Christene de Raadt.
*********************** Circular Letter (15) **************************
* On behalf of NGAA KAIWHAKANEKENEKE c/- John Tovey *
* E-Mail: johnt@raumati.wgtn.planet.co.nz 30 Gavin Rd, Raumati *
* Ph: (04)297-2216 (04)237-9350 faxes by appointment *
***********************************************************************
****************************************************************************
4. Editorial comment and more contributions on Adam Gifford's editorial
and Aroha Mead's response (both in Issue #14).
The Kaupapa of Ngaa Kaiwhakanekeneke, (included below), may not be
quite the statement of philosophical base that Aroha was suggesting
in her response to Adam, but they never-the-less provide a yardstick
for the inclusion or exclusion of material. They could have assisted
me greatly prior to Issue #14.
*************
Draft of modified kaupapa for Ngaa Kaiwhakanekeneke, in the light
of recent E-Mail and Usergroup developments (as at 08/08/95):
1. To encourage the circulation of information respectful of all
points of view through electronic, fax and conventional networks
in order to:
1.1 Promote understanding of and respect for Mana Maaori
Motuhake.
1.2 Assist the fight for justice for Maaori.
1.3 Support Rangatiratanga Maaori and the rights of
Indigenous Peoples everywhere.
2. To encourage individuals and groups with an interest in our
kaupapa, who currently do not have access to or a working
knowledge of E-Mail or Usergroups, to participate fully in
these media, by:
2.1 Providing the cheapest possible software and hardware
combinations for entry-level participants.
2.2 Assisting entry-level participants to develop the
confidence and skills needed to use E-Mail and
Usergroups effectively.
2.3 Encouraging the use of E-Mail and Usergoups through
regular E-Mail mailouts and Usergroup postings
containing topical and relevant articles and paanui.
2.4 Exploiting, in due course, other services available
through the Internet, including mailinglist-based
closed Usergroups, e-mail list-servers and Web sites.
3. Ensure that a high quality selection of the information
circulated by E-Mail is also physically mailed to those on
the Ngaa Kaiwhakanekeneke address list who request this.
********** End of Kaupapa ****************
Note the word 'respectful' in kaupapa 1. There was little respect in the
language Adam used in his editorial to describe the Maaori sovereignty
movement, tino rangatiratanga and decolonisation.
While most people probably share his view that what happened at Takahue
was not at all helpful to anyone, the place to let off steam about it
the way he seemed to need to was NZ.GENERAL or some similar USERGROUP,
not our little effort. I apologise to people who may have been surprised
by that editorial oversight on my part, my excuse is I was very busy.
I will try and be more vigilant in future.
This does not mean an end to all debate but should ensure that concepts
held dear by the groups Ngaa Kaiwhakanekeneke exists to support are not
gratuitously insulted.
3.1 Date: Tue, 24 Oct 95 00:43:50 From: bennion@actrix.gen.nz
RESPONSE TO GIFFORD/MEAD AND TAKAHUE ITEM
You asked for response to these items.
Thanks for publishing both Adam Gifford's article and Aroha Mead's response.
I think it increases the worth of your postings considerably to include
informed debate, and it would be a pity if that debate were not encouraged.
As moderator, I think you have done the right thing in publishing the
debate, with your own disclaimer.
For myself, I agree with the point that Adam Gifford is making that we
should be wary of concepts like "tino rangatiratanga" when they are used
in an almost religious fashion, so that those who ask "what does it mean?"
get condemned as not being among the believers.
Tino rangatiratanga has many historical definitions - the framers of the
Treaty had a view of it, Maori spoke about it sometimes in the land court
and in recorded meetings and in their letters last century - it also has
a meaning or meanings which are being framed today - just as sovereignty
is being redefined in the light of international coventions which now bind
governments.
In any context, it is difficult to see exactly how the arson at Takahue
has furthered the debate, or added any definition or meaning to the term.
Paulo Freire said in his "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" that
"conscientization does not lead men to 'destructive fanaticism'. On the
contrary, by making it possible for men to enter the historical process
as responsible subjects, conscientization enrolls them in the search
for self-affirmation, thus avoiding fanaticism." When he spoke about
"subjects" Friere was contrasting those who know and act as opposed to
"objects" - those who are known and are acted upon.
I think that Adam Gifford's article makes the point that the arsonists
at Takahue were not "responsible subjects" but rather "objects",
responding with little or no clear analysis to events as they unfolded.
The result is as Friere would predict - the arsonists have not, by
their actions, changed their status as victims of colonisation in any
way at all.
Tom Bennion
3.2 From: wuwu@nubm.wgtn.planet.co.nz (Graham Howell) Thu, 26 Oct 95
Kia Ora Adam
I am responding to your editorial about decolonisation which I found
rowdy, yet meaningless in the final analysis.
Decolonisation is a political process designed to free a people from the
effects and affects of colonisation. Decolonisation is just as relevant
to the indigenous people of Wales/Ireland/Canada/Palestine as it is in
the Pacific and Aotearoa.
As a NZ-born Paakehaa supporting decolonisation in Aotearoa, past events
are open to interpretation as to what happened, why it happened and the
motives behind those making the decisions which have inevitably led us
to "New Zealand 1995". By coming to grips with different facts and
analysis of past events we can hopefully build a New Zealand-Aotearoa
based on partner-ship.
To claim George Grey, Busby, Williams, the waves of settlers etc were
products of their times, just as we are implies we cannot either
criticise them or the results of their actions, or the actions of
Coates, Seddon, Fraser, Holyoake, Muldoon, Birch or anyone else. This
is a nonsense and will never permit righting the wrongs.
Of course some may not agree with me on the wrongness of some of the
actions and Acts - but then some NZers do not acknowledge the place of
the Maaori language version of the Treaty, the Declaration of
Independence, or that there is a grievance to begin with. I am forced
to acknowledge these people exist, but that does not mean I have to
allow their point-of-view to gain any more of a foothold than it
currently has.
It is quite appropriate to point out the wrongs - both in intent
and result of the decision makers and their advisors and to debate
the issues. If we don't start by saying what we believe is wrong
and why, the wound will never begin the healing process, and we
won't have a country built on partnership between the descendents
of the people represented at Waitangi 1840.
Graham Howell