Good article. Two mistakes tho - the treaty is written on lots of pieces of paper. There is the one signed at Waitangi and lots of others that travelled around the country and were signed after Waitangi day. Also all those versions were written in Māori and all discussions were in Māori. So the Māori version is the treaty and it has a bad English translation. There are not two versions.
Hi Tim! Thanks for this! I'm out here learning :) I think I've got it as two *texts* in my head. The uni lecturer vibes die hard. And here I conflated that comparison in a poetic sort of way with the *actual documents,* which of course have their own precise history. Not a history to blur over, that. The piece you linked to below was a big help, thanks! All very different indeed from the model I know. Just generally--thanks for reading & for your support all the way through on this little blog. Means a lot, man. Hope to shout you beer in the Hutt one of these days!
It was honestly terrifying to dive into something this complicated, as an outsider, but sometimes you just gotta jump :) Thanks for reading, and glad you dug it!
Kia Ora Dan, that was an excellent read. Nice to read of the ‘why’ for some of the ‘we’.
The story regarding the Police Officers’ made me think, that while they are supposed to be apolitical, their pro- treaty assistance and behaviour would have resulted in them being MORE trusted, not less and indeed would have improved public confidence on the day. I hope their managers find the same wet bus ticket to slap them with, that National and the Speaker are using on their band of bad actors and more recently Stanford and her mean girls insult.
I agree. I think the high road's the best one here, and disappointed the goverment has struggled to embrace it! The Hikoi was great day of civic engagement for democracy many around the world would envy. The cops did their jobs, and there were no bad vibes. Cheer this first, together, and sort the policy later :)
Good start tho remember that both the US and 'New Zealand' were born of blood and theft. Unlike Australia, the colonisers here weren't convicts and overseers - but that doesn't mean they were honest. I think you need to go beyond the emotive and the myths and deep dive into the political/financial history and the aftermath before really understanding what went on here after the signing - particularly the legislation that cemented one interpretation. Don't let the scenery or the jolly entitlement fool you.
Hi Susan! Thanks for this! You're right, of course. I know the US side of this explotative history all too well, and while I'm learning the Aotearoa side it's easy for me to fall for a romantic outsider's view. Though as an American I have to say it *is* pretty awe-inspiring that the treaty itself, however willfully misinterepreted, is still around to argue over and govern from.
And I agree, we absolutely need to know the history! But we also need a story to sell *today* to an anxious middle that doesn't care to look too deeply into the past. Here I'm playing the scarred American lefty. After George Floyd we had yet another national reckoning with our ugly history, deeper than most! Good on us, yeah. But four years later DEI is over and we're back with Trump. If the treaty fight boils down to the cartoon of 'NZ is blood and theft' vs. 'Equal Rights for All,' Seymour's laughing all the way to the bank.
So I guess I'm offering 'translation' as an outsider's rough draft of a narrative & sales pitch. Ugly history doesn't win elections. Maybe partnership can. As always, I'm curious what actual NZers think about this stuff, and writing to learn. Lots to talk about, and a long road ahead!
Coupla things: there were in excess of 84,000 present last Tuesday. The media's minimising is typical.
In order to better understand the context of Te Tiriti being needed, it's essential to understand He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni (not the flag), also known as the Declaration of Independence of New Zealand, is a constitutional document that established New Zealand as an independent Māori state. When it was digned, Māori outnumbered Pākehā 40:1. Whose country was it? Totally Māori. Without this agreement, there would be no TToW: https://e-tangata.co.nz/history/without-he-whakaputanga-there-might-have-been-no-treaty-of-waitangi/
He Whakaputanga was the above agreement; the name of the flag of the United Tribes of New Zealand is Te Kara o Te Whakaminenga o Ngā Hapu o Nu Tireni.
And finally: the Treaty principles have proved a significant roadblock to both corporatisation & privatisation in the past & present a clear threat to any plans of future development of public assets to the private sector. This effect is likely one of the key, although unstated, reasons for the push to return Te Tiriti to its erstwhile status as a simple nullity. It's crucial we understand that the "Treaty Principles Bill" is ONLY about opening up New Zealand to corporate exploitation for profit. It's easier to sell racism to the populace than it is to sell international billionaires mining, deforesting & destroying the seabed. Even if this Bill doesn't pass, National are already putting in place - by stealth - the legislative changes that make all this possible.
Thanks for this! Crucial history, indeed, and in fact a declation! I do worry, though, that pointing back to 1835 is not going to win the political argument. I totally agree, the Treaty Bill seems pretty obviously a fig leaf for deregulation! Maybe that's the best message. I don't know. A long road ahead, though, for sure. Thanks for taking the time to teach a gringo!
I'm 74 and I remember learning Māori history at primary school. We sang their songs, and I remember in particular one song which included a "stick game" which was my favorite. Our desks were in small groupings and were each named after the canoes that first arrived in NZ. We were taught about Hone Heke, Honi Hika, and other chiefs that terrorized pakeha up and down the land. The signing of the Treaty and so on. The trouble is as time goes on history gets distorted to support the current narrative so it's not true that we weren't taught Māori history. I am a descendent of Māori and identify as a Pakeha but one of my daughters identifies as Māori because it was beneficial to her which is just ridiculously uneven in the scheme of things. This treaty is nearly 200 years old it's time to move on and take responsibility for our own stuff ups!! I could go on and on!!
Hi Judy! Thanks so much for reading. Glad to hear you learned Maori history--I've heard so many different stories about what people learned in school, or didin't. Time always distorts the narrative, I agree. And as I note above, I think the Treaty could probably stand some updating someday! But it's complicated. It's a two-sided deal. Only one side--and ACT is just one part of one side--wants an update. The other side says the original terms haven't been met. NZ definitely needs to find a way to meld the two into one citizenry. That's hard work! To me, it seems NZ is already on that path, however slowly and unevenly. Seymour's overly simple bill suggests, to me, the most distorted narrative: that the past is over, and has no bearing on who we are today. But the country's got a long debate ahead, I'm sure, and we'll have to see where this goes. Thanks for taking the time to write, it means a lot to gringo just figuring this stuff out!
Good article. Two mistakes tho - the treaty is written on lots of pieces of paper. There is the one signed at Waitangi and lots of others that travelled around the country and were signed after Waitangi day. Also all those versions were written in Māori and all discussions were in Māori. So the Māori version is the treaty and it has a bad English translation. There are not two versions.
Hi Tim! Thanks for this! I'm out here learning :) I think I've got it as two *texts* in my head. The uni lecturer vibes die hard. And here I conflated that comparison in a poetic sort of way with the *actual documents,* which of course have their own precise history. Not a history to blur over, that. The piece you linked to below was a big help, thanks! All very different indeed from the model I know. Just generally--thanks for reading & for your support all the way through on this little blog. Means a lot, man. Hope to shout you beer in the Hutt one of these days!
And def a beer yea!
I’m also learning - there are so many myths around nee Zealand’s colonisation that are hard to get straight in my head.
I didn't get to finish the book, but this book was helpful in elucidating that there is one treaty - Te Reo Maori, and the English is a translation.
https://aucklanduniversitypress.co.nz/a-bloody-difficult-subject-ruth-ross-te-tiriti-o-waitangi-and-the-making-of-history/
Thanks, Dan, well put and a good read that sums a lot up from a tauiwi perspective...thanks for making the effort of get your thoughts out there...
It was honestly terrifying to dive into something this complicated, as an outsider, but sometimes you just gotta jump :) Thanks for reading, and glad you dug it!
Kia Ora Dan, that was an excellent read. Nice to read of the ‘why’ for some of the ‘we’.
The story regarding the Police Officers’ made me think, that while they are supposed to be apolitical, their pro- treaty assistance and behaviour would have resulted in them being MORE trusted, not less and indeed would have improved public confidence on the day. I hope their managers find the same wet bus ticket to slap them with, that National and the Speaker are using on their band of bad actors and more recently Stanford and her mean girls insult.
I agree. I think the high road's the best one here, and disappointed the goverment has struggled to embrace it! The Hikoi was great day of civic engagement for democracy many around the world would envy. The cops did their jobs, and there were no bad vibes. Cheer this first, together, and sort the policy later :)
Kia ora Dan - really enjoyed this read!
Thanks, Jordan!! Means a lot, coming from you. If you're ever in Greytown, coffee's my shout!
Sounds great, thank you! Will let you know :)
Good start tho remember that both the US and 'New Zealand' were born of blood and theft. Unlike Australia, the colonisers here weren't convicts and overseers - but that doesn't mean they were honest. I think you need to go beyond the emotive and the myths and deep dive into the political/financial history and the aftermath before really understanding what went on here after the signing - particularly the legislation that cemented one interpretation. Don't let the scenery or the jolly entitlement fool you.
Hi Susan! Thanks for this! You're right, of course. I know the US side of this explotative history all too well, and while I'm learning the Aotearoa side it's easy for me to fall for a romantic outsider's view. Though as an American I have to say it *is* pretty awe-inspiring that the treaty itself, however willfully misinterepreted, is still around to argue over and govern from.
And I agree, we absolutely need to know the history! But we also need a story to sell *today* to an anxious middle that doesn't care to look too deeply into the past. Here I'm playing the scarred American lefty. After George Floyd we had yet another national reckoning with our ugly history, deeper than most! Good on us, yeah. But four years later DEI is over and we're back with Trump. If the treaty fight boils down to the cartoon of 'NZ is blood and theft' vs. 'Equal Rights for All,' Seymour's laughing all the way to the bank.
So I guess I'm offering 'translation' as an outsider's rough draft of a narrative & sales pitch. Ugly history doesn't win elections. Maybe partnership can. As always, I'm curious what actual NZers think about this stuff, and writing to learn. Lots to talk about, and a long road ahead!
Yes for sure but more to be so thankful there is still beauty and poetry to restore us.
Happy New Year.
Amen. A Happy New Year to you too, Susan. May your 2025 be full of beauty & poetry both!
Coupla things: there were in excess of 84,000 present last Tuesday. The media's minimising is typical.
In order to better understand the context of Te Tiriti being needed, it's essential to understand He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni (not the flag), also known as the Declaration of Independence of New Zealand, is a constitutional document that established New Zealand as an independent Māori state. When it was digned, Māori outnumbered Pākehā 40:1. Whose country was it? Totally Māori. Without this agreement, there would be no TToW: https://e-tangata.co.nz/history/without-he-whakaputanga-there-might-have-been-no-treaty-of-waitangi/
He Whakaputanga was the above agreement; the name of the flag of the United Tribes of New Zealand is Te Kara o Te Whakaminenga o Ngā Hapu o Nu Tireni.
And finally: the Treaty principles have proved a significant roadblock to both corporatisation & privatisation in the past & present a clear threat to any plans of future development of public assets to the private sector. This effect is likely one of the key, although unstated, reasons for the push to return Te Tiriti to its erstwhile status as a simple nullity. It's crucial we understand that the "Treaty Principles Bill" is ONLY about opening up New Zealand to corporate exploitation for profit. It's easier to sell racism to the populace than it is to sell international billionaires mining, deforesting & destroying the seabed. Even if this Bill doesn't pass, National are already putting in place - by stealth - the legislative changes that make all this possible.
Thanks for this! Crucial history, indeed, and in fact a declation! I do worry, though, that pointing back to 1835 is not going to win the political argument. I totally agree, the Treaty Bill seems pretty obviously a fig leaf for deregulation! Maybe that's the best message. I don't know. A long road ahead, though, for sure. Thanks for taking the time to teach a gringo!
This is a good article with lots of detail: https://open.substack.com/pub/webworm/p/haka?r=518e2&utm_medium=ios
I'm 74 and I remember learning Māori history at primary school. We sang their songs, and I remember in particular one song which included a "stick game" which was my favorite. Our desks were in small groupings and were each named after the canoes that first arrived in NZ. We were taught about Hone Heke, Honi Hika, and other chiefs that terrorized pakeha up and down the land. The signing of the Treaty and so on. The trouble is as time goes on history gets distorted to support the current narrative so it's not true that we weren't taught Māori history. I am a descendent of Māori and identify as a Pakeha but one of my daughters identifies as Māori because it was beneficial to her which is just ridiculously uneven in the scheme of things. This treaty is nearly 200 years old it's time to move on and take responsibility for our own stuff ups!! I could go on and on!!
Hi Judy! Thanks so much for reading. Glad to hear you learned Maori history--I've heard so many different stories about what people learned in school, or didin't. Time always distorts the narrative, I agree. And as I note above, I think the Treaty could probably stand some updating someday! But it's complicated. It's a two-sided deal. Only one side--and ACT is just one part of one side--wants an update. The other side says the original terms haven't been met. NZ definitely needs to find a way to meld the two into one citizenry. That's hard work! To me, it seems NZ is already on that path, however slowly and unevenly. Seymour's overly simple bill suggests, to me, the most distorted narrative: that the past is over, and has no bearing on who we are today. But the country's got a long debate ahead, I'm sure, and we'll have to see where this goes. Thanks for taking the time to write, it means a lot to gringo just figuring this stuff out!
Yes, it’s a bit like Gaza and Israel. Unsolvable! lol