Needs, rights, nationhood, and the politics of indigeneity

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In 2004 the appointment of a Coordinating Minister Race Relations, signalled a shift in elite M'ori policy thinking from a long-standing cautious bipartisan acceptance of self-determination towards a re-emergent assimilationist 'one law' for all discourse. The question simplistically posed by the Leader of the Opposition was should welfare entitlements be granted on the basis of need or race (Brash 2004)? Beneath this question lies an ideological assumption which privileges assimilation over indigeneity as the basis of M'ori participation in public affairs. This paper therefore asks: are M'ori peoples with rights, or individuals with needs? Is there a deeper politics of indigeneity providing a legitimate foundation for rights which are not necessarily superior to the rights of citizenship, but are important and distinguishable adjuncts? These questions transcend the issue of welfare entitlements to wider questions about the nature and terms of M'ori belonging to the liberal polity. The paper highlights the political tension between government attempts to remove indigeneity from the public agenda in response to populist pressure and a pragmatic acceptance that New Zealand 'needs' M'ori to increase their contribution to the national economy and that the realisation of this goal may in fact depend on the fuller citizenship imagined by the politics of indigeneity.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-12
Number of pages12
JournalMAI Review
Volume1
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2006

Fingerprint

politics
citizenship
acceptance
welfare
national economy
self-determination
assimilation
minister
privilege
New Zealand
pragmatics
opposition
elite
leader
participation
Law
discourse

Cite this

@article{042c3148a4be46f682bd311d09b2b4da,
title = "Needs, rights, nationhood, and the politics of indigeneity",
abstract = "In 2004 the appointment of a Coordinating Minister Race Relations, signalled a shift in elite M'ori policy thinking from a long-standing cautious bipartisan acceptance of self-determination towards a re-emergent assimilationist 'one law' for all discourse. The question simplistically posed by the Leader of the Opposition was should welfare entitlements be granted on the basis of need or race (Brash 2004)? Beneath this question lies an ideological assumption which privileges assimilation over indigeneity as the basis of M'ori participation in public affairs. This paper therefore asks: are M'ori peoples with rights, or individuals with needs? Is there a deeper politics of indigeneity providing a legitimate foundation for rights which are not necessarily superior to the rights of citizenship, but are important and distinguishable adjuncts? These questions transcend the issue of welfare entitlements to wider questions about the nature and terms of M'ori belonging to the liberal polity. The paper highlights the political tension between government attempts to remove indigeneity from the public agenda in response to populist pressure and a pragmatic acceptance that New Zealand 'needs' M'ori to increase their contribution to the national economy and that the realisation of this goal may in fact depend on the fuller citizenship imagined by the politics of indigeneity.",
keywords = "Maori politics, New Zealand politics",
author = "Dominic O'Sullivan",
note = "Imported on 24 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: 086 FoR could not be migrated (160168 - ). publisher (260b) = University of Auckland; Journal title (773t) = MAI Review. ISSNs: 1177-5904;",
year = "2006",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
pages = "1--12",
journal = "MAI Review",
issn = "1177-5904",
number = "2",

}

Needs, rights, nationhood, and the politics of indigeneity. / O'Sullivan, Dominic.

In: MAI Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2006, p. 1-12.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Needs, rights, nationhood, and the politics of indigeneity

AU - O'Sullivan, Dominic

N1 - Imported on 24 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: 086 FoR could not be migrated (160168 - ). publisher (260b) = University of Auckland; Journal title (773t) = MAI Review. ISSNs: 1177-5904;

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - In 2004 the appointment of a Coordinating Minister Race Relations, signalled a shift in elite M'ori policy thinking from a long-standing cautious bipartisan acceptance of self-determination towards a re-emergent assimilationist 'one law' for all discourse. The question simplistically posed by the Leader of the Opposition was should welfare entitlements be granted on the basis of need or race (Brash 2004)? Beneath this question lies an ideological assumption which privileges assimilation over indigeneity as the basis of M'ori participation in public affairs. This paper therefore asks: are M'ori peoples with rights, or individuals with needs? Is there a deeper politics of indigeneity providing a legitimate foundation for rights which are not necessarily superior to the rights of citizenship, but are important and distinguishable adjuncts? These questions transcend the issue of welfare entitlements to wider questions about the nature and terms of M'ori belonging to the liberal polity. The paper highlights the political tension between government attempts to remove indigeneity from the public agenda in response to populist pressure and a pragmatic acceptance that New Zealand 'needs' M'ori to increase their contribution to the national economy and that the realisation of this goal may in fact depend on the fuller citizenship imagined by the politics of indigeneity.

AB - In 2004 the appointment of a Coordinating Minister Race Relations, signalled a shift in elite M'ori policy thinking from a long-standing cautious bipartisan acceptance of self-determination towards a re-emergent assimilationist 'one law' for all discourse. The question simplistically posed by the Leader of the Opposition was should welfare entitlements be granted on the basis of need or race (Brash 2004)? Beneath this question lies an ideological assumption which privileges assimilation over indigeneity as the basis of M'ori participation in public affairs. This paper therefore asks: are M'ori peoples with rights, or individuals with needs? Is there a deeper politics of indigeneity providing a legitimate foundation for rights which are not necessarily superior to the rights of citizenship, but are important and distinguishable adjuncts? These questions transcend the issue of welfare entitlements to wider questions about the nature and terms of M'ori belonging to the liberal polity. The paper highlights the political tension between government attempts to remove indigeneity from the public agenda in response to populist pressure and a pragmatic acceptance that New Zealand 'needs' M'ori to increase their contribution to the national economy and that the realisation of this goal may in fact depend on the fuller citizenship imagined by the politics of indigeneity.

KW - Maori politics

KW - New Zealand politics

M3 - Article

VL - 1

SP - 1

EP - 12

JO - MAI Review

JF - MAI Review

SN - 1177-5904

IS - 2

ER -