How can we talk if Te Tiriti o Waitangi is not clear if we must accept that it is clear? And how do we discuss it in a respectful, humble, and educated way? I am still unsure about this.
thank you for writing this, it is helping me on my journey of understanding Te Tiriti. I was wondering if you would be interested in writing more about each of the articles and what you think they say, and what they would look like actualised. I am collecting a diverse range of understandings about each article and would love to read yours!
Thank you so much for your comment, and I’m really glad the piece resonated with you. I’m super embarrassed it’s taken me this long to get back to you – I’m still getting the hang of things with this Substack!
I really appreciate you sharing where you’re at in your journey with Te Tiriti. The idea of diving deeper into each of the articles and exploring what they might look like in practice is such a great suggestion. There are so many layers and perspectives on how they could be interpreted and actualized, and it’s something I’d love to explore further in future pieces. It’s inspiring to know you’re collecting diverse views on this – that kind of collective wisdom is so valuable. I will get thinking about how to make that work into my weekly writing.
Out of curiosity, are there any particular interpretations or ideas about Te Tiriti that have stood out to you so far? I’d love to hear more about what’s been resonating with you.
Interesting thoughts Natalia. There is more shadow than light in the position of those opposing the Act Bill in my view. Specifically, there are two narratives: partnership (co-governance) and two sovereignties (beyond the partnership principle). I'm trying to get someone authoritative to say how or if they reconcile, as I can't see that they do. And then you add article three: if there are two sovereignties and/or partnership how can the Crown assume responsibility for equity of outcomes, since it doesn't 'control' all the 'levers'? I think the public deserves to know exactly what tangata whenua think te Tiriti actualised looks like, so we can have informed discussion. Any thoughts? Best, David King
Yes, these are definitely great questions to ask. In my experience, Māori can be divided into two broad categories: Māori as Tangata Whenua, largely composed of Iwi and Hapu leaders, and Māori as citizens. However, it's important to note that they don't always see eye to eye on various issues. There is a significant diversity of thought within different regions, Iwi, and Hapu across the country, and this complexity can make things challenging.
Additionally, there is a question regarding Māori capacity and their interest in engaging with all the topics that the Crown addresses. Sometimes, when the government reaches out for partnership or collaboration, Māori either lack the capacity or may not prioritize that particular policy issue. The operationalization of Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a much more complex matter, and it is not often debated publicly. My two cents
Kia ora Natalia, great article! I found your reflections on mestiza identity especially valuable as another tauiwi of colour (Malaysian-Chinese, Pākehā) researching what it means to be tangata tiriti (THW/VUW). I'd like to add that the main critique of multiculturalism I've seen is that the Crown uses it to erase indigeneity, treating tangata whenua as "just another minority" instead of the first peoples of Aotearoa (so by combining it with biculturalism, the Crown gets to have its cake and eat it too). I see tangata whenua - tangata tiriti - tangata moana as a framework that addresses many of the problems of both biculturalism and multiculturalism (so long as Pākehā are decentred from within tangata tiriti). Very interested in your reseaech, would love to get in touch if you're around Pōneke :)
Thanks, Etienne, for comment and reflection. I agree your critique of multiculturalism is used. I think it takes a bit more than Pakeha decentering for these frameworks to work and the government use both in want their cake and to eat i too, so I wholeheartedly agree with that. It's also causing a sort of formal racial and cultural hierarchy in its policies, that I think we all need to reckon with. I didn't talk about that in this article, but it's something I think about a lot.
thank you for writing this, it is helping me on my journey of understanding Te Tiriti. I was wondering if you would be interested in writing more about each of the articles and what you think they say, and what they would look like actualised. I am collecting a diverse range of understandings about each article and would love to read yours!
Hi Ingrid,
Thank you so much for your comment, and I’m really glad the piece resonated with you. I’m super embarrassed it’s taken me this long to get back to you – I’m still getting the hang of things with this Substack!
I really appreciate you sharing where you’re at in your journey with Te Tiriti. The idea of diving deeper into each of the articles and exploring what they might look like in practice is such a great suggestion. There are so many layers and perspectives on how they could be interpreted and actualized, and it’s something I’d love to explore further in future pieces. It’s inspiring to know you’re collecting diverse views on this – that kind of collective wisdom is so valuable. I will get thinking about how to make that work into my weekly writing.
Out of curiosity, are there any particular interpretations or ideas about Te Tiriti that have stood out to you so far? I’d love to hear more about what’s been resonating with you.
Interesting thoughts Natalia. There is more shadow than light in the position of those opposing the Act Bill in my view. Specifically, there are two narratives: partnership (co-governance) and two sovereignties (beyond the partnership principle). I'm trying to get someone authoritative to say how or if they reconcile, as I can't see that they do. And then you add article three: if there are two sovereignties and/or partnership how can the Crown assume responsibility for equity of outcomes, since it doesn't 'control' all the 'levers'? I think the public deserves to know exactly what tangata whenua think te Tiriti actualised looks like, so we can have informed discussion. Any thoughts? Best, David King
Yes, these are definitely great questions to ask. In my experience, Māori can be divided into two broad categories: Māori as Tangata Whenua, largely composed of Iwi and Hapu leaders, and Māori as citizens. However, it's important to note that they don't always see eye to eye on various issues. There is a significant diversity of thought within different regions, Iwi, and Hapu across the country, and this complexity can make things challenging.
Additionally, there is a question regarding Māori capacity and their interest in engaging with all the topics that the Crown addresses. Sometimes, when the government reaches out for partnership or collaboration, Māori either lack the capacity or may not prioritize that particular policy issue. The operationalization of Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a much more complex matter, and it is not often debated publicly. My two cents
Kia ora Natalia, great article! I found your reflections on mestiza identity especially valuable as another tauiwi of colour (Malaysian-Chinese, Pākehā) researching what it means to be tangata tiriti (THW/VUW). I'd like to add that the main critique of multiculturalism I've seen is that the Crown uses it to erase indigeneity, treating tangata whenua as "just another minority" instead of the first peoples of Aotearoa (so by combining it with biculturalism, the Crown gets to have its cake and eat it too). I see tangata whenua - tangata tiriti - tangata moana as a framework that addresses many of the problems of both biculturalism and multiculturalism (so long as Pākehā are decentred from within tangata tiriti). Very interested in your reseaech, would love to get in touch if you're around Pōneke :)
Thanks, Etienne, for comment and reflection. I agree your critique of multiculturalism is used. I think it takes a bit more than Pakeha decentering for these frameworks to work and the government use both in want their cake and to eat i too, so I wholeheartedly agree with that. It's also causing a sort of formal racial and cultural hierarchy in its policies, that I think we all need to reckon with. I didn't talk about that in this article, but it's something I think about a lot.