Engagement with gangs is more useful than angry posturing

October 25, 2009

A lot of the usual fuss last week followed revelations that Pita Sharples last autumn entertained, at taxpayers’ expense, some Maori men who are leaders of gangs, to discuss recent government moves as they may affect Maori and/or gangs (precisely what was discussed has not to my knowledge been explained).

I wrote several months back about my belief that visceral reactions to such confrontational events (ie, events which confront mainstream, middle-class, Anglo-Saxon culture) rarely have positive results, and usually lead to further confrontation and less understanding down the line. In this case, the standard visceral reaction is: How dare Sharples talk with these scum! How dare he use our money to get them together! How dare he legitimise what gangs do to harm our communities and our country!!

I won’t go through my argument against chest-thumping posturing again. I just want to re-iterate that of the two options here – condemn all contact with gang members as wholly evil people, or engage with them to understand their perspective and seek avenues of inclusion – I’m pretty sure which is more likely to produce sustainable, positive results in the long run.

I may be wrong but . . . . engaging and talking open-mindedly with people whose way of life we cannot condone at least provides possibilities of change for the better, for all of us. Chest-beating, posturing, outright rejection and attributing only evil to this small but significant group in our society merely makes things worse.

I’m confident that if any change is to take place in the minds and attitudes of gang members and gang leadership, it is far more likely to take place through conversation, encouragement and inclusion than through being shouted at, excluded and condemned carte blanche.

I’m happy enough to see a bit of my tax money go toward maintaining inclusive dialogue and engagement between people who have widely different views on how society should operate. I’d rather that than seeing a majority of self-important mainstreamers refusing to talk with or accept, or even acknowledge any worth of, a small minority of angry margin-dwellers.

And if it so happens that gangs respect Pita Sharples for his willingness at least to listen to them and try to involve them in decision making and planning, then that can only be good.

Leave a Comment » | Maori issues, Race relations | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Armstrong

Michael Laws too self-satisfied to see he’s a disgrace

September 4, 2009

I may be wrong but . . . . . . I’m almost certainly wasting my time writing this particular blog article. With most other articles in my blog I kinda hope that if the subject(s) read it they may reflect for at least a moment and perhaps consider that I may be partly right or worth listening to. But Wanganui mayor Michael Laws? No way!!

The self-assured, self-satisfied arrogance of this man is breathtaking. Driven by a type of benevolent racism so ingrained that he cannot see it, he can only speak and act from a certain knowledge that his cultural preferences are superior to all others. He provides an image of how I imagine the early dogmatic missionary and colonial administrators acted and spoke.

And he’s so sure and smug in his views that he cannot see any other angles or the effects of his spouting-forth. He cannot see, for example, that denigrating Maori language, dismissing young pupils as having no mind of their own, and blaming child abuse on Maori culture, only reinforces the marginalisation of anything that doesn’t fit in with his pakeha-oriented view of life.

Sadly, not only can he not see, he also never will. His views are so fixed and so adamantly and angrily defended that he is probably beyond arguing with. We cannot hope to change his mind – our only hope is to see him voted out by enough reasonable but currently unfortunate Wanganui residents.

And yet he must have a chink in his armour if he feels the need to attack 10 to 12 year old pupils who dare to challenge his stance. A politician completely sure of himself must surely be able to take that with a degree of grace, without feeling it a threat to his position.

Although many worthy New Zealand politicians are capable of reason and persuasion, a significant minority across the left-right spectrum are unreasonably and unpleasantly arrogant. Regardless of my political leanings, I cannot respect arrogant people. Micael (without an ‘h’) Laws is one of them.

Thinking back on how Laws got to be where he is, I’m reminded that he was once a colleague of that other great modern political grandstander, Winston Peters. Both lead with the chin – in Laws’ case this is physically an accurate description if you watch how he holds his head when speaking in combat. Both answer questioners and critics with attack, bluster through any potential embarrassment, and in the process dig themselves into deeper holes.

6 Comments | Politics, Race relations | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Armstrong

Pita Sharples shows the meaning of mana

August 25, 2009

As an average middle-aged pakeha, I have over the years occasionally used the word mana without fully understanding the depth of its meaning. But now I think I get it.

I have had a quiet admiration for Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples for some years now, since I heard him interviewed at length on the radio sometime in the 90s I believe. After hearing so much waffle and political posturing from so many people in the New Zealand political scene for so long, I remember feeling refreshed by the straightforward, respectful and generous-spirited way he spoke.

My appreciation of him has grown since he entered parliament. No insincere and manipulative soundbites from his lips, just basic common sense and respect for his audience. When others block the path of his beliefs and convictions, he smiles (humbly, not through gritted teeth) and gently replies that he’s disappointed but will continue to work for a better deal for the people he represents.

I have written before of my unhappiness with populist, kneejerk posturing of many politicians and leaders – how their reactive attitude to social problems more often than not makes those problems worse or produces other unintended, negative consequences. The more I look and listen, the more convinced I am that real leaders should model their attitudes on Sharples’ generous spirit.

The events of the past week, around the issue of Maori representation within the leadership of the new Auckland city, show starkly the contrast of attitudes, and lead me to the conclusion that Sharples displays what mana must be. And that Rodney Hide will never be able to claim any of that priceless substance.

I’m not going to set Peter on a pedestal and worship him (even if think he’d make a better prime minister than all the alternatives on offer at present). I’m sure he’s a fallible human just like the rest of us. But I draw inspiration from his mana, and take comfort that such leaders with such qualities can still exist and survive in this fractious, conflicted and self-serving country.

To me, Peter demonstrates humility and determination, intelligence and humour, and a touch of the “common man”. When his convictions are thwarted, he tells the truth (he’s disappointed), he avoids slagging his opponents (he respects that they have a point of view to), and he keeps going (there is more than one way to skin a cat).

[As I write, I remember an incident during, I think, the 2005 elections (I hope I’ve got this right) when his electorate workers and those of his main opponent John Tamihere were defacing each others’ billboards. Other aspiring politicians may have worked themselves up into a lather and started a media campaign of reprisal, but Pita Sharples just smiled, shrugged his shoulders, said his team would do whatever it was they were doing, and apologised to his rival. At least, that’s how it came across on telly.]

Mana is something that Rodney Hide does not have and I suspect never will have. No matter how much we may applaud people who stick to their beliefs and ideology, democracy would be under severe strain – perhaps even unworkable – if all politicians used threats of non-cooperation whenever they don’t get their way. Throwing the toys out of the cot may make Hide feel better, or more powerful, or more ideologically pure, but it is hardly a mana-enhancing response to political disagreements.

4 Comments | Maori issues, Politics, Race relations | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Armstrong

South Islanders should empathise with Maori Language Week

July 31, 2009

I may be wrong but . . . . I expect all non-Aucklanders, and South Islanders in particular, should know what it feels like to have to justify the promotion of te reo during Maori Language Week.

We know how a minority culture feels, and how helpful it would be if the majority would only pay us more heed and appreciate our contribution to New Zealand.

I’m a South Islander. Throughout the 40 years I’ve lived in Christchurch, I’ve heard countless complaints of how North Islanders, and Aucklanders in particular, ignore us down here. If we do actually exist, we’re not worth paying much attention to.

This grizzle, which early on focussed mainly on electricity supply and the Cook Strait cable (cutting it), has become more frequent over the past 15 years or so, particularly since television news services shifted operations to Auckland. The prevalent perception down here is that TVNZ, TV3 and Prime can’t be bothered sending their news teams far from the Auckland region, mainly reporting from the south when there is some natural disaster or weather event here, along with perhaps a few cute farm or animal stories and crime cases.

What we get now, we southerners say, is primarily Auckland TV news along with Auckland radio stations, talkback, etc. And our taxes too often go to paying for Auckland’s infrastructure and roads and Auckland-based sporting events such as the Rugby World Cup.

I’m not going to argue the merits or even the accuracy of these popular claims. I’ll use it as an analogy (hopefully not stretched too far) for the way in which many ordinary pakeha Kiwis handle Maori cultural issues. These ideas came to me during this past week – Maori Language Week – as I pondered the sadly predictable array of responses from pakeha to hearing te reo spoken on popular media.

One news channel presented the weather report in Maori, and was inundated with complaints from the usual suspects about pandering to Maori using a language that they claim no-one uses or understands. One went so far as to say that he or she was waiting for a special week for whites! Well, yes, actually we celebrate English Language Week 51 weeks of the year.

If you’ve read my previous article published yesterday on this blog (about the New Zealand flag), you’ll notice a similar theme running here – about how the dominant culture within a bicultural society become so embedded and ingrained into the common ethos that those for whom this culture is “inherited” cannot see how their assumptions, symbols and practices can so easily reinforce the trend and subsume the minority culture(s). With the best of intentions of those supporting cultural diversity, it is a difficult trend to counter.

My thoughts on this have been stirred while reading ‘Mata Toa: The Life and Times of Ranginui Walker’, a book which is helping me to look again at my own long-held assumptions from a different (opposite) perspective.

So . . . . back to my attempted analogy. In New Zealand there is an attitudinal rift between Auckland and the rest of the country, and particularly between Auckland and the South Island. The majority culture (the heavily populated Auckland region) holds sway, while we in the minority just want to be acknowledged, taken notice of and appreciated. It is also pertinent to note that many Aucklanders are largely unaware of this divide and/or couldn’t care less.

I’m not offering any suggestions as to how this demographic divide may be healed. I’m merely opining that all South Islanders who are annoyed by it should at least have a feel for how a minority race/culture feels, and how helpful it may be to be lauded and appreciated a little more often, in a manner which is neither condescending nor patronising.

Just as inclusion of the South Island makes New Zealand a better and stronger nation without diminishing the status of Aucklanders, so promotion of the use of te reo makes for a more inclusive, proud national cultural mix, hopefully without threat to those who want to retain and live by their own cultural heritage.

Leave a Comment » | Maori issues, Media reporting, Race relations | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Armstrong

Two New Zealand flags won’t help race relations

July 30, 2009

I may be wrong but . . . . I believe race relations in New Zealand would gain a huge boost if moves to allow the flying a Maori flag alongside the current NZ ensign were bypassed by simply adopting a new singular flag that is agreeable to all races and cultures in this country.

I am of the camp that believes that, representing tangata whenua, Maori symbolism should in principle be equally displayed in ceremonies along with the current English-based flag. Why not? It doesn’t threaten me or any well-adjusted, open-minded pakeha. I recognise the value added to this country by both cultures and heritages, along with others added via other immigrants over the past 170 years.

When I put my mind to it, I also intuitively feel that the current flag – apart from looking embarrassingly similar to Australia’s – represents a dominant culture, and that while this seems totally appropriate to the pakeha majority, to the indigenous minority it represents a subtle reinforcement and continuation of past subjugation or marginalisation.

Now I’m sure that for many readers, this comment reflects yet another example of a pakeha liberal on a guilt trip trying to make amends for injustices wrought by his ancestors. Not so. I want what’s right. And it’s not right that one of the two cultures on which New Zealand is based (and indeed chronologically the first one) has over many years been marginalised and patronised from a great height, and that now any attempt to gain parity of influence is seen as separatist, inverted racism and just plain cheek.

Yes, we are one country and should only need one flag. But that flag should represent all citizens, not just the culture which became dominant through often oppressive actions past. The problem for us pakeha often is that we assume that the institutions and symbols we have set in place – including the English-based flag with its Southern Cross nod to our antipodean location – are there by mutual consent, whereas in fact they were placed there by our European forebears as a sign of benevolent conquest, probably with very little if any consultation with the Treaty partner.

Around the world, dominant cultures are often unable to see that to their minority culture partners this is an ongoing statement of supposed superiority or pre-eminence.

Unfortunately, I think that choosing a flag to represent Maori in ceremonial settings alongside the current New Zealand flag may only prolong and exacerbate angst and anger over our differences.

Over the past decade or so there has been occasional debate about replacing the NZ flag with something more suitable for our proud young nation in this unique geographic location. Trouble has been, so far the marketing folk have run the debate as they try to find a design which, like a product logo, will help sell NZ in a global marketplace.

We need a new flag that represents our pride and uniqueness. Try as I may, I cannot go past the silver fern on black background. It is now commonplace and widely accepted at sporting and other events at which we are represented. It is neither pakeha nor Maori (nor Asian for that matter). It is of the land and the spirit.

Some critics say that to the uninitiated it looks like a feather (implying surrender?). But Canada’s striking and unique maple leaf flag does not cause any concerns to people lacking knowledge of that country’s native flora. I say go the silver fern.

1 Comment | Maori issues, Race relations | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Armstrong

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers