Recently there has been a bit of controversy over the benefits or otherwise of colonization to New Zealand. The National party’s education spokesman Paul Goldsmith suggested that colonisation “on balance” had been a good thing for Māori. Cue the howls of outrages from ignorant and divisive politicians.
Goldsmith’s statement is an obvious truth. The fact that there is any disagreement over it is beyond belief. Maori before European colonisation had very low life expectancy. They did not have iron. They were not blessed with having access to many scientific discoveries due to their geographical isolation. They had no stable government and might was right. Warfare was brutal and regular. The very fact that there are land claims and compensation is paid for past injustice is a testament to the benefit of colonisation. Maori have been blessed by the coming of British law to these islands. Prior to European settlement, there was no recourse for the weak when they were abused by the strong. For all its faults, colonisation, and particularly the impact of Christianity has been a benefit to Maori culture.
Those who doubt this are either ignorant of history, or deliberately divisive. Let me leave you with Michael Bassett’s comments on this issue. I particularly love his description of Peen Henare and Wille Jackson as two of the weaker minds in our ministry! You can find the rest of his article here.
So, in the opinions of Peeni Henare and Willie Jackson, two of the weaker minds in our ministry, Paul Goldsmith MP is “ignorant” and talking “nonsense” when he says that on balance, Maori benefited from the colonization of New Zealand. According to Henare, Goldsmith who, incidentally, is a First-Class Honours graduate in history with an impressive number of well researched books to his credit, “set back the country” by stating what, on balance, should be obvious to all of us. As that sage Maori leader Sir Apirana Ngata always said, colonization of New Zealand could not have been prevented; Maori were just lucky that it was the British, and not some of the less enlightened imperialists who undertook the settlement of New Zealand. When will our ministers learn some history?
Kris Faafoi, our Justice Minister on hate speech laws. Seriously. What a clown! Oh dear. Is that hate speech? I mean I’m all for clowns. Clowns are great. Clowns bring joy to children. But I think clowns belong in the circus. And I don’t think circuses should be let anywhere near parliament. Too late.
If you are concerned about the move towards co-governance in New Zealand – and as a citizen of a democracy, you should be, then you need to take a look at this post which is a reproduction of a recent newsletter from Hobson’s Pledge. It highlights a Government plan to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) to establish two governments in New Zealand by 2040, one for Maori and one for everyone else. Then, when you have read that, go here and sign the petition. Go on, do it!
New research conducted by the independent Māori institute for environment and health, Te Atawhai o te Ao has found that 93 per cent of Māori in New Zealand experience racism every day. This came as something of a shock to me, because I did not realise racism was such a huge problem in New Zealand. There is the odd time in my life I have been the object of a racist remark, and I have occasionally witnessed a racist remark towards another person, but I would never have put the figure as a daily one. Where are these people mixing?
Reading further on, we find what counts as racism. According to the article reporting on this, “Racism was experienced by Māori as both act and omission, including micro and macro aggressions, media representation, ignorance and disrespect. This included the invalidation of Māori knowledge, mispronunciation of Māori names, and the celebration of colonisation with colonial statues and monuments.” Now personally, I am unsure as to why these things are categorised as racism.
Take mispronunciation of Māori names. Is this really racism? Are people being discriminated against because of their ethnicity, or is it simply a case of not being used to a certain way of pronouncing vowels. I can’t accurately pronounce French words, but I certainly bear no ill will against the French. Having taught children in a South Auckland context, I have found many of them pronouncing English words incorrectly, but I never assumed this was a result of malice against the English; more just a semi dialect.
Is the celebration of colonisation with colonial statues and monuments racism? Of course not! It’s part of our history, and while there were great evils conducted by some colonists, by and large, the history of colonisation has been a good thing for everybody in New Zealand. The Treaty of Waitangi was signed by so many Maori rangatira precisely because they saw the benefits of a colonial government that protected their rights and interests from other potentially aggressive tribes.
Later on in the article it is claimed, “when shopping or seeking services, 89 per cent of Māori said they were less likely to receive assistance because they were Māori, and most had been followed, watched or asked to open their bags in a shop.” But how do people know that they received less assistance because they were Maori? How do they know they are having their bags searched because they are Maori. And for that matter, how do they know they are less likely to receive assistance? Where is the hard data that demonstrates this is actually the case? These seem to be assumptions.
Living life with a chip on your shoulder can certainly colour your perception of what happens around you. I’ve had my bags searched when exiting a shop, and to be honest I did feel a little annoyed. But moving beyond this step to assuming evil motivations from the store is not helpful. I just don’t know why they chose me and the group I was with, but I am not going to develop a victim complex. And I guess that is my concern with this ‘research’. What counts for research these days seem woefully inadequate. Perhaps even in this criticism, I will be charged with racism for the invalidation of Māori knowledge. But with no objective standards of racism and the assumption that entirely innocent behaviour is racism, we make sin what is not sin, and we turn healthy and strong people into victims. Assuming racism at every turn is not going to help. It will create bitterness and resentment, and that can eat a person up on the inside.
If the New Zealand Herald had any credibility left, the last vestiges of it have slunk out the door. They have cancelled Dr Michael Bassett, former Labour MP who was Minister of Health in the Lange government. Dr Bassett is a historian who lectured in history at the University of Auckland and held a position on the Waitangi Tribunal between 1994 and 2004. In 2018 he was appointed Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit (CNZM) for his services to history. Dr Bassett is also a part-time political commentator, and in 2004 he won the Qantas Media Award for Best Political Columnist in New Zealand.
Go check out his explanation of what happened here, and then write a complaint to the editors. That’s what the whiny wokesters do, and they are the minority, so stand up for free speech and take a few minutes to express your thoughts.
The Herald article screamed at me: Covid 19 coronavirus: Racism within New Zealand health system – “It’s killing our people”. That’s a pretty serious claim. Racism is killing our people. Let those words sink in for a minute. If that’s true, New Zealanders ought to feel a sense of righteous outrage. Here in New Zealand, it’s claimed that racism in our health system is killing Maori. We’ve seen racism kill people elsewhere. We’ve seen ethnic cleansing in Rwanda and other places. Surely that can’t be happening here? Are people with evil in their hearts deliberately showing favouritism toward some ethnicities in the health system and mistreating others? What’s going on?
Statistics Showing Disparities
1. COVID is racist?
The article commences with a few shocking statistics. For instance, a study in the New Zealand Medical Journal shows that Maori are 50 percent more likely to die from Covid-19 than non-Maori. So are we to conclude that Covid-19 is itself a racist virus? Are we to remonstrate against the virus and ask it to pick up its game and become a more equal opportunities virus? So far, the neutral reader could hardly be convinced of racism. More information please.
Then we are presented with another recent study that showed that Maori and Pacific people have a greater risk of heart disease due to a higher prevalence of smoking, obesity and heart failure. Again, this is hardly evidence of racism. I have not seen cigarettes sneak out of a packet, glance left toward a Pakeha and then right toward a Maori, and then perniciously make a racist choice to fly toward the Maori face to then forcibly insert itself between unwilling lips. Smoking is a choice, and like other choices, is a result of what individuals value.
3. Obesity is racist?
With regards to obesity, I’m sure we could accept that some ethnicities are more prone to this than others – perhaps genetically, but we can hardly blame this on racism. Racism is treating someone with partiality or mistreating them based on something that is beyond their control, something that is genetic. If we are not responsible for our own skin colour and shouldn’t be mistreated as a result of that, we certainly shouldn’t be accused of racism for the genes someone else receives!
4. Western Approaches to Medicine are racist?
Another study calls for more culturally appropriate care to be made available to Maori men. This seems odd to me. What does it even mean? Are Maori men so different because of their culture that they need an entirely different way of health care being provided? Because I would have assumed that Western medicine has been a boon for most indigenous cultures, Maori included. Surely this is not a request to go back to the kind of cultural health care that was on offer pre-colonisation when life was nasty, brutish and short?
Samuel Marsden
Currently, Maori die seven years earlier than non-Maori. This is disturbing. It’s sad, and we should investigate this. Of course, we want people to live long and healthy lives. But we do not immediately assume sexism is the reason males all around the world have lower life expectancies than women. Why should we assume that racism is the cause of the lower life expectancy of Maori? Furthermore, current Maori life expectancies under the supposedly racist health system which is killing them, compare very favourably with the life-expectancies of Maori pre Europeans when there was no health system and warring tribes were literally killing each other.
Furthermore, let’s not be tempted to hold idealistic and naïve views of the cultural superiority of pre-European Maori health care. Samuel Marsden’s Memoir of Duaterra, a primary record, highlights the unhelpful cultural practice of leaving the sick out in the open air to prevent the defilement of wharepuni. In the particular case mentioned, a sick woman and her child who was about three days old had been left outside with only a few reeds placed in the direction from which the storm of wind and rain blew. She had been left exposed like this all night. As a result of contact with Pakeha, Maori saw the value of Western ways and appropriated them.
Summary
That these disparities exist warrants further study, but to suggest they are indicative of racism is just plain silly. Maori life expectancies pre colonisation were undoubtedly lower than they are now, and the disparities between Maori and Pakeha life expectancy existed then too. In fact, the introduction of our supposedly racist health care system has without a shadow of a doubt actually improved Maori health.
Institutional Racism is the Cause?
So thus far, these statistics prove nothing except differences in outcomes for Maori. But apparently, these disparities are a result of institutional racism. So says the interim CEO of Hapai Te Hauora, Jason Alexander. Apparently institutional racism is deeply embedded in the health system. Alexander points out he is not talking about individual racism. Rather it is institutional racism that is killing Maori. So where is this institutional racism at work?
1. Access Issues
The first major example given is access to healthcare. We are informed that Maori in rural areas don’t have easy access to health systems like people do in cities. But this is not racist. This is just a simple fact of geography. Anyone who lives in a rural area is going to come up against this same difficulty.
But wait, there’s more. Poverty in the city was also cited as an access issue highlighting institutional racism. Again, saying that access issues caused by poverty is racist is arrant nonsense. Any poor person will suffer these same access issues.
So there is our first major example of institutional racism, and it’s absolute bosh.
2. Barriers within healthcare services
The second major example given is that there are barriers within healthcare services. Apparently access to healthcare can make things worse for Maori according to Professor Alan Merry who is the Health Quality & Safety Commission chairman. Sounds like a hopeless case doesn’t it? Access to healthcare is difficult, and getting access makes things worse.
But how can access to health care make things worse? I’m not quite sure what that is supposed to mean unless we are to take from that statement that healthcare professionals are so bad at their jobs that they make matters worse for the Maori who do access their services, much like blood-letting 19th-century doctors.
So what is meant? Once again we are presented with some statistics that apparently prove institutional racism. Here they are.
Specialist appointments happen less often for Maori.
Inappropriate prescribing happens more often for Maori
Maori children with asthma have more prescriptions for reliever medications without any preventer prescribed.
The percentage of Maori getting an operation for a hip fracture on the day of or after admission has steadily decreased since 2013, whereas the percentage for non-Maori has steadily improved.
Maori consistently rate the communication with hospital staff and doctors lower than other groups.
In old age, disabled Maori are less likely to secure specialist equipment.
Some of these statistics are disturbing, but are they evidence of institutional racism? Of course no! They are no more evidence of racism than the underrepresentation of Asian men in the All Blacks is a result of institutional racism. Once again we have racism assumed before proven and any disparity in data leads to the immediate assumption that racism is the cause. Another case of the invincible fallacy. Our world is not as simple as that.
I don’t for a minute believe that doctors in New Zealand look at the children that come into their surgery, and then prescribe differently based on the ethnicity of the child. Can you imagine it? “This is a Pakeha child here, so I’ll give him the reliever and preventer asthma medication, but this next one is Maori, so I’ll only give him the reliever.” I can’t imagine that happening. And do you know why? Because I actually believe that our health workers really care about people. It is an absolute insult to our health professionals to charge our health system with the crime of institutional racism. These individuals who make up our health institutions are by and large doing their utmost despite difficult circumstances to help their fellow citizens. Go into any doctor’s surgery in South Auckland and you’ll find posters targeting Maori and encouraging them not to smoke. There is without a doubt, a real desire in our health system to improve Maori health.
Get the Diagnosis Right!
Please hear me, I am not saying we shouldn’t care about these disparities. The real reasons should be investigated. My problem is that assuming racism is the cause when it most likely is not is like assuming the red spots on my arm are mosquito bites and giving me a soothing lotion when they are actually a result of the measles. Incorrectly diagnosing the problem will invariably lead to incorrect treatment. And incorrect courses of treatment do not solve problems. Often they just create bigger problems.
So don’t just point to a disparity and claim racism. Show me actual racism.
The Problem – Faulty Definitions
This leads us to the heart of the issue: a faulty definition. How exactly is this concept of Institutional Racism defined by academics and these so-called experts? The definition mentioned is ‘the procedures or practices of particular organisations that result in some groups being advantaged.’ Read that definition again. If this is our definition, anything that causes disparities between groups is considered institutional racism.
This is just plain stupid, and the fact that otherwise intelligent people believe it is extremely disturbing. In all of human life, where do we see all groups achieving equal results? We don’t. A diverse world leads to diverse outcomes. Some groups will always produce better results in some areas than other groups. But why must we assume that this is because of racism? Didn’t we once learn somewhere back in school that correlation does not equal causation? Are we no longer wise enough to realise there are often multiple reasons for disparities in data?
A More Accurate and Truthful Definition
Before you tune me out as some kind of crazy who denies racism, let me assure you that I believe there is such a thing as institutional racism. I’m a Christian, and Jesus Christ is my Lord and king. His law condemns those who show partiality, so I am fully opposed to racism in any form, and that includes institutional racism, which I do believe exists. We can all imagine a system where there is institutional racism fairly easily. Apartheid South Africa would be a classic case. So how should Institutional racism be defined?
Here is my rough attempt at a definition. Institutional racism is the existence of preference or favouritism in an institution toward a particular race or races, by a deliberate decision based on ethnicity alone. I think that is a definition that fits much better with our actual definition of racism.
So is racism in our health system killing Maori? No. This is another example of poor research and the assumption that disparities automatically mean racism. In truth, they automatically mean no such thing. Disparities between groups is the norm, not the exception. It’s hard to believe that these kinds of articles are not disingenuous and part of a slow but steady move toward a co-governance approach that will be the end of true democracy in New Zealand. You can bet that reports in this vein will be used to lead the charge into a separate health system for Maori.
