 |
| Hone Harawira |
I’m not writing to announce that I know The Meaning of the Māori electorates. There can be no such thing as The Meaning, rather there are many meanings. It’s true that the Māori electorates represent the “last vestige of a lost autonomy”. The electorates exist to protect mana motuhake. Yet it’s equally true that the electorates represent a counterrevolutionary force. It might be said that they exist to contain mana motuhake. On the one hand, the Māori electorates mean that we have a small role in the distribution of public power and that protects our autonomy, but on the other hand it means that we must submit ourselves to Pākehā norms and institutions and that’s a limit on our autonomy.
But what do the electorates mean to Hone Harawira and his Mana Party? There’s a saying that goes “he kai kei aku ringa” - there is food at the end of my hands. This isn’t a statement, but an instruction to seize an opportunity. For Hone Harawira and the Mana Party, the Māori electorates represent an opportunity. On their view it doesn’t matter whether the electorates are benevolent or malevolent. They are a means to an end. That end is “getting rid of National”.
Thus it’s odd to see a handful of Labour MPs deriding the Internet Mana Party as a “dirty deal”. That argument didn't apply to Labour's concession to Jim Anderton in Wigram. It’s even weirder to see some commentators arguing that the deal corrupts the Māori electorates. They seem to have substituted analysis for catharsis. It’s easy to fall back on partisan hackery or didactic moralising, but neither does anything to capture the complexity of the situation.
 |
| Kim Dotcom |
Governments change, but poverty is a constant in the Māori electorates. Hone represents the people in his electorate – the permanent poor - but he’s also charged with another duty: to improve their lives. If the opportunity exists, why would anyone expect him to conform to other people’s standards and reject an electoral alliance? Why would Hone remain content with actual poverty and a poverty of electoral opportunity? As Tim Selwyn notes, coat tailing is an imperfect rule, but MMP is about “making as many votes count toward representation as possible”.
Sure, the deal is an act of desperation. But that isn’t a bad thing. You would be desperate too if you were on the wrong end of 174 years of inequality. The Mana Party is taking its desperation and, as a matter of fact, committing an act of deep conformism. The coat tails rule is well exploited. Mana isn’t going against the grain but seeking the safety of convention. Yet the spectacle of an independent Māori party – with socialist leanings and, oddly, moneyed support – seems to invoke the latent paternalism of parts of the left. Right wing resistance is a given, but the cries of dirty deal and sell out from the parts of the left resemble many of the attacks against the Māori Party when they made a pragmatic decision to support the National government. The same desperation was at play in the Māori Party at the time. They could remain on the margins and sit content with actual poverty and a poverty of electoral opportunity or they could have a crack at reversing 174 years of inequality. They used the opportunity their Māori electorates had provided and accepted a deal with National.
They did as many Māori advocates always have - submitted to institutional norms for practical change. Mana could hold true to its radical principles – as Sue Bradford did and all power to her – but that would underestimate the desperation in Māori communities. The Māori Party knew it (although they have been punished for the lack of change) and Mana knows it.
Which brings us back to the meanings of the Māori electorates. Mana – like the Māori Party and even the Young Māori Party before it – wants to become a fact in the distribution of public power. The corollary – as the experience of the Māori Party and even the Young Māori Party before it – is that Mana must cosy up with establishment powers and sacrifice some autonomy. But didn’t someone say politics is the art of compromise? Desperate people sometimes do desperate things. Or, in this case, desperate people can do conventional things too.
I wrote this post about a week ago, but didn't publish it because I've been here and there over where I stand. I'm still not entirely sure where I stand. Sometime next week I'm aiming to post an essay on where Māori politics stands and why. For similar (better) perspectives it’s worth checking out Labour MP Louisa Wall’s post at the Daily Blog - the hypocrisy of attacking Maori seats for being tactical – and Scott Hamilton’s post at Reading the Maps - From Olaf Nelson to Kim Dotcom.
In a funny kind of way this deal fits the logic of the Mana Movement, which has always struggled to define its cause. Maori rights obviously, economic and political, but what of the socialist wing, made up largely of Pakeha? And what exactly is the direction of the policy platform - is it a wishlist for state intervention (i.e. Feed the Kids, free healthcare, free tertiary, etc) or does it build a narrative of a new, fundamentally different society? The vague policy principles of the Internet Party, and their relationship to a Maori/socialist movement, feel like an appropriate contribution to this illogical mix.
ReplyDeleteI agree... to an extent. I think the Māori aspect was always well defined. Mana - in its Māori sense - stands for kaupapa Māori politics.
DeleteKaupapa Māori politics provides a Māori account of power relations – one underpinned by the Treaty partnership; a Māori account of the desired future - one where bicultural pluralism is valued through mana motuhake; and a Māori account of how politics is used to advance The Cause - through integration in Parliamentary structures and non-Māori movements, not assimilation.
Where Mana the socialist party fits in this equation was always less clear. I think it fits in at the final stage. That is, the socialist movement is a means to achieving that vision of the desired future (bicultural pluralism). That's a wordy explanation and doesn't come with the benefit of inside knowledge, but that seems to be the state of play from this outsider's perspective. I'd love to hear a perspective from inside the party.
Ngā mihi
M
"Hone represents the people in his electorates"
ReplyDeleteHow many electorates do you think Hone represents, Morgan? I was under the impression it was just the one.
Ah, bad proofreading on my part. Corrected.
DeleteI thought you were going to say he represents the Maori poor in all electorates.
DeleteAnyway, you compare the criticism that Mana is getting for its deal with the IP to the criticism that the Maori Party is getting for its deal with National. That's ironic, because I think if we look at the predictions made by those critics back in 2008, and look at the Maori Party's achievements over six years of coalition, the critics have basically been proven right.
Well, yeah.... That's the point. The Maori Party "submitted to institutional norms for practical change" and, in a parallel because these things aren't unrelated, Mana will submit to institutional norms for practical gain. They can't be seen as divorced.
DeleteWhether the critics of this deal will be proved right too is moot. Maybe, maybe not. I think Hone and Mana have approached this deal better than the Maori Party approach its deal with National. Mana's deal with the Internet Party will expire 6 weeks after the election unless its renewed. Also, this isn't a deal for confidence and supply with the country's largest party. It's a deal of mutual cooperation between a Parliamentary party and a non-Parliamentary party. There are recent and historical parallels, but there are also important difference.
A very good post. I'm Pakeha but have four children, thirteen grandchildren and a great- grandchild on the way, all of some degree of Maori (and many of Pasifika descent as well) descent. Without being insulting, the key word is of Maori descent. We can talk of Maori culture and its renaissance, but Kiwis of Maori descent walk two paths. They should respect both cultures, and New Zealand as our Mother country. Forget the rightwingers, they are part of a global political and cultural movement. We must regain control of our society and create a nation for all New Zealanders. It may be bilingual but it is now multicultural. The rightwingers are encouraging asian immigration which could eventually swamp Polynesian culture by sheer numbers. So the Mana Movement may encourage New Zealanders of Maori, Pasifika and Pakeha to work together to create the society I spoke of above. So as you seek to strengthen your culture and your place in New Zealand, we must walk together in mutual respect. It will be our grandchildren who will be the heirs of our society, lets hope we make a good job of managing and improving it.
ReplyDeleteWalking together in mutual respect. Sounds wonderful, in reality, respect of the indigenous partner, has been absent since the treaty was signed.
ReplyDeleteWith respect there is no indigenous partner as such, but the 'first partner' But having cleared that up Maori have not been treated fairly and respectfully. Everything in the western societies is all based on monetary value. Remember the old celtic societies like the Irish and Scots had values and a similar family based society as Maori and other polynesian societies..
ReplyDeleteDot con is going to jail where he belongs. But if he doesn't and Mana // Green // NZ First // Labour win election New Zealand will suffer terrible economic collapse. It does not affect me I sold out anwent to a better country where people are equal
ReplyDelete