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.  

Here today, gone tomorrow

Clouds are gathering as the Maori Party continues to bleed support. The latest Horizon Poll puts Te Mana marginally ahead of the Maori Party and now Marty Mars has announced he will be joining the Mana Party:

I have sent my membership into the Mana Party, and like John Minto I have never joined a political party before, but the time for sitting on the fence is over - now is the time to seize the opportunity and create history. 

Marty was one of the only Maori Party supporters in the blogosphere. By my reckoning there are no pro-Maori Party bloggers left. On the other hand Te Mana enjoys the support of my blog, or more accurately my sympathy – I do not support any particular political party at the moment, Mars 2 Earth, some authors at The Standard and Tumeke. The same is true in the mainstream media. Rawiri Taonui, who is perhaps the most prominent Maori political commentator, expressed roundabout support for Te Mana. Willie Jackson, who regularly offers commentary on Maori politics, has also expressed support for Te Mana.

What should be of most concern to the Maori Party is that they have lost their activists as well as their academics. Essentially, there is no structural depth to the Maori Party. Some of the party’s most experienced and talented activists have switched allegiances. Think Annette Sykes, Potaua from TW.com, Tim Selwyn and so on. Maintaining a core of experienced activists would have guaranteed the party’s short term survival at least. But now they must rely on the National Party and a small faction of loyalists to, among other things, run campaigns, draft advice and organise party events. Ultimately the Maori Party does not have the numbers on the ground. The party’s academics have also dropped away, for example Moana Jackson and Margaret Mutu. The Maori Party must now rely on their parliamentary staff to perform extra-parliamentary work, such as policy formulation. Lastly, Electorate branches in Te Tai Tokerau and Waiariki are in tatters. The party never created a youth branch, they have no presence on university campuses (where a wealth of talent can be tapped) and membership is declining as former supporters chose not to renew their membership. The prognosis is grim.

I mentioned at the beginning of this post that the latest Horizon poll puts the Mana Party slightly ahead of the Maori Party. Whether this becomes part of a trend remains to be seen. Now Bryce Edwards makes the point that the Mana Party can be at 2.3% and not affect the Maori Party at all. This is an excellent point and demonstrates that the Mana Party is pitching to a supplementary base. Yes, Te Mana is aiming for the tino rangatiratanga vote alongside the Maori Party, but Te Mana is also aiming for the far left vote and the non-vote (meaning the vote of people who usually do not vote). The Mana Party does not have to savage the Maori Party vote in order to reach the 3.5% target.

To conclude, things are looking down for the Maori Party. With the budget coming this Thursday things probably won’t be looking any better. The Maori Party copped a fair amount of criticism for their support of budget 2010, mainly due to the unfair tax switch, and it is difficult to see why things would be much different under what will without doubt be an austere budget 2011.

Maori Party Propaganda

Marty Mars has reproduced an interesting panui he received from The Maori Party. Taken at face value the piece appears to be standard political material, nothing controversial or new, just restating what is already in the public domain. However, a few points caught my attention, specifically;

(The Bill) Allows iwi to claim customary title. Customary title is a property right that includes customary interests plus all minerals except gold, silver, uranium and petroleum; all newly found taonga tuturu, development rights, and a right to develop a plan which regional councils must recognise and provide for.

The MCA bill does allow iwi to claim customary title; however s33 of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 (FSA 2004) allows iwi to claim territorial customary rights (TCR). s32(1) defines TCR as “customary title or an aboriginal title that could be recognised at common law”. So what is the difference between the FSA 2004 and the MCA bill? As far as I know, not much. TCR and customary title, or customary marine title (CMT), are basically the same thing under the common law. The key difference I suppose is the MCA bill clearly defines the rights associated with CMT under s64(1) while the FSA does not define any rights associated with TCR rather under s37(1) a successful applicant group must enter into negotiations with the Attorney-General and Minister of Maori Affairs “for the purpose of negotiating an agreement as to the nature and extent” of TCR. So under the FSA 2004 customary rights are conferred via order-in-council, after negotiation with the relevant ministers, whereas under the MCA bill rights are conferred via legislation once the relevant criteria are met. In sum, not much difference, but I personally think the MCA bill approach is superior. 

The peice also claims;

Restores the right of access to court. If negotiations with Ministers do not reach agreement, tangata whenua can take their title claims to court.

First of all – right of access to the courts was not extinguished. s33 of the FSA 2004 reads; 

High Court may find that a group held territorial customary rights

The High Court may, on the application of a group, or on the application of a person authorised by the court to represent the group, make a finding that the group (or any members of that group) would, but for the vesting of the full legal and beneficial ownership of the public foreshore and seabed in the Crown by section 13(1), have held territorial customary rights to a particular area of the public foreshore and seabed at common law.

Forgive me if I have misinterpreted this, and I do not think I have, does this section not grant The High Court power to determine whether iwi posses customary title? Why then is The Maori Party claiming to have restored access to the Courts? Bizarre.

I also want to address this point;

The Crown has to prove customary rights were extinguished, not iwi.

While s105(1) of the MCA bill reads;

Burden of proof

The applicant group must prove that it is entitled to the customary interest that is the subject of the application.

This section clearly sets out that it is the responsibility of iwi to prove customary rights were not extinguished. It does not fall upon the Crown to prove otherwise. Why has The Maori Party made such a wild claim when the bill clearly states that the opposite is true. Is The Maori Party deliberately misleading Maori? Have I missed something? I am leaning towards the former.

I also took issue with this statement; 

The Bill does not settle the issues, but it keeps them alive.

I disagree - the bill definitely settles the issue. No party will revisit such a toxic electoral issue unless they are moved by the majority to repeal it. Debate around Maori property rights always breeds controversy and discord. No government will reopen a can of worms as unpredictable as the foreshore and seabed. Labour will not go anywhere near the issue because National will savage them. While a second or third term National government will lack the political capital required to revisit the issue without alienating their support base.

I have run out of time so I will quickly conclude. It appears The Maori Party are engaging in some good old fashioned political propaganda. Well done to them for recognising the power of the blogsphere and reaching out to Marty Mars. However; if the party is going to put stuff out in the public domain it should make a greater effort to ensure the material is accurate. I hesitate to say the party is making a deliberate effort to mislead people, maybe I missed something,. Either way, The Maori Party should tread carefully.   

Maori Bloggers (part two)

A few days ago I asked readers whether or not they knew of any Maori bloggers/blogs. I had hoped that more names would have come up but I guess the Maori blogsphere is quite desolate. The following is a list Maori blogs and bloggers that I know of;

mars 2 earth (author: Marty Mars)

mars 2 earth is probably the most popular Maori blog - and with good reason. Marty Mars focuses on kaitiakitanga and offers a view of politics from a Maori/Ngai Tahu perspective (he also posts regularly unlike most other Maori bloggers).

Whenua Fenua Enua Vanua (Ana)

Whenua Fenua Enua Vanua is another leading Maori blog. Ana posts on a range of issues affecting Maori and other indigenous people and along with marty is one of the only Maori bloggers to post on a regular basis.

Ahi-kā-roa (Carwyn Jones)

Ahi-kā-roa focuses on legal issues affecting Maori and other indigenous people. The blog is written by Carwyn Jones, a Victoria University law lecturer. Posts are in depth yet infrequent.

KJT. Random musings on all sorts of things (KjT)

KjT comments almost exclusively on economic issues. According to his bio he is concerned about neo-liberal meanness. It is excellent having a Maori blogger who can comment competently on economic issues.

Te Waainga Wahine (various)

Te Waainga Wahine is a collective of Maori women - a strong voice for Wahine Maori. The blog usually reproduces press releases and links to material from prominent Maori women such as Annette Sykes and Ani Mikaere.

He Hōaka (Kim Mcbreen)

He Hōaka is an undiscovered gem. Like Ahi-kā-roa posting is infrequent but comprehensive and thoughtful.

Roarprawn (Bustedblonde)

Roarprawn is a popular right wing blog. The blog’s author is Ngai Tahu. Although I find her conclusions pretty peculiar it is an interesting blog and an enjoyable read. NB: I do not class Roarprawn as a Maori blog – the author just happens to be Maori.

Tim Selwyn (Tumeke)

Tim Selwyn is a popular Maori blogger. Tim has a very good understanding of Maori politics, as well as national politics, but does not post frequently on Maori political issues.

Rawiri Taonui also writes online columns here and here.

All in all a fairly short but eminent list of blogs and bloggers. There is a good mix of male and female and young and old. I guess the only problem is that the list is overwhelmingly left wing (it could be argued that this merely reflects the Maori population though). If I have missed anyone out please leave a comment.