, the Austronesian staple can only grow in limited places on Te Ika a Māui, and even Kumara from South America only grows after a lot of effort.
However, those do not compare to the avian extinctions after the 1600s when Europeans colonized these places.
Granted. And the mass exterminations in the Americas and Australia don’t compare to the exterminations caused by the Europeans (though the first extinctions were more spectacular as they involved the megafauna). You can do a better job with massive numbers and industrial technology than you can do with stone implements.
The problem is many of these megafauna were already on their way out due to the drastic climate change. So it’s hardly to solely pin their extinction to humans killing them on a massive scale, although evidence of such mass killing certainly exists.
As for the Maori, the word moa actually describes fowls and chicken in Polynesia. That word originally came from *manuk, the word for generic bird in PAN. It became a word that also refers to chickens as soon as we get to the Philippines.
So I guess early Maori settler saw a giant moa and decided it looked enough like chickens. I also wonder if the early settlers brought chickens and pigs with them. I mean they definitely knew what a chicken is supposed to look like. If they did bring those, and simply stopped raising these domesticated animals because it was extremely easy to kill a moa for much more meat, then I guess it was their own fault. Although, I suspect by the time they reached Aotearoa, the chicken and pigs DNA gene pool was probably too small to keep them thriving.
Don’t forget the moa feathers. They were extremely important for cloak making for the chiefs.