viagra in andhra pradesh can you buy viagra high street doxycycline dosage for a bladder infection zoloft 25 mg breastfeeding twins cialis 10 mg efficacia generic viagra soft tablets best viagra in thailand rezeptfrei buy generic viagra in hyderabad finasteride le prix ney york viagra over the counter how much does 20mg of cialis cost ciprofloxacin dose 500 mg can you buy viagra in france buy viagra mississauga stores sildenafil neuraxpharm 50 mg preis best place to buy viagra australia kosten viagra 100mg viagra online rating european pharmacopoeia metformin dose of prednisone in sarcoidosis ist viagra in den usa rezeptpflichtig fecula de papa donde comprar viagra inderal for sleep how to get propecia for hair loss cave of programming generics for zoloft will amoxil treat a uti sufrexal combi ovulos generico de cialis pravaselect 20 mg effetti collaterali zoloft can i take 1500 mg of metformin a day tadalafil in saudi arabia buy nolvadex eciwlcodkedefe tomar media pastilla de viagra online viagra online pharmacy u s aspiratore nasale neonato controindicazioni viagra where can i buy cialis soft tabs where to buy viagra in rochester generic propecia does not work prednisone 10 mg cost cialis 20 mg tadalafil review buy cialis in penang price for zovirax 800 mg where can you get clomid pills viagra used for weightlifting welcome to viagra canada shop how much does cipro cost without insurance how much does propecia cost walgreens who to buy viagra from safely does clomid really make you ovulate cost of generic finasteride 5 mg without insurance get viagra in chennai cover taste of prednisone liquid 5mg propecia effective lasix in urinary retention gonorrhea treatment in men zithromax cipro pregnancy safety car cialis 5mg how to take ciprofloxacin uti reviews is it legal to send viagra through the mail in usa cost of propecia in thailand sildenafil citrate tablets 100mg uk cheap generic cialis next day delivery uk where can i get zithromax in the uk buy zithromax online generic nolvadex prices south afrtica how much is viagra in tijuana mexico actief bestanddeel viagra finasteride for prostate with t blocker online buy viagra fatto in casa how to get rid of a viagra headache cialis 10mg greece 15 mg zoloft cialis prices at asda kuala lumpur buy viagra lasix online without prescription debit card renault cipro 85 review how much viagra can i bring into australia costco mexico viagra propecia yes or no 100mg viagra pills compare the price of cialis at walgreens verkningstid viagra for sale propecia si trova in farmacia efeito do generico do viagra legal to buy viagra online australia sildenafil citrate chemical structure propranolol clorhidrato 40 mg tableta cheapest brand viagra singles online nimesulida tem generico do viagra predsim generico prednisolone tablets clomid difference in days how to order cialis from china viagra uk multiple orgasm male viagra sales in chennai madras tadalafil 20mg how to use cheapest viagra online place buy viagra does 800 mg cialis exist zoloft in urine drug test about tadalafil 20mg canada priligy generico opinioniste pastilla viagra costovertebral angle viagra 100 mg fta can you get arrested for selling viagra viagra prescription low cost metformin atid 500 mg beipackzettel venta de viagra syphilis treatment doxycycline dosage can one take 2 cialis in 24 hours prednisone 60 mg for poison ivy can i take cephalexin with accutane finasteride whartisthebestin overnight sildenafil ag 50 mg cialis 5 mg italia buy propecia price cuantas veces se puede usar las pastillas cytotec buy cialis in new delhi online generic viagra ship to canada ampicillin 250 mg cloxacillin 250mg5ml 100mg zoloft 300 mg wellbutrin twice mastika natural chios gum mastic 500 mg metformin cialis brands india ampicillin sodium 500 mg injection code 90630 arthrotec 75 mg pfizer viagra how much are viagra in the streets number of accutane prescriptions ampicillin and gentamicin in nicu donde puedo comprar viagra seguro viagra online in deutschland bestellen how 2 take clomid price of cialis from el lily does indian viagra cause bleeding buy cialis generic with out prescription does watermelon work like viagra 100 mg viagra does not work can you buy viagra in morroco hixizine generico do viagra bula do selozok 50 mg zoloft comprar viagra en malaga sin receta how much does cialis cost usa quando il cialis generico propecia online thailand ampicillin cloxacillin 500mg where can i get viagra in cork zoloft jaw pain is viagra safe with losartan cialis 20mg kaufen erfahrungen fashion glasses non prescription cheap cialis zoloft 50 mg effetti collaterali varicose veins specialist in randburg can you buy cytotec online cialis 10 mg durata effetto cialis from india made me sick prednisolone 15 mg para que sirve where to buy spray viagra amoxil 500 mg acne cipro 500 mg 14 tablet ne dirajte mi ravnicu nolvadex prices in usa priligy singapore online grocery doxycycline dose for syphilis treatment 50 mg zoloft withdrawal side accutane tablets buy finasteride costo en venezuela where can i buy zithromax in liquid form online cialis us adoxa generic cialis viagra price in life pharmacy in dubai viagra alternatives over the counter australia time lansoprazole generico de cialis purchase peptides sildenafil how long does accutane take to clear up acne order zovirax ointment on line uk buy viagra on internet viagra prices triple prednisone online no rx next day posid 50 mg zoloft buy diflucan internet cheapest generic viagra in the world post finasteride syndrome uk basketball mechanism of action of lasix viagra canada prescription required for tylenol cialis pharmacy price elantan la 25 mg of zoloft buy cytotec in davao finasteride and rogaine in morning or night ciprofloxacin 500 mg tablets 5312 where to buy liquid clomid australia long cialis take effect cheapest generic tadalafil from india dose in prednisone pack viagra generico precio inderal 40 mg biverkningar av gurkmeja cialis 20 mg que es comprar viagra sin receta barcelona farmacia plavix and viagra is it safe for a woman to take viagra can i get viagra off the shelf buy cialis online us fedex viagra usa online real cialis online canada buy sildenafil france is doxycycline used for strep throat how soon should u take viagra clomid and progesterone levels what is the lowest dosage of clomid buying generic doxycycline without a prescription cialis daily 5mg price cubre tacones donde comprar viagra buy generic viagra online in canada cytotec abortion pill in pakistan original purpose for viagra viagra available over counter thailand bomb diflucan safe pregnant woman buying dapoxetine hydrochloride can you take claritin with doxycycline models use accutane sildenafil in apotheken over the counter alternative to cialis socialism failing in denmark substitute viagra india nolvadex 10 mg daytrana best price for cialis 25 mg manly brand sildenafil viagra alternatives over the counter walmart credit accutane and amoxicillin together accutane 40mg a day sildenafil order form in uk walgreen cialis prices without insurance do you need a prescription for propecia in spain generic viagra manufacturers by country 10 mg of prednisone daily for copd major manufacturers of generic cialis passiert wenn frauen viagra nehmen in english best price 1mg propecia viagra in indian book through vp how much does cialis cost in hendersonville tn doxycycline degradation in water cheap generic viagra online india can doxycycline cause yellow tongue prednisolone 5 mg5 ml soln teclozan 500 mg metformin prednisone in copd exacerbation efecto del sildenafil 50 mg usual dose for lasix zithromax lyme disease can clomid cause gallstones cialis 5 mg 28 comprimidos gastrorresistentes buy mifepristone cytotec ru486 misoprostol zoloft in taiwan foro comprar cialis online sildenafil cost nhs discounts zoloft highs and lows in weather order 36 hr cialis how much viagra prescription cost cost of 1 cialis 20 mg nombre generico del viagra en argentina buenos buy zovirax coldsore cream comprar viagra contrareembolso en argentina yahoo comprar viagra online argentina zovirax 200 mg tablet ceny buying proscar finasteride propecia in nigeria deltasone efectos secundarios how to buy metformin in singapore old man takes viagra propecia cost in nz pariet 20mg tem generico de cialis same day delivery viagra nj metamizol 500 mg dosierung ciprofloxacin can accutane cause wrinkles 77canadianpharmacy com buy zoloft viagra type drugs cipro 500 mg 5 days esiste cialis 50 mg ciprofloxacin ophthalmic solution over the counter viagra pay pal india generic propecia same alesse generic version of viagra how i can buy cheap viagra cialis 100mg kaufen alternative pills to viagra finasteride 5mg tablets how do you space 7.5 mg of prednisone a day chorioamnionitis ampicillin dose brothers liquid viagra bing tadalafil 80 mg safe tadalafil solubility in dmso buy nolvadex online canada no prescription can i take viagra and warfarin how can i buy viagra in dublin cialis diario 5 mg c 28 comp metformin 70 mg how do you buy viagra in the uk good cialis dose tetradox doxycycline 100mg metformin xr cut in half zithromax 500 mg malaysia cialis 5 mg au maroc material safety data sheet ciprofloxacin hydrochloride does finasteride cause constipation zoloft 50 mg high performance 100 mg clomid 3 7 doxycycline how to take in acne online viagra tablets in india cialis india visa cialis dosage duration clomid for getting pregnant viagra causa diarreia health canada off label use for metformin can you buy viagra over counter comoros viagra kopen in griekenland taking 250 mg of metformin dosagens de cialis buying viagra amsterdam comprare viagra basso costo generic sildenafil citrate gsc 100 prednisone order onlne overnight shipping accidentally took 2 cialis 20 mg donde comprar cytotec misoprostol mexico sildenafil medisine price in kolkata cialis 5 mg rezeptfrei viagra substitute walgreens mayo clinic 50 mg prednisone buying cialis 10mg where to find ciproflaxacin in ottawaon viagra reviews wore her out is there a generic for cialis over the counter brand cialis with no prescription promius pharma accutane cost comprar sildenafil da china pelo paypal how soon does cialis take effect can we buy viagra in malaysia how much is generic finasteride in the us viagra super active review cialis viagra combination usage definition viagra pfizer tablets sale 100 ml viagra review doxycycline prescription cost comparison over the counter pills that are comparable to viagra e types for sale in uk zithromax cytotec real buy viagra online sweden propecia in indonesia new zealand herald metformin hcl do you need a prescription to buy doxycycline doxycycline ireland quais os beneficios de viagra generico cialis canada coupon buying viagra online safely is generic tadalafil available how does lasix cause ototoxicity prednisone high glucose 25 mg zoloft stimulant effect ibuprofen actavis 600 mg bijsluiter cialis synalar nombre generico de amoxil celebrities that have taken clomid cheap sildenafil baownbeuv order cialis on line how many mg are in the one day diflucan amoxicilina 875 mg efeitos colaterais do viagra clomid legality in south africa cortancyl 20 mg prednisone for 5 pfizer india zoloft efectos secundarios de sildenafil tadalafil 5 mg india viagra las vegas where to buy maximum daily dose of lasix como usar cytotec para un mes de embarazo democratic socialism in norway cytotec 200 microgram tablets sale viagra super active scientific reviews metformina 850 mg mas glibenclamida 5 mg acne treatment without accutane cost cialis 80 mg malaysia ampicillin for gbs uti in early pregnancy que es glucophage how does cialis stay in the body is it ok to take nolvadex in place of genox how many 5 mg cialis are safe to take samsca 15 mg fiyati viagra viagra 50 mg generic viagra cialis online bestellen essen buy viagra from a kuala lumpur pharmacy order doxycycline pills online puerto rico cialis online cytotec in sabah liquid nolvadex for pct finasteride 5 mg tablet amp cost of viagra in south africa clomid dose for infertility viagra buy online ipb guys who take viagra how often can you take 40 mg. cialis where to buy viagra atlanta cheap alternative to one viagra ciprofloxacin syrup in bangladesh price order brand viagra online generico de cialis en farmacias similares matamoros diflucan costo mexico clomid in spanien i want to buy lasix 500 mg does viagra work for women prednisone tx in canine rmsf viagra generico efeitos sildenafil generico retirada de pontos cialis marketing campaign from where i can get viagra in karachi is it ok to take aspirin with cialis online viagra without prescription paypal natural viagra herb can you buy cialis online 5 mg prednisone for hives what is post finasteride syndrome scoliosis specialist in los angeles can you get high from zoloft 100 mg cialis cheap tablets what does doxycycline treats nolvadex 20 cpr riv 20 mg can you take viagra with amoxicillin how to order cialis online mometasone furoate monohydrate generic cialis como comprar viagra en gibraltar prednisone energy boost metronidazole 500 mg ciprofloxacin zithromax liquid dosage buy generic viagra propecia zovirax oral buy viagra in kids for hypertension doxycycline for brown recluse spider bite sildenafil actavis 50mg review viagra for men price in india bangalore how much does viagra increase size cipro 500 mg directions credit ph pharmacy generic viagra is cialis safe to take with hepatitis c how can bye viagra in jordan where can buy cytotec in dubai pregnancy and clomid 100mg is viagra on the 4 dollar plan at walmart cialis ready to market order cialis pills canada como comprar viagra portugalmail how to get viagra in italy existe algun generico de cialis prednisone 60 mg dose ulcerative colitis can you take accutane with prednisone best online pharmacy cialis zoloft to prozac generic amoxil discover card omeprazole actavis 40 mg bijsluiter viagra generic propecia or finasteride lasix 40 mg sanofi will vibramycin treat strep throat buy viagra in melbourne shop is zoloft better in the morning or evening high dose finasteride viagra 100mg information herbal viagra spray for men in saudiarabia order viagra eu metformin 500 mg markings propranolol in first trimester finasteride tablets canada segurex 50 sildenafil 50mg prednisone costs zoloft 50 mg tabletten tavor best time of day to take clomid 100mg and ovulation how long does liquid clomid last heaven and hell real experience with viagra average cost of generic diflucan at walgreens propecia price info ciprofloxacina 200 mg nombre comercial buy viagra 100g on line uk what is the fastest viagra online 1000 mg metformin without prescriptions il viagra generico quanto costa clomid use for getting pregnant .5 mg propecia results can generic cialis really be shipped overnight comprimidos cialis 20 mg iui clomid success stories purchase finasteride australia viagra juice recipe can doxycycline treat oral thrush 5 50 mg of clomid success rate miniprep ampicillin concentration in bacterial culture dalacin c 300 mg bijsluiter nolvadex pain in ovaries after taking clomid clomid price in saudi arabia socialist city council member in seattle what should i expect when i take viagra ariel liquide 27 doses of zoloft metformin chemistry structure when does the patent for viagra expire diagram tadalafil online china rip off brands of zoloft sildenafil 100 mg mylan careers order cialis super active 20mg doxycycline capsules generic finasteride baownbeuv australia sildenafil suppliers in the uk oxandrolone india pharmacy generic cialis how much lasix can i take at one time sildenafil la sante Kiwipolitico » Scott Hamilton
Posts Tagged ‘Scott Hamilton’

A Response to Chris

datePosted on 22:37, May 12th, 2011 by Lew

Chris Trotter has written a response to the previous discussions regarding the Treaty, titled Talking Past Each Other (a crisp description of the comments threads on both prior posts). I would usually respond there, but Blogger comments are presently down and I have time now, so here it is. It’s a bit more than a comment, at any rate.

I think Chris’ post is intended as a critique of my political and historical naïveté (a common theme), and a perception that I’m treating the history of Aotearoa as a ‘morality play’, to borrow Scott Hamilton’s phrase. In spite of that I find in it quite a lot to agree with. In particular, the characterisation of the agendas of the parties to the Treaty, which captures well the diversity, lack of cross-cultural and long-term perspective, and motive chaos within each camp; and the final affirmation that, whatever the history, the future of Māori and Pākehā must be together. The final paragraph, especially; I cannot agree more strongly.

I also have some problems with the piece; in particular the argument that violating the Treaty was necessary to the establishment of a functional colony and that, ultimately, it was for the best that the Crown did breach the Treaty because we ended up with this lovely country. I don’t agree, and to my mind this sort of let-bygones-be-bygones, it-all-turned-out-for-the-best thinking is a very convenient position to take when it’s not your land which was taken. But our differences on this point are well documented and I don’t intend to relitigate this disagreement here (or in comments; honestly, there’s enough of it on the other two thread!s)

Nevertheless, I do also think the piece mischaracterises my position. There are two main aspects to this. First, Chris says it is naïve to view the Treaty as a contract — and I agree, if it is to be viewed only as a contract. My framing of the two preceding posts in these terms was deliberately simplistic, as I noted to Hugh in comments to the first. But it was deliberate inasmuch as there exists such a paucity of understanding of the actual historical context of the Treaty as it actually occurred, and of its significance as a founding or mediating document, that a simple and clearly Pākehā frame of reference is needed to explicate it. It was not just a contract, but the Treaty was among its other roles, a contract laying out the grants and consideration of an agreement to colonise undertaken between the Crown and local rangatira. Viewing it as a contract, I think, forms a useful minimum basis for understanding, and in particular for the establishment of expectations of what should and could have occurred following its signing.

Of course, history isn’t so simple as that, and this gives rise to the second point: Chris (and others, particularly the commenters on the posts) seem to have interpreted my call for the Treaty to be honoured in the most literal terms — that, if my argument is true, Pākehā have a responsibility to return every square foot of raupatu land; pay reparation for every man killed in the Land Wars; and that Pākehā in 2011 must beat their breasts and prostrate themselves before the descendants of those fortunate enough to survive with whakapapa intact. I mean nothing of the sort. What I mean is that, even if it were for the best, even if breaches were necessary, there exists a moral responsibility to recognise these breaches. I disagree that admission of breaches is “accurrate but trivial”, as Chris puts it; if the agreement was made in good faith (as, having been authorised by the Queen, we have a right to assume it was) then the breaches matter, and give rise to an obligation on the part of the party in breach. Where my point has been lost, I think, is that this obligation extends to making reparation for the breaches to the mutual, minimal satisfaction of both parties. Māori, as I have kept pointing out, have not been unreasonable in this regard, invariably accepting reparations of a tiny fraction of the value of the initial breach, or of no economic value whatsoever — settling for symbolic gestures, apologies and recognition. The obligation, I argue, is to negotiate in similarly good faith. Inevitably, neither party will be entirely happy, but that’s not a realistic object — the object may be to reach a state of ‘minimal satisfaction’, a solution which, although merely tolerable to both parties, does enough to prevent further disputes.

And the end goal of this is the same as what Chris hopes for — a future together. By demonstrating good faith and making just reparation, we make progress toward solving two significant problems: one is the cultural and material circumstances in which Māori find themselves, largely as a consequence of successive governments’ lack of adherence to the Treaty. The other is the status of Pākehā society, which by acting in such poor faith has too long denied its own kaupapa; successive leaders, including the odious Prendergast, denying the existence and authority of a Treaty signed in the name of their own sovereign; and even having eventually recognised it, doing so only in a mean and grudging fashion. These circumstances — both the material circumstances and the lack of good faith by Pākehā — give rise to the ‘attitude’ problems among Māori referred to extensively in the prior comments by Andrew W and Phil Sage, which they argue creates a cycle of dysfunction. The same circumstances give rise to the Pākehā guilt to which Chris refers, and of which he has accused me in the past of being victim.

But I say again: this isn’t about guilt; none of us Pākehā held the sabre in hand or pulled the trigger. Many of us, myself included, have no ancestors who were here at the time of the Treaty’s signing and its most egregious breaches (mine were still in Skye, Kerry, Eindhoven and Brabant labouring under their own troubles at the time). But as Chris says, we have — and our society has — grown and prospered at the expense of the country’s original inhabitants, and we share in the responsibility to make that right. It’s not about dwelling in the past — it’s about moving into the future, which we cannot only do once the misgivings of the past have been settled. Although Pākehā have tried to do so, it should be clear now that we cannot force Māori to forget — and nor should we. But we can work together — as much as possible without self-flagellation or haughty defensiveness — toward squaring the ledger, purging the bad blood and cleaning the slate so that we can go forward, unencumbered, into a future as iwi tahi tātou.

L

Farewell Dame Judith Binney

datePosted on 13:16, February 16th, 2011 by Lew

Sad news today that Dame Judith Binney, who was probably New Zealand’s greatest living historian, has died.

Dame Judith is best known for her remarkable works on the history of colonialism in New Zealand — in particular for Redemption Songs: a life of Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki; and more recently Encircled Lands: Te Urewera, 1820-1921 . Shortly after the publication of Encircled Lands, in December 2009, Dame Judith was hit by a truck while crossing a road in Auckland. She suffered a head injury, and while it has not been confirmed, it seems reasonable to assume that this contributed to her early passing.

I can’t do her work and her career justice, so rather than try, I’ll refer you to Scott Hamilton’s excellent essay Why we need Judith Binney.

A huge and tragic loss.

L

Class, identity, solidarity and dissent

datePosted on 21:36, November 1st, 2010 by Lew

Recently commenter Tiger Mountain raised the parallel between solidarity with Actor’s Equity regarding The Hobbit and support for the māori party given their coalition with National and sponsorship of some bad legislation. I explained how they’re not equivalent, but leaving aside the main difference of mandate (which the māori party has and AE doesn’t) the wider issue of critical solidarity is an important one, and one which has been raised several times recently. In the wake of The Hobbit fiasco matters of class, identity and solidarity are high in everyone’s minds, and I think in spite of our many differences, we can agree that’s a good thing.

Another contribution to the wider debate is by Eddie at The Standard. For once I find myself agreeing with Eddie’s opening sentence about the māori party, which is:

The problem with any identity-based political movement is it pre-supposes that the common identity of its members surpasses their conflicting class interests.

It’s true, although I would have phrased it as follows:

The problem with any class-based political movement is it pre-supposes that the common class of its members surpasses their conflicting identity interests.

I wrote at length about this dynamic tension at a time when it looked like Labour was going to force Māori to choose between their class identity and their identity as tangata whenua — and how foolish forcing such a choice would be. (It’s still not clear whether Labour has abandoned it, but it at least seems obvious that they don’t have a full-blooded commitment to the blue collars, red necks strategy. But that’s by the way.)

What tends to follow from statements like that one is a series of value judgements about which set of interests ought to take precedence. This can be valuable, but is often tiresome, particularly when those making the pronouncements are “fighting a corner” for only one half of the equation (usually, it must be said, the “class” corner). But Eddie has mostly (not entirely) resisted the urge to do so and focused on the internal dispute within the māori party, and in particular the rather dictatorial stance taken by Tariana Turia regarding opposition to the new Marine & Coastal Area (hereafter MCA) Bill. That’s an important debate and examination of it is valuable, but what’s not really valuable is Eddie’s attempt to frame Turia’s stance as a matter of māori identity v class identity. It’s not. It’s a matter of the tension between moderate and radical factions within the movement; part of the internal debate within Māoridom.

Class is an element of this internal debate, but it is not the only element, and I would argue it is not even the predominant element. I think it’s clear that the conciliatory, collaborative, third-way sort of approach to tino rangatiratanga taken by Turia and Sharples under the guidance of Whatarangi Winiata (and whose work seems likely to be continued by new president Pem Bird is the predominant force. I also think the main reason for the left’s glee at the ascendance of the more radical faction is largely due to the fact that there’s a National government at present (and recall how different things were when the boot was on the other foot from 2005-2008). Those leading the radical charge against the MCA bill — notably Hone Harawira, Annette Sykes and Moana Jackson (whose primer on the bill is required reading) are not Marxists or class advocates so much as they are staunch advocates for tino rangatiratanga, who oppose the bill not so much for reasons based on class, but for reasons based on kaupapa Māori notions of justice. The perspectives of all three are informed by these sorts of traditionally-leftist analyses, but those analyses are certainly not at the fore in this dispute (as they have been in some past disputes). In fact, the strongest (you could say “least refined”) Marxist critiques of the bill advocate for wholesale nationalisation of the F&S, unapologetically trampling on residual property rights held by tangata whenua in favour of collective ownership.

For Eddie’s caricature of the dispute as “identity” v “class” to hold strictly, Turia, Sharples, Flavell and Katene would need to occupy the “authentic” kaupapa Māori position, the legitimate claim of acting in the pure interests of mana motuhake and tino rangatiratanga; while Harawira, Sykes and Jackson (among others) would need to be largely denuded of this “identity” baggage, and be more or less pure class warriors. Neither is true; Harawira, Sykes and Jackson’s critique of the bill isn’t a Marxist critique; they’re arguing that the bill doesn’t serve the imperative of tino rangatiratanga and is therefore not an authentic kaupapa Māori position; an assertion that Sharples has tacitly accepted with his response that the Maori Party must accept compromise. (This is true, of course; I agree with Sharples and Turia as far as that goes. I just disagree that this bill is the issue upon which to compromise so heavily. Because of that, I come down on the side of Harawira, Sykes and Jackson.)

The other misguided thing is how Eddie frames Turia’s insistence that Harawira and others adhere to the party line as some sort of manifestation of Māori over class identity within the party — the quelling of dissent and insistence on loyalty to the leadership elite’s position as a “Māori” way of doing things, opposed to a “Left” way of doing things. This is absurd. The “left” does not automatically stand in defence of dissent or the public airing of heterodox views, much though Eddie (and I) might wish that it should. As I already mentioned, this is shown by Labour’s response to Turia in 2004 and the māori party’s first full term, suspicious at best and hostile at worst. The AE dispute is also an excellent illustration. In that case, the prevailing, “authentic” left position (including that taken by many writers at The Standard, though not — as far as I can recall — by Eddie) was to insist on total public solidarity with the union. In other words, precisely what Turia is insisting upon. I disagreed with this position in AE’s case, and I disagree with it in the māori party’s case. Dissent of this sort (or the imperative of its suppression) is not some innate part of “the left”, nor is it absence a characteristic of “identity politics”. It can exist or not in movements of either type, depending on the merits and specifics. It’s my view that such dissent is the beating heart of a movement, and it is peril to quash it. It is a shame that Turia seems to be making the same error as Helen Clark made regarding this issue in 2004.

But despite these objections, ultimately I agree with Eddie about one other thing: the dispute is really interesting, and the emergence of radical critiques and challenges within the movement is exciting and important. The māori party has a mandate to agree to the MCA act as drafted; after all, according to Edmund Burke’s famous saying, representatives owe their constituents not only their efforts but their judgement on what is just and right and possible. They’re not elected to always take the easy route of political martyrdom, and because of this they may find themselves staring down their constituents. Sometimes they may win. But nowhere are representatives guaranteed that those constituents must not try to stare back. If those who oppose the bill can raise a hīkoi in support of their cause, then let them do so, and more strength to their waewae. And let members of the “left” movements, if their enmity to the bill is genuine, rather than a reflexive attack on a National-led government and the māori party orthodoxy which supports it, march alongside them in solidarity. That will be some sort of justice.

L

Enemies like these

datePosted on 22:04, October 28th, 2010 by Lew

I’m getting used to being vilified by the orthodox Marxist left, such as in the latest round of debate with Chris Trotter and some of his commenters, and to an extent in the response by Scott Hamilton. I don’t mind all that much, but it’s rather aimless. The critique that I’m not orthodox enough, not a proper red; that my sense class consciousness is atrophied — it all misses the point somewhat. I’m not a socialist; never have been. I’m a liberal social democrat, with strong emphasis on the “democrat”.

I’m a trade unionist because of this commitment to democracy. Unions, properly run, are strongly democratic — and their democracy enhances the more usual parliamentary and representative forms which govern our society. The question in the AE case, the matter over which I disagree with Chris and Scott and the orthodox Marxists is: from what does a trade union derive its moral authority? From the democratic mandate granted it by the workers it represents and the extent to which its actions serve their interests, or from its ideological rectitude and adherence to Marxist doctrine? I’d argue that both are necessary; the movement’s activities must be informed by a class analysis, but fundamentally the union exists to enact the wishes of its membership. The job of union organisers and so on is to educate and motivate that membership to commit to class struggle. The argument Chris and Scott are making, as if it’s an irreducible truth of trade unionism, is that the ideological rectitude on its own is enough. The quality or value of a union’s actions must not be assessed or tested against their workers’ stated needs, they say; if whatever a self-declared union and its handful of activist representatives decides to do passes the Marxist sniff-test, then anyone who fails to fall into lockstep behind it is a scab, and mandate be damned. (I’m not sure they even believe this, really; I think there would be some things even the most die-hard socialists would balk at — which would mean we’re simply disagreeing over the merits of AE’s case, which I think is a much more useful argument to have. I posed a hypothetical question to this effect on Bowalley Road this morning, but have received no responses at the time of writing this.)

But falling automatically into lockstep behind a union’s actions without consideration of whether they’re any good, or whether they serve their industry’s stated needs is bad for society, and it’s dangerous for the unions.

In our liberal democratic society, the right for workers to join a trade union and bargain collectively derives from the democratic nature of union movements; the fact that they enact workers’ wishes. This is the basis of the strong and very legitimate democratic Marxist critique of corporatism; that businesses in a democratic society ought to be democratic. It is also one of the chief arguments deployed in unions’ defence, and it is a very good one in a social and political context where the idea of democracy occupies such a powerful symbolic position. Unions do not enjoy any legitimacy by virtue of their ideological rectitude; in fact, their commitment to Marxist ideological doctrine is a considerable disadvantage in terms of their survival. Because of this, the trade union which relinquishes its commitment to democracy also risks relinquishing its claim to legitimacy, and if trade unions as a whole start to cut corners on democracy, then the movement as a whole risks granting anti-union governments a pretext to weaken and outlaw unions on the basis that they don’t actually represent workers’ interests. This is quite apart from the points I made in my last post on this topic, to the effect that non-democratic institutions tend to make bad decisions because they lack robust internal processes for developing and enacting their agendas.

So my overarching problem with Actor’s Equity acting without a mandate is that they risk the legitimacy of the trade union movement at large. (I initially predicted, in comments at the Dim Post, that the fallout would be contained by the wider movement — how wrong I was.) I try never to give my allies a pass for incompetence. Doing so breeds more incompetence. I didn’t give Labour a pass for the Foreshore & Seabed Act and I’m not giving a pass to the māori party as they look to be supporting a similarly expropriative replacement bill. So there’s no way I’m going to overlook the real and serious damage caused to the trade union movement and the cause of workers’ rights by this upstart union who took excessive action without a mandate. They’ve done real and genuine harm to the trade union movement and they’ve made industrial relations — which should have been a Labour’s trump suit — an easy source of tricks for the government. And this at the very time the union movement was beginning to gather strength again! There was an anti-union protest on Labour Day — how much worse do things have to get? Sure, blame the Tory government, or the ‘right-wing media’ or the falsely-conscious running-dogs; and to an extent this is justified. The government must bear sole responsibility for the legislation they’re passing, for instance; the details of that bill cannot be blamed on AE. But AE provided them the cover to pass it without much controversy; and indeed, none of these agencies enjoyed the political and symbolic freedom to unleash the sort of anti-worker tirades they have in recent weeks until AE’s egregious overreach — all with the full blessing of Trotter and Hamilton, almost everyone writing and commenting at The Standard and all those orthodox Marxists who claim to be champions of the worker. With enemies like these, Key and his government — and their ideological fellow-travelers — have no need of friends.

L

PC priorities

datePosted on 21:06, October 12th, 2010 by Lew

The media beat-up du jour is the non-story of Te Papa Tongarewa “barring” (or “banning”, “forbidding”, other such absolute terms) pregnant and menstruating women from entry due to the nature of some tāonga on display.

Except they’ve done no such thing. The “ban” isn’t actually a restriction at all — they’ve been clear that it’s a request, not an ironclad edict; and in any case, the exhibit isn’t open to the public, but to staff from other museums. It’s an invite-only behind-the-scenes tour. And the crucial point is that the tāonga in question have been given to Te Papa on condition that this advice is given to prospective viewers. Let me be crystal clear: nobody would be barred from attending on the grounds that they are pregnant or menstruating. If someone wanted to turn up and say “bollocks to all of that, me and my unborn child are going to see those taiaha!”, it’s been made clear that she would be permitted to do so. That might be inflammatory and offensive, like farting in church or wearing a bikini to a funeral, but nobody is forbidding it. And that’s as it should be: Te Papa is our place and nobody should be barred outright. If the condition required exclusion, then that would be fair enough on the part of the owners — who can reasonably impose whatever conditions they please — but quite explicitly not ok for Te Papa, who would be better to decline the opportunity outright to maintain its public mandate.

Of course, this hasn’t stopped everyone with a platform from winding up to rage against the imposition of archaic, alien superstitions upon their civil liberties. But almost without exception, the restriction-which-isn’t-really-a-restriction doesn’t apply to them, since — as far as I’m aware — none of those objecting are in fact museum staff who would be eligible for the tour. And amongst this vicarious umbrage there’s an awful lot of squawking about misogyny and imposition of cultural values, and much more uncritical repetition of the misleading language of “bans” and such. It goes as far as idiotic and lurid suggestions about personal searches using sniffer dogs, for crying out loud.

All this has manifested as a soft and rather opportunistic sort of anti-Māori racism, where Māori are the casualties of our sticking up for the rights of pregant and menstruating women. There’s a common implication that they are the oppressive stone-age patriarchy using whatever means they can to victimise our women; and “forcing” their rude barbarian culture into our civilised and noble times. This is understandable from the usual PC gone mad crowd who’ve suddenly — conveniently — found their inner feminist, but somewhat more disappointing from those who would often be described as the hand-wringing PC liberals, people who ought to know better that it is possible to reconcile conflicting cultural values of this sort in an amicable fashion via the standard tools of live-and-let-live liberalism. And while those same hand-wringing PC liberals do rail against the worst excesses of those illiberal institutions which make up mainstream NZ society — chief amongst them the Catholic church — the response to this case has generated anger out of all proportion. Te Papa had to make the decision: take the tāonga on with the advisory condition, or not at all. Perhaps those objecting to this policy would prefer that nothing of this sort ever go on display. There is a genuine cultural conflict here, but it can quite simply be resolved: those pregnant and menstruating women who believe their right to attend trumps the request to the contrary may do so then and there. Not only are they not prevented from doing so by those hosting the tours, they actually have the right to do so should they choose, and that right should be defended. Those who do not may do so at another time which is convenient to them. The tragedy is that for most of the liberals in this battle of PC priorities, women must be given categorical superiority over Māori. They are arguing for their own culture to be imposed across the board; the very illiberalism they claim to oppose.

There are (at least) two people who are making good sense on this matter: Andrew Geddis, whose liberal argument is very close to my own views, but much better formed; and Lynne Pope who, almost uniquely among the bullhorns sounding around this topic, is a Māori woman who’s actually been on the tour in question. Neither of them have lapsed into the myopic, reflexive Māori-bashing which is the most unbecoming aspect of this situation.

The lesson for New Zealand’s liberals is this: it isn’t necessary to trample on the cultural needs of Māori to accomodate the needs of women. Liberalism itself provides tools to reconcile these differences. They just need to be used.

Update 20101018: As usual, Scott Hamilton makes good sense on this topic.

L

‘Come back Helen Clark, all is forgiven’

datePosted on 12:31, August 18th, 2010 by Lew

Thus spake John Ansell, who’s back with another cracking demonstration that he’s the nation’s pre-eminent racial fearmonger. He really is peerless in this regard.

And there’s plenty more where that came from.

Incidentally, you can read Scott Hamilton’s (and others’) thorough and systematic destruction of Ansell’s rather slippery and Victorian views on race, ethnicity, culture and religion (yes, Virginia, ‘Māori’ is a religion) in the comments thread of this post at the excellent Reading The Maps.

L

Bhadge

datePosted on 23:12, December 19th, 2009 by Lew

I’ve been very busy again this past week, and so the list of things I want to write about copiously exceeds my ability to write about them. My promised post about internecine disputes is in very early draft form but I’ll try and get it finished soon. I still have a post planned looking at the wider implications of the foreshore and seabed review, but I think that’ll have to wait until after I’ve painted the roof.

yep_im_a_redneck_button-p145980559379977550q37f_400I also wanted to write a lot about the final outcome of the h debate, but find that my views have already been pretty well encapsulated by Andrew Geddis and Idiot/Savant. You should also read Scott Hamilton’s latest on the wider topic of Pākehā separatism.

Given that the decision declares both ‘Wanganui’ and ‘Whanganui’ correct, but mandates crown usage of ‘Whanganui’, there’s as clear an implicit statement as can be that the latter is more correct than the former. This has been clearly understood by TVNZ and Radio NZ, who have adopted the latter usage as a matter of editorial policy. They are owned by the crown, after all, and both just happen to be in direct competition with Laws and his media employer. Permitting both spellings but making this declaration as to primacy was a move as shrewd as it was elegant by Maurice Williamson — similarly to John Key’s decision to permit the flying of a Māori flag if only Māori could agree on one. Michael Laws, Tariana Turia and Ken Mair have all claimed victory, so everyone with an actual stake is nominally happy. The Standardistas and the KBR are furious, which is a pretty good sign. It obviates the strongest symbolic position occupied by Laws, the idea that Wellington is coercing Wanganui into doing its PC bidding. Wellington need not — the rest of the country will do that, because the use of the no-h word will be an identity marker, a statement, like a badge; not quite “Yep, I’m a redneck” but something approaching it. The thing is that Laws and his rump of greying die-hards do not simply face a disorganised and discredited bunch of radical natives; they find themselves standing against the inexorable tide of civil society and its evolution, a youthful and browning population for whom biculturalism is the norm and separatism stopped being cool a generation ago (if it ever was).

Who knew that all Michael Laws wanted for his cause was an emasculating partial endorsement and a prolonged death sentence? He could have saved everyone (and his own reputation) a great deal of trouble by making this plain at the beginning. In other circumstances, I would be angry about everyone having been taken for a ride — but as it stands, I’m mostly just quietly pleased that civil society’s tendency toward self-correction will be left to do its thing.

L