OnPoint by Keith Ng

Read Post

OnPoint: Dear Peter Brown: *Hug*

100 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

  • Tze Ming Mok,

    Nice one, dude. I like it when you blog about your feelings.

    Christ, ye olde 2004 march. I would have human-shielded Cale, hell, all of them once the violence started, on principle. But I have an uncanny ability to never be in the hotspot at the right time - unlike you Keith. If only Bharat Jamnadas hadn't been human-barricading me at the steps of Parliament, making me repeat the same quote over and over and signing those endless release forms for Asia Downunder... But ultimately, I didn't go down there because I didn't want to be part of the confrontation. And I should have known that if anyone could have stopped what eventually happened, it was me. I thought at the time, 'no-one could have stopped that'. In hindsight, I was wrong. It was on me. 'RedWatch' of the infamous 'commie hitlist' was kind of right about that in the end, funnily enough. I should have made contingency Asian-human-shield plans for when the anarchists went haywire. But I am a useless tactician. I'll know better for next time I organise an anti-hate crimes march in New Zealand, which will be, oh that's right - never.

    SarfBank, Lunnin' • Since Nov 2006 • 154 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    I lived in the US for 20 years - on a wonderfully multicultural street where we were the only straight white couple - we moved back home to NZ a few years back

    One of the main reasons we felt we could do that was because we felt that NZ had changed, a lot, even white-bread Dunedin - in fact probably the defining experience was on a trip back home seeing african girls hanging out with their mates at the mall and speaking with kiwi accents - things really had changed.

    At a larger level the result of such wonderfully diverse immigration has been to make NZ a much more cosmopolitan place - and the food! 25 years ago when I left there was F&C and fewer than a dozen pretty mediocre restaurants in town - people forget how much things have changed - Mr Brown would serve us compulsory bangers and mash - and claim that's a good thing

    But I've had this conversation a bunch of times especially with older or more working class NZers - talking up our cultural diversity, pointing out that it was one of the reasons we moved back - and I hear hesitation in their voices - things have changed and they aren't in control - that's the cultural vein that Winston's mining - it's ugly and Winston's encouraging of it is despicable - I was aghast when Labour brought him into the government last time - personally I'm hoping that NZ First will sink from the political stage this time around (will they use the Winston-walking-on-water-like-Jesus image again this year so I can make fun again?)

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2623 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Nice one, dude. I like it when you blog about your feelings.

    And yet, he is a Vulcan. Fascinating.

    If only Bharat Jamnadas hadn't been human-barricading me at the steps of Parliament, making me repeat the same quote over and over and signing those endless release forms for Asia Downunder...

    Ah, the televisual media. We just fix it all up afterwards to make it look like reality ...

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen Judd,

    I admire that attitude.

    And yet I think it's ok to be a little bit cross with Peter Brown. Who's doing more to foment division, friction, resentment than Brown himself?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3122 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Semmens,

    Bravo for a thoughtful post on the issue. To me though part of the problem the reaction of everyone from the chamber of commerce to the Green Party to Peter Brown's comments - Outright refusals to even countenance a discussion of the possible implications for New Zealand. The refusal of our leadership elites in business and politics to even discuss the problem is going to hand the framing of the debate (topical because of the upcoming FTA with China) to idiots like Peter Brown and NZ First.

    We had this same canard raise its head in the 1990's, and New Zealand popular opinion then decisively rejected uncontrolled Asian immigration. The current large numbers of Asians in Auckland by and large have not been allow to integrate and have it seems to me often responded by deciding they don't want to integrate anyway. Anti-Asian sentiment is still acceptable and large numbers of New Zealanders engage in systematic and widespread discrimination against Asians in hiring and social situations. I am of the view that this rejection is largely because the politicians of the 1990’s stuck their heads in the sand and refused to listen to and help assuage the unease of New Zealanders over immigration, and that let Winston and co whip up an anti-immigration feeling that lingers to this day.

    It isn’t inherently racist to have the serious debate now we should have had 15 years ago about what sort of demographic makeup and what sort of country we want as a result of immigration BEFORE any sort of racist anti-immigration party gets 20 seats and demands the removal of hundreds and thousands of people who are already here. We need to decide, for example, if we are going to be a melting pot or a diverse society, a United States/Australia model or a Canada/U.K. model, before we have any potential massive migration as a result of (for example) a FTA with China. And it is important, for once, to listen to what working class New Zealanders have to say on the issue instead of engaging in a middle class echo chamber on immigration. To do otherwise would simply increase the disconnect already rampant between the elites and the working class and just encourage the rise of extremist parties who use race as a platform, as evidenced by the European experience of immigration as a political issue.

    The worst possible thing that could happen would be to allow a re-run of the 1990’s race debate.

    Sevilla, Espana • Since Nov 2006 • 2217 posts Report Reply

  • Neil Morrison,

    It isn’t inherently racist to have the serious debate now we should have had 15 years ago about what sort of demographic makeup and what sort of country we want as a result of immigration BEFORE any sort of racist anti-immigration party gets 20 seats...

    Some in the British Labour Party put forward this argument a few years ago - failing to acknowledeg the real grievances of (mostly less well off) white communities regarding immigration just leaves the door open for the BNP.

    It's very tricky point to make though. It's very easy to be characterised as being sympathetic to racist attitudes.

    Since Nov 2006 • 932 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen Judd,

    Neil: in my mind the "real grievances" are only real in the sense that they are genuinely felt. Otherwise, they seem to me to be proxies for economic anxiety. Hatred and fear of migrants is justified by one's sense of being at the bottom of society, or fear of falling to the bottom.

    But looking at the economic roots of anti-migrant racism would open up a discussion that many comfortable people don't want to have, which is why it is so often limited to the "middle class echo chamber" that Tom talked about.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3122 posts Report Reply

  • jon johansson,

    I was wondering the other day whether people still feinted at Obama 'rallies.'

    Was it now such a mundane occurrence that it was no longer thought newsworthy by the national press corp? Or, had this rarest of rare political phenomena finally pettered out, washing up on the shore of Obama's slow transformation back to man and politician?

    Imagine my surprise then when I got an email out of the blue - from someone I had previously viewed as the very embodiment of the rational fact - in which a religious conversion to Obamamania was fortrightly declared. Even more intriguing was the thought offered that a change in sexual orientation for Obama was not out of the question.

    So, you're not alone Keith, and in the spirit of your post let me leave you with a lovely thought:

    E paru I te tinana, e ma I te wai,
    E paru I te aroha, Ka mau tonu e.

    (If you're touched with mud, you can wash it off,
    If you're touched with aroha, it lasts always.)

    Wellington • Since Dec 2007 • 6 posts Report Reply

  • Angus Robertson,

    Paul Campbell:

    But I've had this conversation a bunch of times especially with older or more working class NZers - talking up our cultural diversity, pointing out that it was one of the reasons we moved back - and I hear hesitation in their voices - things have changed and they aren't in control

    Did you use the term "cultural diversity"? Because that is hyper politico speak with various contextual, esoteric meanings - it is basically meaningless phraseology. Only in places like here is it acceptable, because agreeing with a poster in this venue infers a known bias and us readers have some recollection of what views you have commented before. Use such language in polite public conversation and it is meaning-less, connotation-loaded drivel to which no polite person will give you anything other than hesitation.

    Auckland • Since May 2007 • 984 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    I almost think the racism of the UK Labour Party is worse than that of declared fascists like Kyle Chapman. Because it's wrapped up in alleged sympathy for "underprivileged white people".

    My mum is from the East End of London, which is one of those underprivileged "white" communities they talk about. That community is *not* disadvantaged in respect to those whose ancestors migrated more recently (almost all East Londoners are descended from migrants, I certainly am). Those who made an effort in life, like Mum, have done perfectly well. There is a group left behind who didn't make that effort and, feeling themselves hard done by, resort to racism.

    Unfortunately rather than trying to help everyone according to need, UK Labour has identified with these people to the point of adopting their attitudes. Bad.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Lucy Stewart,

    I totally agree re:Obama's race speech - it's just amazing to watch an American politican talk about American racial politics in a realistic and honest way. I was leaning a bit more towards him before that, but that's what sold me; the ability to start that sort of dialogue is priceless in a President.

    As for Brown, I watched his interview with Campbell and he just came across as an bit of a joke - repeating the same statement over and over, refusing to engage with the fallacies in his argument even in the face of the facts, and, of course, insisting that he's the right kind of immigrant because he speaks English, unlike those Asians, who don't. I can't believe that anyone would take him seriously. In which case, he probably is in need of a hug.

    What I really can't understand, though, is the constant repetition of "Asian". Stats NZ's definition of Asian is anyone from Afghanistan to Timor Leste - it's an incredibly wide area. The immigration experiences for an Afghani refugee v. an Indian small business owner v. a Malaysian international student are going to be so different that they're almost not comparable. When Brown talks about "Asians" as a monolithic group, he just comes across as someone who hasn't been outside for the last twenty years.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2105 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen Judd,

    There is a group left behind who didn't make that effort

    ... and another who did make that effort, but did not succeed, because part of being really poor is being more vulnerable to serious random life events than people who are not poor.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3122 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    I was wondering the other day whether people still feinted at Obama 'rallies.'

    Unless you're aware of a riot nobody else has heard of, I think you mean 'fainted'. I guess it might happen when people give enough of a shit that they're willing to stand in a crowded hall for hours to see a candidate. Makes a less than flattering contrast to the 'meet the candidate' events I've attended, where everyone on the stage must have been wishing that empty chairs could vote.

    It isn’t inherently racist to have the serious debate now we should have had 15 years ago about what sort of demographic makeup and what sort of country we want as a result of immigration...

    I kind of agree with you, Tom, but here's the reality check. I'm ashamed to say this, but some of the most racist fucktards I know are in my own whanau and I've tried having a serious, rational, reality-based dialogue on the subject of immigration. how long do you smash your head into a brick wall, wipe the blood from your eyes and repeat before you say 'shit,I'm getting woozy' and give up?

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Idiot Savant,

    It isn’t inherently racist to have the serious debate now we should have had 15 years ago about what sort of demographic makeup and what sort of country we want

    Yes, it is. You're it masking behind the polite phrase "demographic makeup", but what you're actually wanting to talk about is how many non-white faces we "have" to see in the streets, and the average skin-tone of New Zealand. In the process, you're granting that these things matter. And that is giving away the entire argument at the start.

    Skin colour does not matter, and it is no more a fit subject for debate than the average religion or political affiliation of potential immigrants. These things are properly the domain of the individual, not of society as a whole. It is no-one's business at all what race other people are. The only metrics we should be looking at to decide among those who want to live here are merit and need; th emoment we start looking at the colour of their skin, we're no better than the National Front.

    Palmerston North • Since Nov 2006 • 1717 posts Report Reply

  • Charles Mabbett,

    In relation to the segregated communities issue, there's an interesting figure that I've come across in a study called Diverse Auckland by Ward Friesen at the University of Auckland that will be released next week.

    "As well as a diversification of migrant sources, the identities of the population within New Zealand will continue to diversify. In 2006, about 10 percent of the New Zealand population identified with more than one broad ethnic group, and this was especially the case for people aged less than 15 years. The Asian population identifying with more than one broad ethnic group was slightly lower at 8 percent but 18 percent of those under 15 years of age had more than one ethnic identity. Thus over time an increasing proportion of the Asian population will also have European, Maori, Pacific and/or other identities."

    This kind of subtlety about how New Zealand society is changing just wouldn't feature in Peter Brown's thinking. I doubt it would even make sense to him. But the implications are clear, increasing intermarriage between races and that's got to be a good thing.

    Since Nov 2006 • 236 posts Report Reply

  • Idiot Savant,

    You're it masking behind

    Obviously, that should be the other way round.

    (Sorry; still on my first coffee)

    Palmerston North • Since Nov 2006 • 1717 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Semmens,

    Craig to be flippant for a second, from my observations a shared desire to dump on Asians is a powerful bridge building agent between Pakeha and Maori New Zealand... "Look, we all disagree about the treaty, but lets have a group hate about those bloody Chinese..." However, P.I's I know have a very high incidence of intermarriage with Chinese. Go figure.

    Lucy - "Asian" is code for "Chinese'. Specifically. Even the Japanese seem to be better accepted (is the fact that most Pakeha Aucklanders of my acquaintance can tell the difference in a glance between an ethnic Chinese and and an ethnic Japanese an encouraging sign? I'd like to think so!). And to be flippant again, Indians in New Zealand are by and large quickly integrated, they are (and I know I am painting with a broad brush here) admirably capitalist and for us lefties the fact that 90% of Fijian Indians are Labour voters is a amost welcome extra. No one minds the South Africans and the Europeans, they look just the same, fit right in AND the Saffas like rugby.

    Sevilla, Espana • Since Nov 2006 • 2217 posts Report Reply

  • Charles Mabbett,

    I loved Marcus Lush's comment on Radio Live yesterday morning in an interview with Paul spoonley - something along the lines of "1995 called and said can we have our debate back?"

    Tom, you raise an interesting issue about the lack of debate about immigration but to a certain extent forces beyond New Zealand's control are shaping this country's demographic future.

    I think we all agree that we have to have an immigration policy that is colour blind but New Zealand can (and has) implemented a higher threshold for English language skills.

    But when half of Asia has a strong English language heritage - think Singapore, Malaysia, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Burma, Hong Kong and Bangladesh - and the other half is embracing English language learning like crazy - think China and Korea - it is inevitable that more Asians are going to qualify.

    Put that together with the meteoric growth in wealth and incomes in Asia and it seems improbable to prevent immigration from Asian countries unless the country implements an essentially racist immigration policy like in the White Australia and White New Zealand days or unless New Zealand can stem the outward flow of skilled workers.

    Since Nov 2006 • 236 posts Report Reply

  • Keith Ng,

    Skin colour does not matter, and it is no more a fit subject for debate than the average religion or political affiliation of potential immigrants. These things are properly the domain of the individual, not of society as a whole.

    But for some, skin colour (or to be precise, language and cultural practices) does matter. It's a truth that needs to be acknowledged. And you don't change their minds by banishing them from the debate, you change their minds by showing them what an inclusive society is genuinely about.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 543 posts Report Reply

  • Mikaere Curtis,

    The only metrics we should be looking at to decide among those who want to live here are merit and need

    How do you define merit ? I'm sure Brown would include metrics around how closely the applicant's originating culture matches our own. This would, of course, favour Europeans.

    We really do need to have a national dialogue on immigration. It's an important issue which is highly visible and the shouting down of depressingly regular racist rhetoric from NZ First is no substitute for real discussion.

    Me, I'd start with a discussion on population. How large do we want our population to get ? Is Auckland full ? Do we need mechanisms to moderate immigration into targeted parts of the country ?

    A discussion of "integration" would be useful too. Should we require immigrants to integrate ? What does that mean anyway ? Can we select for a propensity to integrate ?

    And lastly, our discussion would absolutely need to address Te Tiriti and the relationship immigrants have with it, and the fact that, as Keith points out, immigrants are on the Pakeha side.

    Tamaki Makaurau • Since Nov 2006 • 528 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    I didn't like anything of what Brown said. But what annoyed me the most was the "they don't integrate into New Zealand" line. A couple of years ago I got to visit Toronto and Victoria, BC on holiday. Both have lovely Chinatowns - Victoria's is pretty small. The people on the streets are all colours and sorts, but the shops and houses are largely run and occupied by various Asians. It created an interesting community and a point of difference, and by-and-large it was supported and enjoyed by a diverse range of people from across the city. New York benefits greatly from having a Little Italy and a Chinatown etc. Is not being completely integrated always so bad?

    What grated about what Brown said was that he was expecting every Asian person to come to NZ to be a... what's the term that people use - a banana? Look Asian in colour, but in all other respects be 'Kiwi', but only Euro-descended Kiwi. Which wouldn't grate so much, but if Brown moved to China on some sort of (badly thought out) career move, he wouldn't integrate in the reverse way at all.

    In which case he should just STFU.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    But for some, skin colour (or to be precise, language and cultural practices) does matter. It's a truth that needs to be acknowledged. And you don't change their minds by banishing them from the debate, you change their minds by showing them what an inclusive society is genuinely about.

    Or waiting for generations to move on and for them to die out and people with newer ideas to come to the fore. Somewhat sadly.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Semmens,

    "...New York benefits greatly from having a Little Italy and a Chinatown etc. Is not being completely integrated always so bad?..."


    But they all have American flags outside their stores.

    Sevilla, Espana • Since Nov 2006 • 2217 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Semmens,

    One other thing I/S - go to any of the Nordic countries we so strive to emulate and check out how many black or indeed even swarthy faces you see. Try and migrate to Norway. They are progressive countries that seem to practice what is basically a "whites only and then only some" type policy. Why? I suspect because they know they've got it good and they don't particularly care to share that goodness with others.

    Sevilla, Espana • Since Nov 2006 • 2217 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    A small contribution to an informed debate would be for TV news to stop illustrating every story on "Asians" or "immigrants" with stock Queen St footage. Yes, I know it's just next door to the newsroom and the crew can pick up lunch while they're there, so it's all very convenient, but ... most of those people on your screen aren't immigrants.

    I don't think even Peter Brown is demanding we stop letting East Asian students and tourists come here and go home again.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1333 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.