Turia is understandably unhappy about Key’s unilateral decision to exclude the Te Urewera National Park from the Tuhoe deal. But to suggest that she would be willing to dump the very fruitful coalition for this reason is to suggest that she is a very stupid woman who has no understanding of political give-and-take. Turia is very far from stupid.

The current coalition is quite stable in political terms. Both ACT and the Maori party have achieved some gains, despite neither of them being essential for a majority unless the other coalition partner quits first. I would expect both parties to become increasingly critical of National as we near the 2011 elections, in order to differentiate themselves from the government. However, considering the popularity of the current government, despite it’s shortcomings, I would have thought even this inevitable fractiousness would be muted. Neither party would wish to make themselves unappealing to National post 2011.

Both ACT and the Maori party have little to gain from differentiating themselves from National. They are both essentially reliant on seats, rather than numbers. Hide is reliant on National putting up either no candidate or a token one. He cannot afford to be too confrontational, even if he wanted to. The Maori party are reliant on the Maori seats which will not be greatly affected by their coalition with National, so long as they have something to show for it. Only die-hard Labour supporters would say that the Maori party have achieved nothing.

I am not reading a lot into the Maori party confab about whether they continue the coalition. Turia and Sharples have every reason to express disappointment and no reason at all to pull out of the coalition, unless they have a sudden attack of dumb. Pulling out at this time will destroy any leverage they have on the format of the new Foreshore and Seabed legislation and will sink Whanau Ora immediately. That would be a high price to pay for a protest.

Related posts:

1. Viewpoints
2. We Will Fight Them On the Beaches…
3. Politics of Inclusion

Could it be, in fact, that they cannot refute what he says because they share his beliefs? That is what we all began to wonder as the party leadership drifted through the week without emphatic denunciation of what Harawira expressed. What was sad about the week is that we did not really find out.

Actually, Paul, we already know that Turia and Sharples have the same core beliefs as Harawira. Here is Turia failing to apologise for her “Maori Holocaust” speech. Although the furor was about her use of the word “Holocaust”, reading through her speech would tell you that she blames Maori problems squarely on Pakeha. Here is Sharples telling his gang-leader friends that they should stick together against the white man (His actual words were “Why are we fighting whakapapa against whakapapa? There’s so much enemy that is not brown.”). We also see the leadership of Harawira’s electorate and other Maori leaders defending him.

One can only conclude that the core belief of Maori leadership is that white people are to blame for the predicament of their people. Although this is true on a historical level, this is not the limit of that core belief. It is clear that the belief in white culpability extends to the current generation of Pakeha. This has all the hallmarks of racism – being an irrational prejudice based solely upon skin colour.

Not that I think that Turia and Sharples (or even Harawira, for that matter) are malignantly white-hating racists. What I am saying is they have an underlying belief that is race-based and irrational. Unless they confront this belief, it is unlikely that they will be of any use in nation-building. They may find some useful solutions for their people, but they will find themselves unable to partner with white New Zealanders.

You can already see this in Turia’s “Whanau Ora” brainchild. It is possible that this solution may well have benefit for Maori, but it should not have been a maori-only project. If it has benefit for the Maori people, then it will have benefit for all New Zealanders. All this does is emphasise the separate nature of Maoridom and enhance division.

If you truly wish to build a nation (and New Zealand is still very young in historical terms and still in the process of “becoming”), the only way to do this is to develop a nation-culture. This would not be a colonial culture (where Maori take on the Pakeha culture and lose their own) nor an indigenous culture (where Pakeha take on Maori culture and lose their own) but a synthesis of the two. Note that I am not suggesting that Maori give up their Maoriness or that a culture should be homogenous. What I am suggesting is that the underlying glue of society needs to be based on a uniform culture with pockets of multiculturalism. That uniform culture would mostly be a synthesis of Maori and European cultures.

I see signs of this happening as people become more willing to embrace aspects of other peoples cultures. However, Racism and prejudice block this synthesis. And while I would very much like to see the Maori party be part of the solution, if they persist in holding Pakeha responsible for their people’s problems, they will remain part of the problem. Turia and Sharples need to address this racist streak urgently, if they want to develop anything of lasting usefulness with National.

Related posts:

1. Maori Moment
2. Political Stability
3. Affirmative Reaction

The daft thing is that I find Harawira’s “cheeky darkie”  attitude to be quite refreshing. There is no problem in guessing his motivations and beliefs. He provides a much needed dose of reality to the strange love-fest between the Maori party and National, because there is still a significant chunk of Maoridom that thinks exactly like Harawira.

As a foreigner in this country, I have observed that Maori tend to be quite forthright and somewhat aggressive  in giving their opinion (this is a generalisation, of course). This tends to clash with the more reserved, almost priggish, sensibilities of white New Zealanders. Much of the problem between Maori and Pakeha seems to me to stem from this clash of cultural differences. Harawira just makes the contrast more obvious.

Perhaps we could all learnt to think of it as a “maori moment” and just get over it.

Related posts:

1. Core Belief
2. Spot the REAL Hypocrites (updated)
3. Viewpoints

As Mr. Harawira’s loudmouth, boorish actions threaten to end the current coalition, one would have thought this was newsworthy – but it is not mentioned except as a brief article on page three. The front page news? Rodney Hide had a holiday.

Rodney. Hide. Had. A. Holiday.

And just in case you think this is a ploy of the editor – splashing a trivial scandal on the front page to attract readers, think again. Two (not one, but two) columnists go with Hide’s use of his entitlement. His legal use of his entitlement. That did not involve skiving off his actual duties nor slagging off three quarters of the country.

Okay, I accept that Hide has shown a remarkable lack of insight here and has neatly opened himself up to the same set of poor perceptions that currently plague Bill English. But how is his minor porking at the trough in any way more important than Harawira’s blatant racism?

Not that Harawira will admit to racism. He won’t have to – already the apologists are out in force. If you want a really good example of rank, festering hypocrisy, here is our Race Relations Commissioner being nauseating:

Commissioner Joris de Bres says, unlike students wearing Nazi uniforms or schoolboys bowing to a swastika, Mr Harawira’s comments are not a breach of the Human Rights Act, because he is entitled to freedom of expression.

I feel free to express that you are a complete prat, Mr. de Bres. I look forward to seeing your unbelievably stupid remark on a Tui billboard in the near future.

Additional:

There does not seem to be any shortage of apologists with prattish remarks.

Related posts:

1. Racist Race Relations
2. The Blight of Racism
3. Missing Helen

But the weirdest thing is that this is one government department bidding against another. Admittedly, neither TVNZ nor Maori TV are government departments – but the money they are bidding with is government money. All this achieves is an increase in the price of coverage for the world cup. This would be a bit like Telecom’s Retail division bidding against Telecom’s Network division for a new broadband technology. Few companies would, after shooting themselves in the foot, take careful aim and unload the other barrel into the other foot.

This is precisely what happens when government stick its fingers into businesses that should be running autonomously (i.e. privatised). Markets are severely distorted and we all end up paying a lot more for a lot less.

Just like ACC.

Additional:

It appears National have had second thoughts about pitting one part of government against another…

Related posts:

1. Getting Away With Nothing
2. How to Shoot Yourself in the Foot
3. Stuck in the Middle With You