Ka mate, ka mate! Ka ora, ka ora!
November 15, 2024 5:25 AM Subscribe
The haka is a Māori ceremonial dance best known internationally as the pre-game ritual of Aotearoa/New Zealand's All Blacks rugby team, but that association can sometimes obscure its true power as a symbol of formidable indigenous opposition, never better demonstrated than in Parliament yesterday when MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke led colleagues and members of the public gallery in one of the best examples in years.
Maipi-Clarke commenced her haka by tearing up the Treaty Principles Bill introduced by the right-wing libertarian ACT New Zealand party, part of the coalition government that has run the country for the past year. (For those who fondly remember Jacinda Ardern's government, it's quite a comedown.) The Bill seeks to weaken the Treaty of Waitangi, one of the foundations of the nation.
Ōtautahi/Christchurch blogger Moata Tamaira writes about why Maipi-Clarke's haka is so resonant.
Maipi-Clarke commenced her haka by tearing up the Treaty Principles Bill introduced by the right-wing libertarian ACT New Zealand party, part of the coalition government that has run the country for the past year. (For those who fondly remember Jacinda Ardern's government, it's quite a comedown.) The Bill seeks to weaken the Treaty of Waitangi, one of the foundations of the nation.
Ōtautahi/Christchurch blogger Moata Tamaira writes about why Maipi-Clarke's haka is so resonant.
That's power, right there.
posted by signal at 5:54 AM on November 15 [14 favorites]
posted by signal at 5:54 AM on November 15 [14 favorites]
This was making the social media rounds yesterday and holy cats, I got chills. signal is right: that IS power.
posted by Kitteh at 5:56 AM on November 15 [12 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 5:56 AM on November 15 [12 favorites]
I do not mean to diminish the incredible significance of the haka, which is so much more than what I'm highlighting here... But damn it feels good to see the bullshit decorum of far-right fascism be disrupted.
posted by meese at 6:01 AM on November 15 [47 favorites]
posted by meese at 6:01 AM on November 15 [47 favorites]
I was meaning to do this, thanks for a great post rory! (tiny nitpick - Ardern's given name is Jacinda.)
A common complaint from the racist uncles is that Maipi-Clarke 'interrupted the vote' - those watching will see that voting proceeded around the room, Te Paati Maaori reported their votes last, and the haka started immediately after that.
There is also a hikoi (land march) on its way down to Wellington from Te Kao in Northland, with complementary events moving up the South Island, timed to arrive at Parliament on the day this was supposed to be debated - the government moved the debate and vote forward, which I suppose allowed them to get through it without 10,000 (currently - it's only got as far as Rotorua so far) people on the front lawn joining Maipi-Clarke's haka.
posted by ngaiotonga at 6:06 AM on November 15 [15 favorites]
A common complaint from the racist uncles is that Maipi-Clarke 'interrupted the vote' - those watching will see that voting proceeded around the room, Te Paati Maaori reported their votes last, and the haka started immediately after that.
There is also a hikoi (land march) on its way down to Wellington from Te Kao in Northland, with complementary events moving up the South Island, timed to arrive at Parliament on the day this was supposed to be debated - the government moved the debate and vote forward, which I suppose allowed them to get through it without 10,000 (currently - it's only got as far as Rotorua so far) people on the front lawn joining Maipi-Clarke's haka.
posted by ngaiotonga at 6:06 AM on November 15 [15 favorites]
Watching this video of the proceedings including what happened just before, it sounds like there's a call for a verbal vote - asking for people to call out aye or no. And usually when that sort of thing happens and there's ambiguity you'd have a more accurate vote. But it sounded like the speaker just went with "the ayes have it" with to me that sounding totally unreliable.
Am I accurate in thinking that, or am I misunderstanding what happened there?
posted by edd at 6:11 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
Am I accurate in thinking that, or am I misunderstanding what happened there?
posted by edd at 6:11 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
I've never been able to make any sense of Waitangi's status at New Zealand law. Fine, you're preserving the English illusion of "parliamentary sovereignty," but this was a document agreed to by co-sovereigns, which means your parliament isn't the only sovereign. If you want to pretend that you can ignore or reinterpret international agreements at whim then your "sovereign" parliament will have to accept that there are consequences.
The only reason this isn't considered a "real treaty" is because the signing counterparts were indigenous chiefs. If the Crown had made similar agreements with Belgium concerning New Zealand affairs, the law of succession of states wouldn't allow the "sovereign" parliament to just ignore or reinterpret them as they pleased, surely.
posted by 1adam12 at 6:19 AM on November 15 [13 favorites]
The only reason this isn't considered a "real treaty" is because the signing counterparts were indigenous chiefs. If the Crown had made similar agreements with Belgium concerning New Zealand affairs, the law of succession of states wouldn't allow the "sovereign" parliament to just ignore or reinterpret them as they pleased, surely.
posted by 1adam12 at 6:19 AM on November 15 [13 favorites]
At first I was frustrated because, while I don't want to be dismissive of the importance of visible resistance as a political tactic if the bill passes anyway this is just theater, but it appears that the National party supported the bill through the first reading because it promised its far-right coalition partner (ACT) it would, but that the public resistance and disagreement within the party means it is unlikely to support the bill beyond this point? Making this a very effective tactic. Someone who understands NZ's legislative process please let me know if I'm mistaken.
posted by Wretch729 at 6:25 AM on November 15 [2 favorites]
posted by Wretch729 at 6:25 AM on November 15 [2 favorites]
(tiny nitpick - Ardern's given name is Jacinda.)
Oh no! And I was so focussed on the number of r's in her surname... mods, can you tweak please?
posted by rory at 6:37 AM on November 15
Oh no! And I was so focussed on the number of r's in her surname... mods, can you tweak please?
posted by rory at 6:37 AM on November 15
The thing is, though, Wretch729, if the bar for any political action is "guaranteed to work," then nobody can do anything because those. guarantees. don't. exist. It's just not a reasonable bar to set.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for evaluation and assessment; some things do work better than others and it's good to amass some evidence on that point. But we can't even amass evidence if we're not also throwing spaghetti at the wall.
Or throwing hands. Which I loved. Go Maipi-Clarke!
posted by humbug at 6:38 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for evaluation and assessment; some things do work better than others and it's good to amass some evidence on that point. But we can't even amass evidence if we're not also throwing spaghetti at the wall.
Or throwing hands. Which I loved. Go Maipi-Clarke!
posted by humbug at 6:38 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
Oh yeah, my argument wasn't with the tactic it was that all the coverage was way more focused on the act of protest with barely a mention of whether it was working effectively. Felt a bit like a "look at these people with their quaint customs" vibe, which is both gross and unhelpful to understanding the political situation.
posted by Wretch729 at 6:47 AM on November 15 [2 favorites]
posted by Wretch729 at 6:47 AM on November 15 [2 favorites]
But it sounded like the speaker just went with "the ayes have it" with to me that sounding totally unreliable. Am I accurate in thinking that, or am I misunderstanding what happened there?
edd, there were no surprises in the voting, I don't pay that much attention to politics and I still could have told you the vote breakdown more than a week in advance. The government (National, ACT, and NZ First) had it in their coalition agreement that they would support the bill through its first reading (which this was), and the Prime Minister refused to allow conscience voting, so a spokesperson for each party reported the party's vote. Once NACT1 had their votes in, which they did first, 'the ayes have it' was guaranteed and it was just a question of whether Labour, the Greens, or Te Paati Maaori would vote aye (um, under no circumstances).
posted by ngaiotonga at 6:47 AM on November 15 [8 favorites]
edd, there were no surprises in the voting, I don't pay that much attention to politics and I still could have told you the vote breakdown more than a week in advance. The government (National, ACT, and NZ First) had it in their coalition agreement that they would support the bill through its first reading (which this was), and the Prime Minister refused to allow conscience voting, so a spokesperson for each party reported the party's vote. Once NACT1 had their votes in, which they did first, 'the ayes have it' was guaranteed and it was just a question of whether Labour, the Greens, or Te Paati Maaori would vote aye (um, under no circumstances).
posted by ngaiotonga at 6:47 AM on November 15 [8 favorites]
And not to clutter up the thread but I wasn't criticizing this post, which had lots of useful info but rather the barrage of headlines about this I saw in US and international media.
posted by Wretch729 at 6:50 AM on November 15 [1 favorite]
posted by Wretch729 at 6:50 AM on November 15 [1 favorite]
As well as the TikTok video ("one of the best examples in years"), have a look at the video in the BBC story ("in Parliament yesterday")—slightly longer, wider angle, and ends with a delicious moment of who I'm pretty sure is David Seymour, the sponsor of the Treaty Principles Bill, looking sheepish.
posted by rory at 6:50 AM on November 15 [5 favorites]
posted by rory at 6:50 AM on November 15 [5 favorites]
Thank you for the explanation, ngaiotonga!
posted by edd at 6:53 AM on November 15 [1 favorite]
posted by edd at 6:53 AM on November 15 [1 favorite]
Words fail me. This is so inspiring.
Thank you so much for posting this, rory.
posted by kristi at 6:59 AM on November 15 [3 favorites]
Thank you so much for posting this, rory.
posted by kristi at 6:59 AM on November 15 [3 favorites]
Rory I agree, the BBC video shows the full breadth of the moment, especially all the white people on the right sitting there like stones, incapable of acknowledging the pain and humanity right in front of them.
As an American, I can’t begin to convey how much this resonates and guves me hope. So many of us are looking for ways to resist a seemingly unstoppable tide. Thank you so much for posting this.
posted by flyingsquirrel at 7:24 AM on November 15 [11 favorites]
As an American, I can’t begin to convey how much this resonates and guves me hope. So many of us are looking for ways to resist a seemingly unstoppable tide. Thank you so much for posting this.
posted by flyingsquirrel at 7:24 AM on November 15 [11 favorites]
I have watched this ten times before breakfast and will probably watch it ten more. For me what resonates is the absolute power of the tearing of the bill and immediately moving to the haka - like “oh yeah, my party has a response all right”. And I was thinking earlier, there’s no specific rules in parliamentary procedure *against* a haka - so the suspension was really just “because she upset white people.”
posted by corb at 7:29 AM on November 15 [12 favorites]
posted by corb at 7:29 AM on November 15 [12 favorites]
The suspension was probably the right move for practical reasons if nothing else. But I think it also adds to the power: your bill is so shit we will tear it up, perform an awe inspiring haka and force the adjournment of parliament.
posted by plonkee at 8:05 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
posted by plonkee at 8:05 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
If you want excuses to keep watching, here's yet another video from a different angle capturing additional details, like her colleagues joining in and Maipi-Clarke taking her seat at the end.
I love the way she flicks the torn bill dismissively on the floor. Love it all, really. I can't think of a more perfect response to Seymour and his crew attempting to rewrite the central document of the country, which triggered decades of war and has underlied decades of claims for Māori redress, so that it provides "the same rights and duties for all New Zealanders", which would make the indigenous people of the country just another minority group the white majority can ignore. Around a sixth of the population is Māori.
posted by rory at 8:15 AM on November 15 [11 favorites]
I love the way she flicks the torn bill dismissively on the floor. Love it all, really. I can't think of a more perfect response to Seymour and his crew attempting to rewrite the central document of the country, which triggered decades of war and has underlied decades of claims for Māori redress, so that it provides "the same rights and duties for all New Zealanders", which would make the indigenous people of the country just another minority group the white majority can ignore. Around a sixth of the population is Māori.
posted by rory at 8:15 AM on November 15 [11 favorites]
Wow what a powerful moment. Righteous rage.
posted by Zumbador at 8:38 AM on November 15 [2 favorites]
posted by Zumbador at 8:38 AM on November 15 [2 favorites]
Was it planned? Did all the Maori present know this was coming? I have to assume so, given how big a deal this bill is, but it also feels so intensely organic, once Maipi-Clarke starts it.
posted by meese at 8:42 AM on November 15
posted by meese at 8:42 AM on November 15
here's yet another video from a different angle capturing additional details
The detail I really love that I didn't see in other videos is the look on the face of the older colleague directly next to Maipi-Clarke. That's some "you show them" pride in the younger generation there.
That's an element that I thought "yes, and" in response to the blog post from Tamaira. She touched on the power of a young person doing this, and I feel like this haka resonates within the growing visibility of youth leadership and activism around the world. This action being rooted in both tradition and youth feels especially powerful.
posted by EvaDestruction at 9:06 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
The detail I really love that I didn't see in other videos is the look on the face of the older colleague directly next to Maipi-Clarke. That's some "you show them" pride in the younger generation there.
That's an element that I thought "yes, and" in response to the blog post from Tamaira. She touched on the power of a young person doing this, and I feel like this haka resonates within the growing visibility of youth leadership and activism around the world. This action being rooted in both tradition and youth feels especially powerful.
posted by EvaDestruction at 9:06 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
A critical look at Te Pāti Māori leadership from last year, by Tom Peters at the World Socialist Website.
Māori Party leader says Māori are genetically superior race
Māori Party leader says Māori are genetically superior race
The reality is that TPM represents the interests of a narrow layer of tribal capitalists and upper middle class layers.posted by dmh at 9:36 AM on November 15 [1 favorite]
This elite minority has profited from multi-million dollar Treaty of Waitangi settlements handed out to the tribes over the last three decades. These have been used to create lucrative businesses in tourism, agriculture, fisheries, property and other industries.
A critical look at Te Pāti Māori leadership...
So what. Why is this relevant here.
posted by prefpara at 9:52 AM on November 15 [11 favorites]
So what. Why is this relevant here.
posted by prefpara at 9:52 AM on November 15 [11 favorites]
But it sounded like the speaker just went with "the ayes have it" with to me that sounding totally unreliable. Am I accurate in thinking that, or am I misunderstanding what happened there?
Parliamentary nerd here. What happens is the Presiding Officer, in this case, The Speaker, proposes some sort of motion or question, i.e. "That the Bill be now read a First Time. All those in favour say, "Aye", all those opposed say, "No". Members then voice their vote. The Presiding Officer will then say either, "The ayes have it", or, "The noes have it" based on the voices. At that point any member in the Chamber can call for a Party vote - i.e. a formal tally of the votes. The Presiding Officer then instructs the Clerk at The Table to conduct a party vote. The Clerk asks the Whips of each party - in descending order based on the number of seats each Party has - for their votes. This is why Te Pati Māori was last as they have the least number of seats in this Parliament. The votes are then tallied, passed to the Presiding Officer, who then reads it out. In this case it was, "The Ayes are 68, the Noes, 55. The Ayes have it."
posted by vac2003 at 10:38 AM on November 15 [8 favorites]
Parliamentary nerd here. What happens is the Presiding Officer, in this case, The Speaker, proposes some sort of motion or question, i.e. "That the Bill be now read a First Time. All those in favour say, "Aye", all those opposed say, "No". Members then voice their vote. The Presiding Officer will then say either, "The ayes have it", or, "The noes have it" based on the voices. At that point any member in the Chamber can call for a Party vote - i.e. a formal tally of the votes. The Presiding Officer then instructs the Clerk at The Table to conduct a party vote. The Clerk asks the Whips of each party - in descending order based on the number of seats each Party has - for their votes. This is why Te Pati Māori was last as they have the least number of seats in this Parliament. The votes are then tallied, passed to the Presiding Officer, who then reads it out. In this case it was, "The Ayes are 68, the Noes, 55. The Ayes have it."
posted by vac2003 at 10:38 AM on November 15 [8 favorites]
So what. Why is this relevant here.
When members of a political party perform an intimidating ceremony during a parliamentary vote then it is relevant that the party leadership has faced criticism for unapologetic racism. How is that not relevant?
posted by dmh at 10:53 AM on November 15
When members of a political party perform an intimidating ceremony during a parliamentary vote then it is relevant that the party leadership has faced criticism for unapologetic racism. How is that not relevant?
posted by dmh at 10:53 AM on November 15
Wretch729 The main issue or at least result of allowing this Bill is that it asks a question that should be unaskable. It's akin to tabling a bill to reinstate slavery in the US, or relitigating a peace treaty (which is essentially what it is).
As a result many people here now feel they can say openly racist (and anti lgb, nature protection, immigrants...) things face to face, and online. Facilitating anti Māori language enable the full range of hate language. The intended outcome will be violence by racists/ists generally, and then govt. will in turn violently suppress the people who defend themselves. Our govt. are primary evangelical end-times people who wierdo wrote about yesterday.
posted by unearthed at 11:00 AM on November 15 [7 favorites]
As a result many people here now feel they can say openly racist (and anti lgb, nature protection, immigrants...) things face to face, and online. Facilitating anti Māori language enable the full range of hate language. The intended outcome will be violence by racists/ists generally, and then govt. will in turn violently suppress the people who defend themselves. Our govt. are primary evangelical end-times people who wierdo wrote about yesterday.
posted by unearthed at 11:00 AM on November 15 [7 favorites]
The WSW article is tendentious because in context Waititi is clearly referring to sporting prowess, and Polynesians do have an edge in muscularity and sprint fitness, which is why they dominate in our local football codes. And the claim that TPM represents "Māori capitalists" is an assertion presented without evidence. I read this as just another polemic from a Marxist fringe party attacking another movement that is more successfully engaging a chunk of the working class.
There is a criticism to be made of how tribal organisations manage the assets they hold on behalf of their people and for example over the years Tainui has come in for a lot of criticism - from its own members - but eg where I live Kai Tahu pump a ton of money back into flax-roots initiatives and have a dedicated team whose mission is finding Kai Tahu people who aren't affiliated and bringing them in.
The funny thing is that criticisms of "Māori elites" are mostly heard from our right wing parties, indeed from the ACT party which introduced this bill to parliament. And it is one of those hilarious projection accusations when it comes from that quarter.
Anyway I don't regard the source or the claims as credible, and I'm a New Zealand resident lefty, so there. And I think "so there" is an adequate rebuttal of that piece.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 11:06 AM on November 15 [27 favorites]
There is a criticism to be made of how tribal organisations manage the assets they hold on behalf of their people and for example over the years Tainui has come in for a lot of criticism - from its own members - but eg where I live Kai Tahu pump a ton of money back into flax-roots initiatives and have a dedicated team whose mission is finding Kai Tahu people who aren't affiliated and bringing them in.
The funny thing is that criticisms of "Māori elites" are mostly heard from our right wing parties, indeed from the ACT party which introduced this bill to parliament. And it is one of those hilarious projection accusations when it comes from that quarter.
Anyway I don't regard the source or the claims as credible, and I'm a New Zealand resident lefty, so there. And I think "so there" is an adequate rebuttal of that piece.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 11:06 AM on November 15 [27 favorites]
Not wanting to derail but 'The World Socialist Website' sounds (sarcasm)wonderful(/sarcasm) - "In an article for the socialist magazine New Politics, the Lebanese Trotskyist academic Gilbert Achcar described the WSWS as "pro-Putin, pro-Assad and 'left-wing' propaganda" combined with "gutter journalism ... run by a 'Trotskyist' cult ... which perpetuates a long worn-out tradition of inter-Trotskyist sectarian quarrels in fulfilling its role as apologist for Putin, Assad, and their friends."[25]"
Reading the linked WSW article, all parties come away as racist whether they are left, centre-left, centre, centre-right or right. Which kind of waters down the point of whatever they're trying to make? Everyone in NZ is racist, but TPM in particular is racist?
The author, Tom Peters, also seems to write articles that bag pretty much everyone in NZ with a few exceptions. I can't really take him seriously (as another NZ lefty).
posted by phigmov at 11:11 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
Reading the linked WSW article, all parties come away as racist whether they are left, centre-left, centre, centre-right or right. Which kind of waters down the point of whatever they're trying to make? Everyone in NZ is racist, but TPM in particular is racist?
The author, Tom Peters, also seems to write articles that bag pretty much everyone in NZ with a few exceptions. I can't really take him seriously (as another NZ lefty).
posted by phigmov at 11:11 AM on November 15 [6 favorites]
dmh, as the issue under discussion appears to be whether or not they have certain historically significant rights, and whether or not those rights will be protected by the rule of law, it is indeed irrelevant to bring up what seem essentially to be criticisms of their character. Rights are not reserved for persons of good character, or for persons who are not racist. The protection of the rule of law is not doled out according to who deserves it most. To ask in this context whether the people whose rights are under threat might be bad people suggests the idea that their rights are contingent on our approval of their conduct. This is the language of the oppressor. And the oppressor will always find some reason to criticize those whose rights it seeks to restrict. I reject this rhetorical move and find it repugnant.
posted by prefpara at 11:13 AM on November 15 [31 favorites]
posted by prefpara at 11:13 AM on November 15 [31 favorites]
When members of a political party perform an intimidating ceremony during a parliamentary vote
To be clear, the ka mate haka is not an intimidating ceremony, and as can be gleaned even by a brief glance at Wikipedia, it is a chant that symbolizes the triumph of life over death and the celebration of the land.
"I will put one foot in front of the other—
One foot, then the other—until the Sun shines on me!"
To argue that it's an intimidating ceremony is to show a great ignorance of Maori tradition.
posted by corb at 11:15 AM on November 15 [17 favorites]
To be clear, the ka mate haka is not an intimidating ceremony, and as can be gleaned even by a brief glance at Wikipedia, it is a chant that symbolizes the triumph of life over death and the celebration of the land.
"I will put one foot in front of the other—
One foot, then the other—until the Sun shines on me!"
To argue that it's an intimidating ceremony is to show a great ignorance of Maori tradition.
posted by corb at 11:15 AM on November 15 [17 favorites]
Oh and as to this part - "an intimidating ceremony during a parliamentary vote" - if only we could defund the tone police. You'd think clutching one's pearls would make it harder to type the dogwhistles of respectability politics.
posted by prefpara at 11:17 AM on November 15 [24 favorites]
posted by prefpara at 11:17 AM on November 15 [24 favorites]
Another instance in different circumstances High School Boys Honor Retiring Teacher With Moving Haka . Actually my old high-school.
posted by phigmov at 11:26 AM on November 15 [4 favorites]
posted by phigmov at 11:26 AM on November 15 [4 favorites]
Was it planned? Did all the Maori present know this was coming? I have to assume so
Quite likely? But people who grow up in the culture will do things like this spontaneously and no planning is needed, it just needs someone to kick it off. Hell, I'm an aging Pākeha and leaving aside those aspects of Māoritanga I have picked up over the years, I can join in Ka Mate, because it used to be the All Blacks haka and everyone of my age or older who grew up here knows it.
On the subject of Ka Mate, a critical point is that Te Rauparaha composed it after hiding from his enemies in a kumara pit overnight. It is about survival against the odds. So arguably the message is, we have survived, and we are surviving, and we will outlast you.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 11:56 AM on November 15 [35 favorites]
Quite likely? But people who grow up in the culture will do things like this spontaneously and no planning is needed, it just needs someone to kick it off. Hell, I'm an aging Pākeha and leaving aside those aspects of Māoritanga I have picked up over the years, I can join in Ka Mate, because it used to be the All Blacks haka and everyone of my age or older who grew up here knows it.
On the subject of Ka Mate, a critical point is that Te Rauparaha composed it after hiding from his enemies in a kumara pit overnight. It is about survival against the odds. So arguably the message is, we have survived, and we are surviving, and we will outlast you.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 11:56 AM on November 15 [35 favorites]
Funny how all of these folks concerned about decorum have nothing to say about how disruptive and unsportsmanlike it is to renege a treaty or to diminish indigenous rights.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 11:59 AM on November 15 [32 favorites]
posted by evidenceofabsence at 11:59 AM on November 15 [32 favorites]
rory: Yes, that's Seymour with the red tie and that was the ACT front bench who were being addressed there.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 12:37 PM on November 15 [2 favorites]
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 12:37 PM on November 15 [2 favorites]
Here's a quick (6m) summary of why the Treaty Principles Bill is an insult to the Maori from Riana Te Ngahue, for those who like their explanations in video form.
As the Guardian article mentions, the treaty that the Maori agreed to is not the treaty that the British wrote in English.
posted by asok at 12:50 PM on November 15 [3 favorites]
As the Guardian article mentions, the treaty that the Maori agreed to is not the treaty that the British wrote in English.
posted by asok at 12:50 PM on November 15 [3 favorites]
I don't think this is explained in the various linked pieces, so I'll say it here.
The ACT party represents the hard capitalist part of New Zealand's right wing, receiving far more in donations than any other party despite its relatively small size, supported by local magnates and with ties to offshore interests like the Atlas foundation.
Their motivation in going after the treaty is that Māori interests under the treaty are a significant barrier to selling publicly held assets and to exploiting Crown land and to environmentally damaging business operations. The effect of the bill would be to remove many legal avenues that Māori might use to oppose the interests of aforesaid magnates.
ACT is part of a three party coalition where the old-school National Party is the largest component, but the National Party prime minister Chris Luxon is a weak leader and National can't govern without both of the other two parties. This means the two minority parties (ACT and NZ First) have outsize influence. So National has let ACT introduce the bill, even though they say they will not vote for it at its third (and final) reading.
The thing is that ACT have set up the legislative schedule so that they will have six months before that third reading, during which time there will be a relentless race-baiting campaign. ACT's goal isn't necessarily to get this bill passed but to create the conditions for getting a referendum at our next election with enough popular support to pass then.
This is extremely dangerous. There hasn't been significant armed resistance from Māori since the wars of the 19th century, but if anything were going to provoke civil war in Aotearoa, going after the treaty in this manner would be it.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 1:06 PM on November 15 [20 favorites]
The ACT party represents the hard capitalist part of New Zealand's right wing, receiving far more in donations than any other party despite its relatively small size, supported by local magnates and with ties to offshore interests like the Atlas foundation.
Their motivation in going after the treaty is that Māori interests under the treaty are a significant barrier to selling publicly held assets and to exploiting Crown land and to environmentally damaging business operations. The effect of the bill would be to remove many legal avenues that Māori might use to oppose the interests of aforesaid magnates.
ACT is part of a three party coalition where the old-school National Party is the largest component, but the National Party prime minister Chris Luxon is a weak leader and National can't govern without both of the other two parties. This means the two minority parties (ACT and NZ First) have outsize influence. So National has let ACT introduce the bill, even though they say they will not vote for it at its third (and final) reading.
The thing is that ACT have set up the legislative schedule so that they will have six months before that third reading, during which time there will be a relentless race-baiting campaign. ACT's goal isn't necessarily to get this bill passed but to create the conditions for getting a referendum at our next election with enough popular support to pass then.
This is extremely dangerous. There hasn't been significant armed resistance from Māori since the wars of the 19th century, but if anything were going to provoke civil war in Aotearoa, going after the treaty in this manner would be it.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 1:06 PM on November 15 [20 favorites]
Was it planned? Did all the Maori present know this was coming? I have to assume so
My assumption is that perhaps a few people knew this was a possibility, but I don't think it was a planned action. You can see that by watching the broad angle above with the colleague - the other Maori woman next to her kind of smiling at the beginning of the chant, and then her look of 'oh shit yes this is happening' at 0:11 when the tearing of the bill happens and the haka fully starts. You can see that Maipi-Clarke clearly gets out the first part alone, and other people are kind of joyfully joining in to various extents - some people in their seats half-participating, others launching out of their seats. Even the two who are main participants with her didn't seem to know it was happening exactly - the gentleman had to remove his glasses, which he would have done prior if he was expecting it. I think it seems more like as soon as it started, others realized the perfect rightness of the action and joined.
posted by corb at 1:54 PM on November 15 [4 favorites]
My assumption is that perhaps a few people knew this was a possibility, but I don't think it was a planned action. You can see that by watching the broad angle above with the colleague - the other Maori woman next to her kind of smiling at the beginning of the chant, and then her look of 'oh shit yes this is happening' at 0:11 when the tearing of the bill happens and the haka fully starts. You can see that Maipi-Clarke clearly gets out the first part alone, and other people are kind of joyfully joining in to various extents - some people in their seats half-participating, others launching out of their seats. Even the two who are main participants with her didn't seem to know it was happening exactly - the gentleman had to remove his glasses, which he would have done prior if he was expecting it. I think it seems more like as soon as it started, others realized the perfect rightness of the action and joined.
posted by corb at 1:54 PM on November 15 [4 favorites]
I reject this rhetorical move and find it repugnant.
This rhetorical sleight (and slight) of Peters' was the one that struck me:
multi-million dollar Treaty of Waitangi settlements handed out to the tribes over the last three decades.
Not just millions, multi millions! Over, um, thirty years:
As of August 2018, 73 settlements had been passed into law. The total value of all finalised settlements is $2.24 billion.
That's NZ$, worth around US$1.5 billion in 2018. NZ population of 4,990,000 in 2021, 16.5% Māori, so around 823,000 Māori. Treaty settlements started in 1989, let's call it thirty years. So that's US$50 million a year, or about NZ$90 or US$60 per head per year.
All of which costs New Zealanders overall around twenty kiwi dollars per head per year (so Māori people net NZ$70 per head). Twenty bucks a year rent for living in and majority control of a beautiful land that the Māori had settled for five hundred years before the British muscled in on it.
You know, if we're giving context and all.
posted by rory at 2:39 PM on November 15 [18 favorites]
This rhetorical sleight (and slight) of Peters' was the one that struck me:
multi-million dollar Treaty of Waitangi settlements handed out to the tribes over the last three decades.
Not just millions, multi millions! Over, um, thirty years:
As of August 2018, 73 settlements had been passed into law. The total value of all finalised settlements is $2.24 billion.
That's NZ$, worth around US$1.5 billion in 2018. NZ population of 4,990,000 in 2021, 16.5% Māori, so around 823,000 Māori. Treaty settlements started in 1989, let's call it thirty years. So that's US$50 million a year, or about NZ$90 or US$60 per head per year.
All of which costs New Zealanders overall around twenty kiwi dollars per head per year (so Māori people net NZ$70 per head). Twenty bucks a year rent for living in and majority control of a beautiful land that the Māori had settled for five hundred years before the British muscled in on it.
You know, if we're giving context and all.
posted by rory at 2:39 PM on November 15 [18 favorites]
as the issue under discussion appears to be whether or not they have certain historically significant rights, and whether or not those rights will be protected by the rule of law, it is indeed irrelevant to bring up what seem essentially to be criticisms of their character. Rights are not reserved for persons of good character
No, I don't think "historical rights" (which honestly sounds a lot like states rights) is the issue under discussion at all. I think the issue under discussion is that IF the predominantly white crowd (Mefi) needs the release of cheering a spectacle of stereotyped nativity, then I think it pays to disabuse the "noble savage" narrative. Use your words? When is melodic stomping and chanting the answer? Why celebrate it? Especially when the people doing so unapologetically advocate racial superiority as a political prerogative? I think it's just wrong: politically, factually, and morally, and I will point it out where I have the energy.
posted by dmh at 3:51 PM on November 15 [1 favorite]
No, I don't think "historical rights" (which honestly sounds a lot like states rights) is the issue under discussion at all. I think the issue under discussion is that IF the predominantly white crowd (Mefi) needs the release of cheering a spectacle of stereotyped nativity, then I think it pays to disabuse the "noble savage" narrative. Use your words? When is melodic stomping and chanting the answer? Why celebrate it? Especially when the people doing so unapologetically advocate racial superiority as a political prerogative? I think it's just wrong: politically, factually, and morally, and I will point it out where I have the energy.
posted by dmh at 3:51 PM on November 15 [1 favorite]
"When is melodic stomping and chanting the answer?"
When you are a Māori in your own country defending your rights using your own cultural forms, I would have said. It is astute politics for a domestic audience (I doubt anyone expected the international interest, that's a happy coincidence). I have already suggested the claim of racial superiority is suspect. Frankly, I think the norms implied in "use your words" and "spectacle of stereotyped nativity" bespeak their own kind of belief in the superiority of one culture and a little self-reflection would go a long way, e hoa.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 4:07 PM on November 15 [25 favorites]
When you are a Māori in your own country defending your rights using your own cultural forms, I would have said. It is astute politics for a domestic audience (I doubt anyone expected the international interest, that's a happy coincidence). I have already suggested the claim of racial superiority is suspect. Frankly, I think the norms implied in "use your words" and "spectacle of stereotyped nativity" bespeak their own kind of belief in the superiority of one culture and a little self-reflection would go a long way, e hoa.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 4:07 PM on November 15 [25 favorites]
To argue that it's an intimidating ceremony is to show a great ignorance of Maori tradition.
I'm fully ignorant of the tradition you invoke. In all honesty I'm surprised you yourself, as a lawyer, would want to champion the "tradition" of disrupting a parliamentary vote with a haka. I confess I feel privileged to not experience the slightest obligation to understand the tradition, before I'm allowed to qualify it as intimidation. Maybe the reason you're not intimidated is because you can't seriously imagine these people wielding power.
posted by dmh at 4:14 PM on November 15 [1 favorite]
I'm fully ignorant of the tradition you invoke. In all honesty I'm surprised you yourself, as a lawyer, would want to champion the "tradition" of disrupting a parliamentary vote with a haka. I confess I feel privileged to not experience the slightest obligation to understand the tradition, before I'm allowed to qualify it as intimidation. Maybe the reason you're not intimidated is because you can't seriously imagine these people wielding power.
posted by dmh at 4:14 PM on November 15 [1 favorite]
Mod note: Hello!
This thread seems to be devolving into one person vs many, so dmh, please take a break from it instead of trying to speak on a culture you admit to knowing little of.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:48 PM on November 15 [7 favorites]
This thread seems to be devolving into one person vs many, so dmh, please take a break from it instead of trying to speak on a culture you admit to knowing little of.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:48 PM on November 15 [7 favorites]
To argue that it's an intimidating ceremony is to show a great ignorance of Maori tradition.
You think you look normal, Your Honour?
posted by flabdablet at 5:41 PM on November 15 [4 favorites]
You think you look normal, Your Honour?
posted by flabdablet at 5:41 PM on November 15 [4 favorites]
And I thought the Canadian Parliament had fun meetings!
posted by Relay at 6:21 PM on November 15 [1 favorite]
posted by Relay at 6:21 PM on November 15 [1 favorite]
Maybe some wider context - Te Tiriti was signed before NZ law existed, in fact it's essentially the act that caused NZ law to exist in NZ - it's a treaty (a contract) between the English Crown (King) and most (but not all) of the then Leaders of then Māori tribes, it happened at a time when there we very few white settlers. The Māori signed a Māori language version of the treaty, one that did not match the English language version (that was not signed). In particular Māori did not sign away their sovereignty.
The English Crown has been replaced by the NZ Crown (ie the government), and over the past 50 years it has recognised that it has not upheld its side of the bargain and had started a redress program (at honestly pennies on the dollar). This leaves us with an interesting conundrum - if the treaty goes away NZ's government has no legitimacy, it's the treaty that gives it its power. ACTs blatantly racist attempt to amend the treaty - which after all is a bilateral contract - would break it and remove the government's legitimacy. People like me, Tanagta Tiriti (people of the treaty), are only here by right because of a contract made in the 1800s, if ACT breaks the Treaty I lose my right to live here and become stateless.
A Treaty is a contract, made by two parties, it can't be changed without the consent of those two parties, to try and unilaterally change that treaty by one party is IMHO both illegal and immoral. The irony of a racist hard Libertarian party (ACT) trying to break the state by breaking a contract is not lost on me. The fact that the rest of the coalition that currently governs us is putting us though this will be remembered too, I think they'll be a 1 term government.
There is a Hikoi (a protest march) approaching parliament from both ends of the country, next Tuesday there will be 10s maybe 100s of thousands of people, Tangata Whenua and Tangata Tiriti outside Parliament demanding and end to this abomination
I retired last year, was going to spend lots of time on warm beaches - instead I find myself standing on the street , or chasing a PM through a parking building with a sign several times a week, I have a pile of blank signs downstairs waiting for messages (they're easier to make 4 at a time), by god this world is fucked!
posted by mbo at 6:41 PM on November 15 [31 favorites]
The English Crown has been replaced by the NZ Crown (ie the government), and over the past 50 years it has recognised that it has not upheld its side of the bargain and had started a redress program (at honestly pennies on the dollar). This leaves us with an interesting conundrum - if the treaty goes away NZ's government has no legitimacy, it's the treaty that gives it its power. ACTs blatantly racist attempt to amend the treaty - which after all is a bilateral contract - would break it and remove the government's legitimacy. People like me, Tanagta Tiriti (people of the treaty), are only here by right because of a contract made in the 1800s, if ACT breaks the Treaty I lose my right to live here and become stateless.
A Treaty is a contract, made by two parties, it can't be changed without the consent of those two parties, to try and unilaterally change that treaty by one party is IMHO both illegal and immoral. The irony of a racist hard Libertarian party (ACT) trying to break the state by breaking a contract is not lost on me. The fact that the rest of the coalition that currently governs us is putting us though this will be remembered too, I think they'll be a 1 term government.
There is a Hikoi (a protest march) approaching parliament from both ends of the country, next Tuesday there will be 10s maybe 100s of thousands of people, Tangata Whenua and Tangata Tiriti outside Parliament demanding and end to this abomination
I retired last year, was going to spend lots of time on warm beaches - instead I find myself standing on the street , or chasing a PM through a parking building with a sign several times a week, I have a pile of blank signs downstairs waiting for messages (they're easier to make 4 at a time), by god this world is fucked!
posted by mbo at 6:41 PM on November 15 [31 favorites]
The reality is that TPM represents the interests of a narrow layer of tribal capitalists and upper middle class layers.
This elite minority has profited from multi-million dollar Treaty of Waitangi settlements handed out to the tribes over the last three decades. These have been used to create lucrative businesses in tourism, agriculture, fisheries, property and other industries.
Even if that was all true and lacking bias that seems to be the Māori's problem and they don't need a group of colonists white knighting around.
posted by Mitheral at 7:57 PM on November 15 [5 favorites]
This elite minority has profited from multi-million dollar Treaty of Waitangi settlements handed out to the tribes over the last three decades. These have been used to create lucrative businesses in tourism, agriculture, fisheries, property and other industries.
Even if that was all true and lacking bias that seems to be the Māori's problem and they don't need a group of colonists white knighting around.
posted by Mitheral at 7:57 PM on November 15 [5 favorites]
Some more context here: Australian ABC.
posted by freethefeet at 11:07 PM on November 15 [1 favorite]
posted by freethefeet at 11:07 PM on November 15 [1 favorite]
cheering a spectacle of stereotyped nativity
This wasn't some show being put on for tourists. Please read some of the links here about it. The one freethefeet just posted is very good.
it pays to disabuse the "noble savage" narrative
The only person mentioning noble savages here is you, right there. I recognise that there are concerns being raised in AoNZ about the probity of Te Pāti Māori, but in this context bringing that up as a gotcha is a serious diversionary tactic. Indigenous peoples everywhere have their own internal politics, winners and losers, and issues with corruption. Those pale when compared with the wider issues of corruption that stem from colonialism. Why don't we talk about how a treaty signed when Aotearoa was 98% Māori paved the way for their colonisation and marginalisation, and how the treaty settlements of the past thirty years are a belated (pretty modest) attempt at redress, which even then is apparently too much for the vultures of late capitalism represented by ACT NZ?
Use your words? When is melodic stomping and chanting the answer? Why celebrate it?
I chose to use/highlight a Māori writer's words instead, in the closing link of my post.
This was a protest. It isn't as if the idea of using song and dance and ceremony and ritual to make a political point hasn't occurred to white people.
Dismissing Maipi-Clarke's protest in defence of indigenous rights because one of her colleagues talked about Māori being "genetically superior" in the context of sport is, frankly, some bullshit. When it comes to sport, I wouldn't imagine that Māori people are immune to genetic essentialism any more than a lot of other people are. But there's a different debate to be had about the role of rugby in modern Māori identity and/or about myths around genetics and sport.
And sure, we could discuss the relationship between indigenous groups and capitalism, and Māori views on same. All of it, though, is a distraction from an attempt by a right-wing minority party to hijack the national conversation in AoNZ to bring the Treaty itself into question so that they can disrupt the constitutional foundations of the country and swoop in for some disaster capitalism.
I live in a country that's gone through a similar undermining of its settled constitutional arrangements in the past couple of decades, and would hate to see my old neighbours (and a country I once lived in briefly) go through anything similar. Nobody challenged Theresa May and Boris Johnson by letting loose a Scottish war cry and sword dance in Westminster during the Brexit years, but it bloody well wouldn't have hurt.
posted by rory at 3:56 AM on November 16 [26 favorites]
This wasn't some show being put on for tourists. Please read some of the links here about it. The one freethefeet just posted is very good.
it pays to disabuse the "noble savage" narrative
The only person mentioning noble savages here is you, right there. I recognise that there are concerns being raised in AoNZ about the probity of Te Pāti Māori, but in this context bringing that up as a gotcha is a serious diversionary tactic. Indigenous peoples everywhere have their own internal politics, winners and losers, and issues with corruption. Those pale when compared with the wider issues of corruption that stem from colonialism. Why don't we talk about how a treaty signed when Aotearoa was 98% Māori paved the way for their colonisation and marginalisation, and how the treaty settlements of the past thirty years are a belated (pretty modest) attempt at redress, which even then is apparently too much for the vultures of late capitalism represented by ACT NZ?
Use your words? When is melodic stomping and chanting the answer? Why celebrate it?
I chose to use/highlight a Māori writer's words instead, in the closing link of my post.
This was a protest. It isn't as if the idea of using song and dance and ceremony and ritual to make a political point hasn't occurred to white people.
Dismissing Maipi-Clarke's protest in defence of indigenous rights because one of her colleagues talked about Māori being "genetically superior" in the context of sport is, frankly, some bullshit. When it comes to sport, I wouldn't imagine that Māori people are immune to genetic essentialism any more than a lot of other people are. But there's a different debate to be had about the role of rugby in modern Māori identity and/or about myths around genetics and sport.
And sure, we could discuss the relationship between indigenous groups and capitalism, and Māori views on same. All of it, though, is a distraction from an attempt by a right-wing minority party to hijack the national conversation in AoNZ to bring the Treaty itself into question so that they can disrupt the constitutional foundations of the country and swoop in for some disaster capitalism.
I live in a country that's gone through a similar undermining of its settled constitutional arrangements in the past couple of decades, and would hate to see my old neighbours (and a country I once lived in briefly) go through anything similar. Nobody challenged Theresa May and Boris Johnson by letting loose a Scottish war cry and sword dance in Westminster during the Brexit years, but it bloody well wouldn't have hurt.
posted by rory at 3:56 AM on November 16 [26 favorites]
Sing-in protest interrupts debate (2011). One protester began singing from the gallery to the tune of the “Star Spangled Banner.” ... Shortly after the first one was removed, another began singing. When that protester was removed, another burst into song.
Singing, chanting, vows for change as gun sit-in ends (2016). The protesting lawmakers responded by breaking into the song they sang on the House floor hours before, the civil rights anthem, "We Shall Overcome."
‘No drilling! No drilling!’: climate choir sings truth to power in Palace of Westminster (2024). “Fossil fuel profits are outrageous – Stop Rosebank! Stop Rosebank!” they sing to the tune of Handel’s Hallelujah chorus.
posted by rory at 5:40 AM on November 16 [7 favorites]
Singing, chanting, vows for change as gun sit-in ends (2016). The protesting lawmakers responded by breaking into the song they sang on the House floor hours before, the civil rights anthem, "We Shall Overcome."
‘No drilling! No drilling!’: climate choir sings truth to power in Palace of Westminster (2024). “Fossil fuel profits are outrageous – Stop Rosebank! Stop Rosebank!” they sing to the tune of Handel’s Hallelujah chorus.
posted by rory at 5:40 AM on November 16 [7 favorites]
And I thought the Canadian Parliament had fun meetings!
This reminds me of how Elijah Harper stopped the Meech Lake Accords where Canada tried amending the Canadian Constitution to grant Quebec special status while ignoring first nations, He objected in the Manitoba assembly while holding an eagle feather.
posted by srboisvert at 6:55 AM on November 16
This reminds me of how Elijah Harper stopped the Meech Lake Accords where Canada tried amending the Canadian Constitution to grant Quebec special status while ignoring first nations, He objected in the Manitoba assembly while holding an eagle feather.
posted by srboisvert at 6:55 AM on November 16
And the oppressor will always find some reason to criticize those whose rights it seeks to restrict. I reject this rhetorical move and find it repugnant.
posted by prefpara at 11:13 AM on November 15
prefpara - thank you for your comments. Your final sentence rings so so true for me, especially now. I am not Maori but I so much resonate with their energetic claims to their rights. And here in the US, I draw strength from them.
posted by bluesky43 at 7:14 AM on November 16 [4 favorites]
posted by prefpara at 11:13 AM on November 15
prefpara - thank you for your comments. Your final sentence rings so so true for me, especially now. I am not Maori but I so much resonate with their energetic claims to their rights. And here in the US, I draw strength from them.
posted by bluesky43 at 7:14 AM on November 16 [4 favorites]
From - "Hana’s haka shows up the House"
“The bill is based on a definition of equality that erases how our history has privileged some and impoverished others. Implementation of this kind of equality would perform a reset of society that automatically legitimises the inequality that’s resulted from the injustices of our colonial history.”
...
"The misrecognition of a legitimate form of Māori expression shows a deep-seated problem — the positioning of parliamentary norms as universal and therefore applicable across cultural boundaries. The argument for abiding by parliament norms and not shutting the bill down before it was tabled because an agreement was made by three parties is self-contradictory.
If sticking to agreements is so important, then why do they not need to abide by the agreements made in Te Tiriti o Waitangi?
What is also ironic about claims of haka disrupting proceedings is what anyone who listens to debates in the chamber can see and hear during every session.
Our MPs shout at others, are rude and disrupt others while they’re talking all the time. The haka is a far more elegant, respectful and eloquent device than the usual disrespectful, intentional attempts to insult and denigrate others that parliamentarians use to bully and silence on a regular basis.
It is highly hypocritical to say that one Māori form of expression is disruptive, while carrying out bullying, disrespectful and disruptive behaviours that have been inherited from a foreign country."
posted by phigmov at 11:11 AM on November 16 [16 favorites]
“The bill is based on a definition of equality that erases how our history has privileged some and impoverished others. Implementation of this kind of equality would perform a reset of society that automatically legitimises the inequality that’s resulted from the injustices of our colonial history.”
...
"The misrecognition of a legitimate form of Māori expression shows a deep-seated problem — the positioning of parliamentary norms as universal and therefore applicable across cultural boundaries. The argument for abiding by parliament norms and not shutting the bill down before it was tabled because an agreement was made by three parties is self-contradictory.
If sticking to agreements is so important, then why do they not need to abide by the agreements made in Te Tiriti o Waitangi?
What is also ironic about claims of haka disrupting proceedings is what anyone who listens to debates in the chamber can see and hear during every session.
Our MPs shout at others, are rude and disrupt others while they’re talking all the time. The haka is a far more elegant, respectful and eloquent device than the usual disrespectful, intentional attempts to insult and denigrate others that parliamentarians use to bully and silence on a regular basis.
It is highly hypocritical to say that one Māori form of expression is disruptive, while carrying out bullying, disrespectful and disruptive behaviours that have been inherited from a foreign country."
posted by phigmov at 11:11 AM on November 16 [16 favorites]
Mod note: One comment removed. Please refrain from pointing out whether another community member has favorited a comment or not, as it comes off as accusatory and belittling.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 1:12 PM on November 16 [1 favorite]
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 1:12 PM on November 16 [1 favorite]
Mod note: Hi again. Apologies but another comment removed. Please keep the discussion focused on the topic and not how threads are moderated. If you have questions or concerns, you're welcome to reach out via the Contact Us form.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 2:51 PM on November 16
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 2:51 PM on November 16
I arrived back in Wellington yesterday, 7 years since my last trip home to NZ, and 20-ish years since I left for the US.
I couldn’t be prouder that people are standing up against this bullshit. I drove down Lambton Quay and saw signs warning of Hikoi related delays on Tuesday.
Good.
Maybe it’a living through what is happening back in the US, and then seeing some of the same far-right forces at work home in NZ. It fills me with rage. A big fuck off to the supporters of this bill. Feel free to head down to Wellington Harbor and pull a wave over your head. It’s a cracking day for it.
posted by inflatablekiwi at 12:41 PM on November 17 [7 favorites]
I couldn’t be prouder that people are standing up against this bullshit. I drove down Lambton Quay and saw signs warning of Hikoi related delays on Tuesday.
Good.
Maybe it’a living through what is happening back in the US, and then seeing some of the same far-right forces at work home in NZ. It fills me with rage. A big fuck off to the supporters of this bill. Feel free to head down to Wellington Harbor and pull a wave over your head. It’s a cracking day for it.
posted by inflatablekiwi at 12:41 PM on November 17 [7 favorites]
The most consequential week for te ao Māori in a generation
Earlier this week we farewelled the last Māori Battalion soldier, B Company veteran Tā Robert "Bom" Gillies.posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 4:01 PM on November 17 [5 favorites]
His death severed Māoridom's connection to World War II, and our grandparents; where Māori soldiers heeded the call to leave behind their families in order to shed their blood for God, for King and for country.
And to say they fought hard was an understatement. Of the estimated 3600 Māori who were enlisted to fight in WWII under the 28th Māori Battalion, 649 lost their lives. Of that sacrifice, Lieutenant-General Bernard Freyberg had said that ''no infantry battalion had a more distinguished record, or saw more fighting, or, alas, had such heavy casualties as the Māori Battalion".
...
Labour's Ikaroa-Rāwhiti MP, Cushla Tangaere-Manuel, acknowledged the passing of Tā Bom Gillies before challenging the Government on whether they have and will ever see Māori as equals to Pākeha.
"Yesterday, we stood in unison to honour Tā Bom Gillies who said ... 'we returned from war to the continued subjugation of Māori … since the Treaty, to this day'.
"Honestly, e hika mā, what is the price of citizenship?"
Reminds me of that scene in Casablanca where they defiantly sung La Marseillaise (another legit war chant) at the Nazis.
posted by whuppy at 3:11 PM on November 18 [3 favorites]
posted by whuppy at 3:11 PM on November 18 [3 favorites]
Definitive answer to the question, was it planned? Yes, but it didn't go entirely according to plan.
Meanwhile reports of more than 30k people in Parliament grounds and surrounding streets in Wellington from the hīkoi culminating today. Photos (RNZ) and Stuff.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 5:11 PM on November 18 [6 favorites]
Meanwhile reports of more than 30k people in Parliament grounds and surrounding streets in Wellington from the hīkoi culminating today. Photos (RNZ) and Stuff.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 5:11 PM on November 18 [6 favorites]
Te Pāti Māori has laid an official complaint against the speaker of the house Gerry Brownlee following Tuesday’s Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti Aotearoa’s biggest protest on parliament grounds. ... The complaint comes as all three parties from the coalition government have also issued a complaint against Te Pāti Māori co-leaders for doing the haka in parliament last week.
"I ripped that in half and chucked it away." Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke was warmly greeted by an audience of 35,000 outside the place she was suspended from for 24 hours just a week ago.
posted by rory at 1:21 AM on November 20 [4 favorites]
"I ripped that in half and chucked it away." Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke was warmly greeted by an audience of 35,000 outside the place she was suspended from for 24 hours just a week ago.
posted by rory at 1:21 AM on November 20 [4 favorites]
I really hope the public see the Hīkoi as being a groundswell of support for the Treaty and not some fringe element. Also, the public need to see the instigator and supporters of the bill as being essentially toxic and dangerous such that they get punished at the next election or there is a loss of confidence leading to the collapse of the current right-wing government coalition. I understand there is also some additional legislation underway in parallel with the bill to undermine aspects of the Treaty too, so while people focus on the bill, there is also damage being done to existing Treaty provisions and cultural progress of embedding Māoritanga into the countries way of life.
posted by phigmov at 9:47 AM on November 20 [3 favorites]
posted by phigmov at 9:47 AM on November 20 [3 favorites]
I didn't know the red berets were a thing - Hīkoi hats: Why are so many people wearing red berets?
posted by phigmov at 10:02 AM on November 23 [3 favorites]
posted by phigmov at 10:02 AM on November 23 [3 favorites]
« Older to be or 4B | "several theories that are questionably valid and... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
I was moved to post this by some of the dismissive comments below the TikTok video calling it "embarrassing" or "unprofessional" that have attracted tens of thousands of likes from, presumably, ACT New Zealand voters and ignorant foreigners. Trying to undermine Te Tiriti is what's truly embarrassing.
The title of this post, from the most famous haka, translates as "I die, I die! I live, I live!"
posted by rory at 5:28 AM on November 15 [34 favorites]