My impression of the NZ stuff gained from your posts is that the NZ government (and Australian) are equally harsh as the US but are not as controlled by the courts.

While the executive of the NZ govt (the PM, Cabinet and the public service) is subject to the courts, the legislative (Parliament) is supreme - the courts cannot overturn a law that’s been duly passed by Parliament. That being said, the demographics within the NZ democracy and Parliament are far better for Maori, at about 15% of the population and 19 out of 121 members of Parliament, than for indigenous peoples in the United States and Australia. A party established solely to advocate for Maori interests holds something close to a balance of power within Parliament.

In short, it’s complicated. You’re right about sovereignty being far more acceptable in the US than in NZ, but NZ has never had the reservation thing, and the populations interact and intermarry a lot more, especially since the second world war. Most Maori live outside their tribal areas. There’s no blood quantum laws or physical boundaries to distinguish who should be covered by indigenous law and who should be covered by general law.

The Indian Wars started earlier but finished about the same time as the Land Wars in NZ. Colonialism in NZ is no more recent than colonialism in the western states of the US.

Kevin - just to clarify - the reason your posts were off-topic is because this post is not about the history of colonisation in New Zealand, but about the last few months. One or two posts going wider as part of a discussion might have been one thing, but you posted three or four times in a row. If you want to discuss the wider issues you can do it when I write a post on wider issues, but don’t post on this thread.

Maia Writes:
Sailorman - I think you’ve probably got a little bit of an inaccurate view of how racism and colonialism in New Zealand compares with racism and colonialism in America. Although I suspect it’s because you’ve got a little bit of a rosy picture of what happens in America rather than a too negative picture of New Zealand - but I invite you to the longer post I’m going to write.

I await said post with interest. To the degree you’re able to do so (you seem to be better versed with US politics than am I with NZ politics) is there any chance you can draw a parallel between, say, the treatment of native americans and aboriginals?

My impression of the NZ stuff gained from your posts is that the NZ government (and Australian) are equally harsh as the US but are not as controlled by the courts.

In the U.S., for example, the supremes have actually been fairly supportive of the sovereignity issues: for an obvious example see, e.g., the ability of some NA to have casinos even in the face of strong pressure.

Obviously this doesn’t fix any complaints regarding what was DONE. but when i look at what you or others write–that, for example, the recent authorization in Australia, i think it was, to go into the various aboriginal towns in a harsh manner–it seems like there’s a certain lack of political power in NZ that even the NA groups in the US have, put upon though they are. That entry seems to have been specifically excluded from the (may get this wrong) “anti racist statute” or whatever it was; I’m not sure that type of action would pass muster even in the current US climate.

Anyway, this is all speculation. but to the degree you take requests ;) i figured it was worth asking.

Sailorman - I think you’ve probably got a little bit of an inaccurate view of how racism and colonialism in New Zealand compares with racism and colonialism in America. Although I suspect it’s because you’ve got a little bit of a rosy picture of what happens in America rather than a too negative picture of New Zealand - but I invite you to the longer post I’m going to write.

I will just correct an inaccuracy - no-one was taped saying they intended to kill the next Prime Minister of New Zealand. If they did they could have been charged with conspiracy to murder, but even the police commissioner has conceded there was no conspiracy to murder. Some of those arrested have been taped discussing political violence, but from the short extracts that have been leaked it is not clear whether it’s just talking shit, discussing possibilities and strategies or making concrete plans.

Maori, like most New Zealanders are very hard working and contribute a lot to society. I would like their voices to be heard on the issues rather than a very small number of arguably psychologically disturbed people who are the usual cannon fodder for the political elite to use as terrorists like they do all round the world.

So I have encouraged my children to be proud of their heritage, but perhaps you believe that whether some Maori ancestry is more equal that others depends on your agreement with only one set of opinions.

Yes, right. Encouraged. With the points of view you espouse here. “Maori are lazy bastards sucking off the governmental teat! Would you like to learn haka?”

Now take for example my children. Had I brought them up resenting european presence in New Zealand/Aotearoa and that it was no use engaging with modern New Zealand society because it is stacked against you, where would they be? Better or worse off than they are now. It is a cause of disappointment that they do not want to self identify with their Maori heritage because of all the negative publicity. I have encouraged them to e proud of their Maori ancestry.

The Americans on this blog will understand that I brought my kids up saying that I consider it to be self evident that all people are created equal. Apart from that I let them draw their own conclusions, and they have.

Another positive discrimination that occurs in New Zealand is that 8/120 parliamentary seats are reserved for Maori. Approximately half the people who self identify as Maori however choose to vote on the general role, as my wife and children do. In addition there must be people who have Maori ancenstry but choose not to identify as Maori and approximately 1/7 of Maori live in Australia.

Who speaks for them? To consider that there is one united voice for all Maori is antiquated and patronising. All I would like is to let all voices be heard and for positive role models held up and praised as well as negative ones.

Anyway, Maia, I let him through because he’d been sitting in mod for a couple days. If you’d rather he not be here, I apologize.

This is not to say the situation is perfect. Maori are over-represented in the crime and deprivation statistics as are indigenous people around the world. This has been caused by similar process such as rapid post war urbanisation, a feeling of disenfranchisement and hopelessness and the desire for a low paid workforce from some quarters. However, they have been assisted to stay in that situation of over-representation in the so called “underclass” by the less than magnanimous post war version of the welfare state (and, no doubt some of this will be familiar to people from all countries):

1. In the post war era most of the inequalities have been swept away except for some women’s, gay and indigenous issues. In the post egalitarian society politicians have become increasing inventive at creating divisions in order to ensure their power base. So there has been a push by white liberal politicians to over-emphasise the divisions between us, rather than the similarities that bind us as a nation.

2. The compensation for previous wrong-doing by colonists has in general been done as deals between the white liberal politicians and the iwi (tribes) which have created an iwi elite, because politicians find it easier to deal with a small number of elite groups rather than a large grass roots organisation. The iwi are not democratically elected and so are less accountable to their “constituency” than democratically elected representatives. This situation creates stability for the elite in that it ensures the deprived “constituency” will always be there. Elizabeth Rata has written arguably the most objective account of the post egalitarian trend for creating cultural elite in New Zealand.

3. The ethnicity reporting system is by self identification for official statistical purposes. Anyone can classify themselves as Maori as long as they can prove some Maori ancestry, no matter how small the fraction of Maori blood. Consequently you get a situation where people self identify as Maori if they commit a crime or fell discriminated against say in wages, but there is a tendency to self identify as European or New Zealander amongst Maori, such as my children, who are “successful” by traditional European standards. This grossly inflates the Maori deprivation, unemployment and crime statistics hence continuing the perception that there is negative discrimination against Maori and ensuring that it is a self fulfilling prophecy in order to maintain the power base of the iwi elite and their white political friends.

4. Like other western democracies we have brought in very liberal and generous benefit systems for unemployment, disability and solo (often teenage) parenthood [good] that have allowed the governments to sidestep these issues and not introduce long term plans for reducing the need for these benefits. This intergenerational welfare dependence produces an “underclass” ensuring the place of the iwi elite and a voter base for the politicians.

In fact there are many positive discriminatory programs for Maori in New Zealand, to the point that it became an issue even with our Labour political party at the last election who traditionally support Maori causes and had to back off on targeting based on race and “pledge” targeting based on need instead.

As a parent I find it difficult to understand how politicians can use generations as pawns in their post egalitarian power games, constantly telling them they are deprived and the victims of post colonial oppression for the sake of political power and elitism. Even just from a practical point of view you would thing that in a country of 4 million people, the politicians could put aside their ideology and come to a consensus for the sake of getting the next generation out of the so called “underclass”. But even this has eluded us, because of selfish aspirations of the political elite over what is best for the country and ultimately the people in it.

References
1. Public Policy and Ethnicity: The Politics of Ethnic Boundary Making by Elizabeth Rata and Roger Openshaw (Hardcover - Dec 12, 2006)
2. A Political Economy of Neotribal Capitalism by Elizabeth Rata (Hardcover - Mar 9, 2000)

Jonathan Friedman, an American social anthropologist living in Sweden has also published extensively on the effects of globalisation on indigenous cultures and the “re-invention” of culture and emergence of an “elite” keeper of the cultural flame, in particular in Hawaii, which as many similarities to NZ. Talking to an Indian friend recently he said that the same political strategy of divide and conquer on ethnic lines, has been used by the Congress party in India.

The idea of suppression orders is so that only the guilty will be named and dragged through the mud. It is fine in principle but hardly works in practice. The principle is that if there are no checks and balances anyone can get dragged lynched by the press with no redress because we are not a wealthy country and prefer not to have the massive compensation settlements that the US has.

The most notorious case of this happening was in the mid to late 80s where two dedicated doctors (Green and Bonham) got dragged into the public arena by the press for something they didn’t do to. The government ordered an inquiry into the doctors who were subsequently hung out to dry. Slaughtered on the altar of political expediency.

Perhaps 50 years is too long but it probably began that long ago or at least the international scene started to change that long ago. I can’t say I have agreed with much our politicians have done over the last 30 years.

We are primarily an agricultural economy, one of the few (it there are any others), in the OECD. We built our economy in the first half of the 20th century on meat, wool and dairy exports to the UK. So ground zero for our economic woes are generally taken as the early 70s when the UK joined the EU and the agricultural protectionism that goes with it and the oil shocks after the 1973 gulf war.

However there are many other factors, one being that although my compatriots are great people and we have a great country we get politicians which we certainly don’t deserve. Perhaps it is because we are a small country but we get an extraordinary number of politicians who are there pushing their own barrows, or really are interested in only one issue such as feminism and think no further ahead than the 3-year election cycle.

One of the main causes of our problems is we should have had a better view to the future and we should have been working smarter. Our politicians feed off the deeply ingrained idea that the country and the world owes us a living (we’re colloquially called godzone = gods own country). Unfortunately despite a few attempts to convince the voters that this is not indeed the case (that a person in India has just as much right to try to better themselves as we do) we have not managed to shake off that falsehood. Consequently the work ethic is poor compared to the US, although that is a gross generalisation I do admit.

It will be interesting to see if my assessment agrees with John Kay’s but at first glance I would say he is toeing the tired old party line where New Zealanders are incredibly hurt and bemused to hear that the world doesn’t owe them a living and would rather bury their head in the sand. (asianinvasion2006.blogspot.com/2007/11/d…)

I’m a bit unclear on this next bit, but I’m sure someone will correct any mistakes. As I understand it, the wiretap evidence was gathered through warrants issued under the Terrorism Supression Act. Since the Solicitor General ruled that no one will be charged under the act, the evidence gathered through those warrants can’t be used. It is unlikely that we’ll ever know the truth.

The New Zealand government counters extremism by bending over backwards to accomodate diverse views - from having land tribunals to give back indigenous land, very liberal laws on abortion and prostitution, restrictive laws on smacking children and free speech with the ability to prosecute people making so called racist statement, comprehensive equal opportunities/affirmative action programs, postitive discrimination and targeted assistance to indigenous and others people that are percieved as deprived, very generous welfare support, … The list goes on and on.

So in other words, the New Zealand government’s counterterrorist strategy is to be like every other free, prosperous Western democracy in the world? That actually doesn’t sound too bad.

They were taped saying they intend to kill one of the future prime ministers of New Zealand.

is obviously bad, but you seem to be implying that this

Their stated aim and that of the Maori sovereignty movement is to bring about the formation of a Maori (indigenous) state.

is also bad, and I’m not sure why.
One thing that has confused me about new zealand politics is that they seem to be a democracy on their face, but the interaction between the maori and the majority is unusual: the minority seems to be SO disempowered that they are almost entirely shut out of the democratic process. Compare that to the U.S., say, where a variety of minorities, though obviously put upon, have successfully been able to use the U.S. court system to get help.

Would you say that’s accurate? It seems to me that the status of native australians and New Zealanders is extraordinarily poor. If so, it’d be no surprise that they want to get out from under that load.

I’ll attempt to answer people’s questions about the charges. I’m limited in what I will say for a number of reasons. The first of which is that I don’t care, if everything the police have been implying is true then those arrested still have my solidarity. The second is that I don’t know anything much, and the third is that these matters are currently before the courts. The other problem is that I know next to nothing about guns so while I’ve read about charges and so on, I am none the wiser (so in order I don’t care, don’t know, wouldn’t say and wouldn’t understand).

standayle - I can’t understand from your post whether you’ve heard that people were found with illegal firearms, or that they were alleged to have possessed illegal firearms sometime in the past. The police have laid very few charges relating to firearms that were found during the raids, the majority of the charges are related to what may or may have not happened in the Urewera.

I think you’ve probably mixed the tolls up with a story about somewhere else. Because I haven’t heard it anywhere in relating to this, and I’ve been following it rather closely.

Petar - like I said I can’t answer any of your questions about guns, because I wouldn’t know a sub-machine gun from a .22. But I think you haven’t been paying attention if you think that sub-machine guns and IIDs were found - I don’t think even the police are claiming that. I think they’re claiming that they have evidence that these were used, but I haven’t heard anything about them being found in the raids, and certainly no-one has been charged with possessing them from the raids.

I support Te Mana Motuhake ō Tūhoe (I assume that is what you meant by seceding) Tuhoe never signed the treaty; their land was stolen from them.

Sailorman - I’ll attempt to answer your question even though I don’t find the term ‘terrorist’ particularly useful. There have been no terrorist acts committed in New Zealand for 20 years (last act of terrorism was committed by the French government). The movement that was targetted - the Maori sovereignty movement - is not some local out-post of Al Qaeda - or any other target of the ‘war on terror’.

So I think the short answer is that the government and police are going after people they don’t like using the powers that they granted . Opinion is divided about how much this is a deliberate strategy to quell resistance, or how much it’s the inevitable result of passing terror laws and setting up anti-terrorist units - with all these hammers they need to find some nails. I think it’s a combination of both.