(First published in the Manawatu Standard, the Nelson Mail and Stuff.co.nz on February 6.)
■ The British were relatively humane, enlightened colonisers,
certainly by comparison with other colonial powers such as Belgium, Spain,
Portugal and France. New Zealand was colonised not by force of arms but by
agreement with the established inhabitants. In that respect we are rare, if not
unique.
■ As far as we can tell, the Treaty of Waitangi was signed
with honourable intentions and genuine respect for Maori. It was only later
that settler greed for land and general Pakeha villainy caused things to turn
dirty. But it should be acknowledged that some Maori tribes were dispossessed
of their lands by their own chiefs.
■ Colonisation had a devastating effect on Maori health and
society and is increasingly blamed for problems which dog Maori today, such as
educational under-achievement, unemployment and high imprisonment rates. But colonisation
brought benefits too. Pre-European Maori life was hardly idyllic. Tribal
warfare was a constant threat and slavery, violent death and cannibalism were
endemic.
■ The Treaty can be seen in hindsight as a hopelessly insubstantial document on which to base the governance of a complex 21st century
country. Hastily written and even more hastily translated, the Treaty has
strained to breaking point under the enormous weight placed on it. It doesn’t
help that there were two versions, leaving the courts to come up with sometimes
fanciful imaginings of what the signatories intended.
■ Unlike Australia, whose first white settlers were
convicts, New Zealand was settled by people who came here of their own free
will, looking for something better. This was probably just as true of the
original Polynesian arrivals as it was of the Europeans who followed. My own
family stories are typical: my father’s forebears left Denmark to get away from
Prussian invaders and my mother’s left Ireland to escape poverty and
repression. My wife’s parents were victims of Nazism who were rendered
stateless by World War II and remained so until New Zealand accepted them in
1965.
■ As the debate over immigration threatens to become more
rancorous, we need to remind ourselves that we were all - Maori included - once immigrants who
were able to take advantage of what this country offered. Most New Zealanders
probably welcome the more vibrant society that has resulted from increased
immigration and cultural diversity, but it has the potential to become
problematical if not handled carefully. The real issue is how to manage
immigration without destabilising society and facilitating divisive demands for
special treatment of select ethnic and religious groups.
■ We still don’t know nearly enough about our incredibly
rich and colourful history. In fact we have two rich histories, one of which –
pre-European Maori history – is overlooked altogether because Maori had no
written language with which to record it. It survives only in oral
story-telling.
■ Taika Waititi was justified last year in ticking Pakeha
New Zealanders off for not bothering to pronounce Maori names properly. But does that make us a racist country, as he suggested? I don’t think so. The
“racist” tag is greatly overplayed and too often used to close down legitimate
discussion. There is racism in New Zealand, undoubtedly, but you can’t condemn
a country as racist just because people persist with the pronunciations they’ve
grown up with. “Racism” to me implies a belief that some races are
intrinsically superior to others and that discriminatory treatment is therefore
justified. I can’t see how lazy pronunciation, which is usually the product of
a lifelong habit rather than any desire to demean or belittle Maori, crosses
those thresholds.
■ New Zealand is a pragmatic, practical country that prefers
to do what works rather than allow itself to be captured by ideology. Extremist
causes almost never gain mainstream political traction. We thus tend to be
spared the ugly and intolerant extremes of Left and Right that characterise
politics in some other countries.
■ We’re also a small, intimate society with two degrees of
separation, which means we can’t help bumping into each other in the street,
the supermarket and airport lounges. It’s harder to hate people when you have
to deal with them face-to-face as human beings. How many countries could put
together a parliamentary rugby team with players from opposing parties, such as
the one that’s playing against former rugby greats in a curtain-raiser to a pre-season
Blues-Hurricanes match this weekend?
■ And finally, we have much to celebrate. We live in one of
the world’s most civilised liberal democracies. Global surveys consistently
rank us among the top 10 countries in the world on measurements such as
freedom, human rights, quality of life, education, health and tolerance of
difference. We’re not perfect, but we’re doing lots of things right. Happy
Waitangi Day.
3 comments:
Karl - you might care to check the syntax of Para 8, in which you state "But that does make us a racist country ....?" I'm 99% sure that is NOT what you meant.
Thanks for pointing that out, Hugh. Sloppy proof-reading on my part. It has been corrected.
A good & clear piece Karl. Re. your 2nd-to-last point about the country being a village, and off-point I know...I wonder if the 'unruly tourists'struck this aspect of our intimate little nation, insofar as they may not have expected such high visibilty in cutting their swathe through the place, combined with the 'silly season' news dearth producing a 'Spotlights R Us' phenom in the media.
All the new residents selling their wares at a WD event highlighted on the news last night were pretty clear this was a 'national day', underpinned by a document with Maori establishing equality of opportunity, my words. Well good show. As usual, it's the vibe that counts.
Post a Comment