Showing posts with label margaret mutu. Show all posts
Showing posts with label margaret mutu. Show all posts

Sep 12, 2011

Racism and power


Marty at Mars 2 Earth delivers a powerful post:

To be upfront - I don't rate John Tamihere and that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the good he has done for Māori - I just feel the negatives outweigh the positives - Tamihere doesn't speak for me. Which is what he says about Professor Mutu and that is why he entitled his post "Mutu doesn't speak for me". Tamihere calls Professor Mutu a reverse racist and I don't care about that because as I have mentioned, racism = prejudice + power and if you think a Māori woman within academia has power you would be incorrect. So the worst that anyone can say about Professor Mutu is that she is prejudiced and I have no issue with that. Tamihere makes this statement

I also rate the positive work John Tamihere has done for Maori, but I – like Marty – disagree with the thrust of Tamihere’s piece. Having said that, I do not share Marty’s definition of racism. Racism is an unfortunately subjective term. My definition of racism does not include power as a precondition. I can hold prejudice and perpetuate prejudice without holding power. I may need power to further racism in a significant way, but on a day to day level I do not need power to be a racist. If I were to say “all Asians are bad drivers” what does that make me? I think it makes me a racist. Or am I just stating a truism? No, I am furthering a racial stereotype based on my own unfounded prejudices – I think that makes it racism.

So what are you saying john - that everyone is tangata whenua now - if they have lived on their land for 3 generations, because if you are - you are wrong. We are all guests in this country at times - if you visit a new marae you are a guest, if you travel to another area you are a guest - guest isn't a swear word it is a term of honour because of the reciprocity of obligation and responsibility attached to it. This term 'ethnic supremacy' is also inflammatory and incorrect - it is not about supremacy it is about equality and any Māori who frames it incorrectly is treated with suspicion by me.

Marty is right. Pakeha are not tangata whenua, read indigenous. Pakeha are New Zealanders and this is their place, but Pakeha do not share the same interests as Maori. We all share this country and it is as much mine as it is my Pakeha flatmates, but my place in Aotearoa is different. For example, I have unique interests in the whenua given my whakapapa i.e. As a Maori I have an obligation to exercise kaitiakitanga over the lands of my tipuna (the same tipuna who settled this land before anyone else).

Like I said last week, I have no appetite for debating Professor Mutu’s call. The racists on both sides ensure reason is forgotten and poison introduced. New Zealand needs to mature before we can deal with this subject adequately.  

Sep 5, 2011

MWWL, David Rankin and Billboards

I’ve missed a bit of news over the past few days so I’ll briefly comment on a few issues in this post:

----------

Hannah Tamaki has failed in her bid for the presidency of the Maori Women’s Welfare League. From Radio New Zealand

The new national president of the Maori Women's Welfare League (Kataraina O’Brien) says the co-founder of Destiny Church, Hannah Tamaki, who was also vying for the role, did not go about things in the right way.

This, I think, is true. Hannah Tamaki took an unorthodox approach to her campaign. Previous campaigns for the presidency have been, for want of a better term, discrete. However, Tamaki took a glamorous approach to her campaign producing professional campaign material and travelling the country attending league functions and so on. In my opinion this gave her an unfair advantage over the less well-known and less wealthy candidates. Hannah Tamaki also appeared in the media, on numerous occasions, and passed comment on her bid and the League’s attempts to stymie her. The precedent is for members to keep contentious issues within the league and refrain from commenting to the media. Tamaki, quite clearly, departed from this precedent.

I think this is the best outcome for the League. Hannah Tamaki’s bid has reenergised the otherwise declining movement. It would not have been in anyone’s interest for Tamaki to win – I know if she had of won over the weekend a vote of no confidence would have been moved immediately. This would have divided the league even further.

----------

David Rankin has opened his mouth again, this time labelling Margaret Mutu a racist after Mutu called for a restriction on white immigration. From Stuff.co.nz:

Mutu's controversial comments came in response to a Department of Labour report which found Maori are more likely to express anti-immigration sentiment than Pakeha or any other ethnic group. 

The head of the university's department of Maori studies, Mutu agreed with the findings and called on the Government to restrict the number of white migrants arriving from countries such as South Africa, England and the United States as they brought attitudes destructive to Maori. 

Firstly, I agree that some white immigrants bring racist attitudes, however restricting “white immigration” is probably, and I do not want to devolve into semantics, racist. Certainly Joris De Bres, the Race Relations Commissioner, seems to agree. In a free society people are entitled to their own views - even if those views are repugnant. There is no infallible mechanism to prevent racist migrants from coming to Aotearoa and I suspect Professor Mutu knows this. In my opinion, this is not a debate worth having. The racists from both sides, Maori and Pakeha, will ensure any debate turns toxic while the clowns like David Rankin will add legitimacy to anti-Maori sentiment.

----------

I covered a fair chunk of the country over the past week and made a few election-related observations. Firstly, Labour MP Sue Moroney’s billboards dominate Hamilton West. I didn’t see anything from the incumbent Tim Macindoe. Sue probably stands little chance of winning the seat given the way the party vote went in the previous election and Labour’s current performance in the polls. Hamilton West, and Hamilton East too, are considered bellwether seats. Nearly every party since 1972 that has won both seats has gone on to form the government. In my opinion Hamilton is a very rural city. Hamilton services the Waikato hinterland (i.e. the farms which make up most of the Waikato) and this pro-National hinterland probably influences the political leanings of Hamilton residents. Having said that, Hamilton West, in contrast to Hamilton East, is quite working class and the seat has been held by Labour on more than a few occasions. So maybe I am too slow to write off Sue.

I was also in the Hawkes Bay and couldn’t drive more than a kilometre without coming across a National Party billboard. Either National is recycling the “building brighter futures” line or some enthusiastic supporters are erecting signs from the last election. The Maori Party candidate, Na Rongowhakata Raihania, also had a few billboards which were, to be honest, visual chaos. Too many colours, the contrast was too sharp and his name is too long. Good to see he has got a head start over the competition though. Labour’s signs were also prominent in the Manawatu, especially in the small towns surrounding Palmerston North. Palmerston North is the only rural seat Labour holds and you would expect them to put in a big effort to retain it.    



Dec 15, 2010

Constitutional Review


It is awfully worrying that the likes of Moana Jackson and Margaret Mutu have rejected the Maori Party/National run constitutional review. These people should have been central to the debate not forced to run their own process due to dissatisfaction with the current process. In my opinion a royal commission should be handling this issue and Moana should have been included as a member. Instead we have a part time group of politicians who know nothing about constitutional law. But perhaps I am too cynical - good things may come.

In any case I hope the group explore a variation of the Westminster system, but not necessarily a departure, that better reflects Te Ao Maori.  Any changes must reflect our democratic values, provide for government stability, protect the rights and freedoms of citizens and incorporate Maori values. With that been said I actually think our constitutional arrangements work well - all I would like to see is small changes to our constitutional conventions and relevant statutes that better reflect New Zealand in the 21st century and the interests of tangata whenua.

Constitutional changes are often driven by or result in the establishment or of a new political order. But will that political order be Maori?