Thoughts on Te Tiriti

So its been a while, yes, but I am determined to write on here more regularly, throwing out there whatever ideas are in my mind, without being my usual perfectionist self and spending days on each post. (so, apologies in advance for all the errors, inconsistencies and mistakes!)

Here’s my thoughts for today. By interesting coincidence, we’ve been doing historical injustice in my philosophy class (Ethics and International Affairs) this week, and also started on our 4 weeks of Treaty of Waitangi in Public Law. A good combination, for sure, and plenty of food for thought.

Monday

Claudia Orange came to talk to our public law class. I was super excited – remembering her from year 13 history as the treaty historian, I was sure she would have plenty to say and an interesting perspective. Sadly not – she was ok – but I found she really lacked passion. Her speaking style seemed to be kinda “facts, facts, facts, blah, blah, blah” which didn’t convey anything much, and certainly not any sense of overwhelming injustice, unfairness or loss. I doubt anyone really got much from her speech, apart from lots of names, dates and facts. And really, who is going to remember those?

I’m not sure if her detachment and lack of emotion really reflected her point of view, or if it was just her speaking style. Given that she was (I think) the first person to write a comprehensive history of the Treaty, it seems sad that it has lost its spark for her. Or maybe it never had one, and was just something to study and not something to actually care about. I don’t know. Maybe I am being a bit too harsh – I will have to do some more research into her work.

I couldn’t help comparing her with Catherine Delahunty, whose perspective on the Treaty I remember vividly from Young Greens camp. Basically, as I understand it, “either we [as pakeha] are here by Treaty or by conquest” and if we’d rather not be here by conquest, then we’d better honour the treaty. I really admire her as one of the few pakeha who actually stands up for really honouring the Treaty, someone who really lives her values and fights for them. We have a lot to learn from people like Catherine. (a good starting point is this amazing post. read it!)

Tuesday and Wednesday

Watched Operation 8 in philosophy class. I was the only one who had seen it! Really glad to see it again, and stoked that a bunch of people were watching it who otherwise wouldn’t. And people even turned up. Excellent.

Thursday

My essay was due. “Can terrorism ever be morally justified? Why or why not?” Basically I ended up arguing that yes, terrorism can be morally justified, in the same way that war can be (although, of course, I think generally war isn’t justified. But the point is it can be, and so can terrorism, and in the words of one of the papers I cited, “no self-serving revulsion against terrorism can change this”).

I also argued that terrorism as a concept is misused and abused for political purposes rather than serving as an objective analytical concept. I didn’t go quite as far as saying it is entirely a social construct, because I think there can  be and objective definition; however the fact is that terrorism is simply not used in this objective way. I talked about the contradictions of using “terrorist” to label the Palestinians but not the Israelis, and how the rhetoric of terrorism can actually increase conflict. Then (yes I am going somewhere with this) I talked about the dangers of using the rhetoric of terrorism to vilify the acts of those who aren’t actually terrorists at all, using the example (yep you guessed it) of Operation 8.

Basically I said that the rhetoric of terror is used to justify pre-existing agendas and deflect attention away from unpopular policies; as well as to isolate and undermine political opponents. This is exactly what happened in the 2007 raids.

Friday

Discussion of Operation 8 in class. Lecturer asks “why is it that they locked down Ruatoki and not Abel Smith St?” Peoples responses were basically that it would be “impractical” to do that in a city. Yeah right. Only impractical in terms of the huge political consequences of unleashing the armed defenders squad against “innocent” Pakeha.

What should we do about historical injustice? Someone in my class actually said that it was irrelevant, because the social issues and inequalities we have today have nothing to do with historic injustices. I was flabbergasted. Seriously. How can one truly believe that you can steal a people’s land, impose a different culture, legal system and language, and then expect they’ll carry along just fine, and then a hundred years later they just happen to be over-represented in all the statistics just cos? Cos the present exists in a vacuum? Yeah right. Yay for being a history student and actually realising that of course, the past influences the future. How could it not?!

At least they was lots of debate in class, hopefully got people thinking at least a little bit! I can only hope.

Law was average. Learnt the other day that the person who usually teaches the Treaty section is Maori, and while I hate to generalise, I can’t help but get the feeling they would have provided a slightly more critical view than the one we’re getting from a privileged white male.

I have been thinking about what makes a good lecturer. The one we had for Bill of Rights was great – opinionated about everything, and more than willing to share that opinion, but also for it to be challenged and questioned. I think that’s fundamental, especially in public law, where “context is everything” (ie, its really, at it heart, much more about politics than law, and most outcomes are based on gut feeling). Learning about something in this bland, dispassionate way is just not exciting, and not really that helpful. But it might get better; its only been 2 lectures.

At least we are talking about the Treaty at all, even if it is only in a slightly tokenistic way. It is a starting point, the first stepping stone on a long and complicated journey towards understanding and recompense. Of course, I don’t pretend to be knowledgeable on this topic at all – I don’t have any answers, and I’m not even sure I know what the questions are. But the only way we will get anywhere is by engaging in dialogue, and I am grateful for the opportunity to do so.