Criticism directed at Nanaia taking Foreign Affairs says more about the critic than the criticised.
Her ability to do the job has nothing to do with her gender, ethnicity or Moko, in fact her indigenousness could be a boon when dealing with other countries.
That’s not to say the announcement wasn’t a surprise. NZ is about to enter very choppy geopolitical waters between China and America and a clear communication style will be demanded.
The reality is that Jacinda is actually the Foreign Affairs Minister, her International profile makes her the voice every leader listens to. Expect a senior Secretary to be appointed in Nanaia’s Office who answers directly to the Prime Minister’s Office. There won’t be any surprise announcements from Nanaia like her Māori Media funding idea.
To understand why Nanaia has Foreign Affairs you need to appreciate the horse trading that has occurred here.
The real catalyst has been the rise of Willie Jackson and the power of the Māori Caucus.
What has been missed by pundits is that Willie has been given Māori Development off Nanaia, this is a huge upset and a clear signal that the Māori Caucus (as the largest faction) is being rewarded with real political muscle.
It’s not just tribal allegiances and standing that matter, it’s your ability to effect real community change with flax root organisations at the coal face of the social issues corroding Māori. That’s why Willie now has that job because Urban Māori are being recognised as the political power block they are.
Nanaia as Foreign Affairs Minister is recognition to the mana within Māoridom that she represents.
It all cements the Māori Caucus in as the most powerful faction within Cabinet.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice going into this pandemic and 2020 election – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media.
Yes, Nanaia would be seen by many in the Māori world as welded to the Kingitanga, whereas Willie should have more mobility perhaps.
Lots of other countries have downtrodden indigenous peoples and a colonial history, so she will be an asset on that issue too. Just wait till she meets some US State Dept. types and asks how is it all going at Standing Rock!
+100 great post …Jacinda is coming into her own…Nanaia is a great choice for Minister of Foreign Affairs
…and it will increase NZ’s mana and the mana of NZ women in a largely male chauvinist Patriarchal world
( this includes the world of patriarchal monotheistic religions)
…it is also about time a mature woman and a Maori woman received recognition by the Labour Party for her loyalty and service
Did Kelvin Davis use his deferral of the Deputy PM role to leverage an increase in the overall power of the Maori caucus. If so well done him. Labour have a variety of good men in their caucus who recognise the strength of the team over any personal alpha tendencies.
Correct although I suspect there is some quid pro quo going on here regarding Davis’ demotion as well.
It would prepare the way to ending the export of water … reinforcing the references to a certain Treaty in our trade agreements.
On a related matter… the Mightyape website has removed an author’s books for disagreeable Twitter comment about the Nanaia Mahuta appointment. I have written therefore to the Mightyape CEO to suggest he create a position of ‘Official Censor’ and appoint me to the job. Letter pasted below…
Simon Barton
CEO
Mightyape
Dear Mr Barton,
I read today in the New Zealand Herald (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/author-olivia-pierson-labels-nanaia-mahutas-moko-ugly-uncivilised-mighty-ape-pulls-books/WW6GEQON7BK4HADJW43Z3FPMEE/) that you have ceased selling Olivia Pierson’s books because she said, in regards to Nanaia Mahuta’s appointment as Minister of Foreign Affairs, ‘Facial tattoos, especially on a female diplomat, is the height of ugly, uncivilised wokedom.’
I am writing therefore to suggest you create a position of ‘Official Censor’ at Mightyape, and appoint me to that role. Whilst disagreeing with Olivia Pierson’s opinion and impressed with the moral stance you are taking, I am concerned by your continued support of authors who have also transgressed, and believe I am the man to bring consistency to your impressive sense of moral responsibility.
Consider Winston Churchill. In 1943, as three million starved to death in Bengal, and British officials begged for food supplies to the region, Churchill refused, and blamed the Indians for ‘breeding like rabbits’. In World War II, furthermore, Churchill presided over a Britain that bombed German cities full of non-combatants and burned to death hundreds of thousands of old men, women, children and babies. These are, I submit, actions at least as reprehensible as expressing an opinion on Twitter, and if employed you can rest assured I would have Mr Churchill books off your website within a week.
Likewise the following authors…
Charles Dickens cheated on his 45-year old wife with an 18-year-old actress, then launched a smear campaign against his wife in the press, won custody of the children and would not allow them to see their mother. Surely his books must go too.
What of J D Salinger, author of The Catcher in the Rye’, and notorious for romantic (but perhaps not sexual) relationships with young, teenage girls?
There’s Jack London who wrote that genocide was just a part of natural selection, and was something that’s perfectly acceptable when ‘lesser breeds’ encounter Anglo-Saxons.
And please, don’t forget Roald Dahl. I know you are probably making good money from this hugely loved children’s author, but did you know he once said: ‘There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity….even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.’ I would have thought it a no-brainer, therefore, that Mr Dahl’s books should be at least banned, and perhaps burned.
Did you know also that William Golding tried to rape a 15-year-old girl and Norman Mailer attacked his wife with a knife and almost killed her? I suspect not. But do not worry. On my watch their books will be gone from the Mightyape website by lunchtime on my first day at work.
V.S. Naipaul said female writers are inferior to male writers. Enid Blyton was a terrible mother. And so I say, ‘out with them also’.
As for that miscreant William S Burroughs, he killed his wife by shooting her in the head, an action I regard to be at least as serious as writing a disagreeable comment on Twitter. As Mightyape’s official censor, it would be my intention to burn publicly as many of his books as possible, and make prominent display of our moral righteousness.
Please don’t forget… Orson Scott Card is reputed to be a homophobe. And Erza Pound supported both Mussolini and Hitler, and in 1940 did a series of radio broadcasts blaming the Jews for financing World War II.
What of New Zealand’s very own Anne Perry? Did you know she helped murder her best friend’s mother during an attack in which the victim was beaten 20 times on the head with a brick? I am sure, once you realize the implications, you would want her books gone from Mightape as much as I do.
In conclusion, I regret the fact this letter manages to address but a fraction of the perfidy that surrounds everyone who enters your website. There are thousands of authors to be investigated, and I am sure many conceal secrets that would more than justify the withdrawal of their books also. It is my submission, therefore, that I am the man to both undertake the research and control the logistics of banning books written by reprehensible authors.
With thanks for your attention. Kind Regards
Anthony Keesing
Brilliant!!!!! Post of the year
Don’t joke, the National library in Wellington is probably planning just this.
Well done.. That was an amusing way of belittling what was a brave philosophical stance… How many of these “reprehensible “people actually put their bigotries, and relived their worst personal attributes in their books? Can you detail when those people went public with their bigoted, and reactionary views? If being “above reproach” in every facet of one’s life is the only way to achieve success in the public arena, then we would be living in a very grey, and dour world indeed… Nothing but music by “approved” composers, literature by the pious, theater by the mediocre… Yawn…
belittling what was a brave philosophical stance…
Exactly.
What exactly is ‘philosophical’ about banning books? What is ‘brave’ about joining the deplatforming mob?
You seem to be suggesting that a bookstore owner/ CEO should not exercise discretion as to which books, or which authors, they choose to promote and to sell. When I worked in a bookstore such choices were made on a regular basis.
This is here and now and of course it is deeply insulting to Maori and in particular Nanaia Mahuta. The women’s ‘self published’ book should be off the radar completely.
Hi Michal,
I agree with you when you say that Olivia Pierson’s comments are ‘deeply insulting’, and I am interested in what you prescribe as a solution. You seem to be arguing that if something is insulting, in your opinion, then its author should ‘be off the radar completely’. I am curious, therefore, as to the implications of your statement and have some questions in this regard.
1. Would you remove from ‘the radar completely’ all authors expounding views you found ‘insulting’, or just some of those expounding views you found ‘insulting’?
2. If you would remove just some ‘insulting’ authors, how would you decide who should be heard and who should be suppressed?
3. By what means do you think judgements of this sort should be enforced?
4. Have you considered opposing bad ideas by expressing better ones?
I look forward to your responses. Kind Regards, Anthony K.
Speak in plain tones please. You seem reasonable but your argument is a bit creepy, from my lights.
There is a whole new generation on the political left who think they have a right to ban, deplatform and destroy those who say things with which they disagree. They are, in my view, woefully misguided, and there is nothing ‘creepy’ about questioning them on the implications of their views and actions. They also like calling people names – like ‘creepy’, and seem to mistake this name calling for logical argument.
Our whanaunga Nanaia has been in parliament for twenty years now she has won her seats in her electorate for many many years even when others have failed. She comes from our Kingitanga line, she is well educated, articulate and can korero Maori. I listened to her interview on RNZ she said all the right things. She can and will hold her own on the world stage, she is humble and has humility something currently lacking in many world leaders. She will represent us proudly and do whatever is best for us as a country. We pride ourselves in being the first country to give women the vote but in recent years we have been slipping. Covid has create turmoil in the world, now is the time for people to work together and help one another so what better time to appoint an indigenous women for such an integral role in foreign relations and diplomacy.
Thank you for writing that so clearly, CiP.
And, like a kauri tree in the forest, Nanaia is beautiful, and in her bearing, regal.
Yes. Regal is the word I’d been looking for. Nanaia is a woman of stature, and grounded in the way that too many politicians are not. I love her moko – that Olivia person looks a bit unsophisticated 1960’s Kiwi hickish – wrote some self-help stuff about there only being one right pathway- big groan.
I’d have rather liked to have had a mother like Nanaia Mahuta.
Well I wish you did too, since you do not seem to like your own mother much, to want to replace her…for whatever reason…sorry about that.
Nevertheless, however how much Nanaia Mahuta may be regal, beautiful, or a great mother…what she needs to be is a strong and tough foreign minister and an agile representative for NZ concerns and morals on the world stage.
That is what NZers expect or want of that position.
From the outset, Peters appeared to fulfill that role with aplomb – he didn’t embarrass us as a nation, and his quick wit and sharp mind was appreciated as representative of we, NZers. Although in truth his character is a rarity here…Urban, smart, agile and witty, plus being a charmer and a looker and aggressive like James Bond. Beyond that, what he did in his role, we did not know much, and there is always a trailing whiff of sulphur about his reputation, warranted or not…But I liked his comment that we needed to do more in the Pacific, and that China was taking advantage of the gap of aid we did not provide for Pacific bros and sis for many decades. And it’s a bit late now etc…
John Minto has outlined some big issues we need to get on top of as a moral nation in a fucked up world, you can read m as I did, in his blog on this website.
However Chris T on his commentary, does not think Mahuta’s character is up for the job – she does not have the right stuff, she is some kinda patsy for Jacinda, he says.. Is he right? Is she just a brilliant cover, a ‘brownwash’ with Kingitanga mana that reflects political kudos for Jacinda… who will do all the heavy lifting in foreign affairs with Mahuta giving the stamp?
Compromise minority rights while continuing the ‘same world’ corrupt status power quid pro quo??
Let’s hope not.
A give peace a chance, man.
“Olivia Pierson labels Nanaia Mahuta’s moko ‘ugly, uncivilised’.”
Olivia Pierson simply labelled herself.
https://www.iias.asia/the-newsletter/article/absence-dissent-new-zealands-asia-pacific-engagement-1989-2020
An absence of dissent. New Zealand’s Asia-Pacific engagement, 1989-2020
Well I wish you did too, since you do not seem to like your own mother much, to want to replace her…for whatever reason…sorry about that.
Nevertheless, however how much Nanaia Mahuta may be regal, beautiful, or a great mother…what she needs to be is a strong and tough foreign minister and an agile representative for NZ concerns and morals on the world stage.
That is what NZers expect or want of that position.
From the outset, Peters appeared to fulfill that role with aplomb – he didn’t embarrass us as a nation, and his quick wit and sharp mind was appreciated as representative of we, NZers. Although in truth his character is a rarity here…Urban, smart, agile and witty, plus being a charmer and a looker and aggressive like James Bond. Beyond that, what he did in his role, we did not know much, and there is always a trailing whiff of sulphur about his reputation, warranted or not…But I liked his comment that we needed to do more in the Pacific, and that China was taking advantage of the gap of aid we did not provide for Pacific bros and sis for many decades. And it’s a bit late now etc…
John Minto has outlined some big issues we need to get on top of as a moral nation in a fucked up world, you can read m as I did, in his blog on this website.
However Chris T on his commentary, does not think Mahuta’s character is up for the job – she does not have the right stuff, she is some kinda patsy for Jacinda, he says.. Is he right? Is she just a brilliant cover, a ‘brownwash’ with Kingitanga mana that reflects political kudos for Jacinda… who will do all the heavy lifting in foreign affairs with Mahuta giving the stamp?
Compromise minority rights while continuing the ‘same world’ corrupt status power quid pro quo??
Let’s hope not.
A give peace a chance, man.
Comments are closed.