If 2024 has a theme in Te Ao Māori, it’s undoubtedly kotahitanga. From the beginning of the year, the Māori nation was called to Tūrangawaewae, and the call was for kotahitanga – uniting in the face of the most explicitly oppressive government we have seen in a long time, coming together to protect all we have achieved in the past 50 years, which this government seeks to undo, and all we hope to achieve for future generations. From that point til now, through multiple hui and indeed throughout the tangihanga of Kīngi Tūheitia Pōtatau Te Wherowhero VII and coronation of Te Arikinui Ngā wai hono i te pō VIII, we have heard, over and over, the call to unify.
It’s not a new call, entire movements have been named after the concept of kotahitanga. It’s been recognised from the time of our ancestors, that we have strength in unity, and are more easily picked off, or held down, when we are separate. I’ve heard many mihi to this government, who have, in their racism, created the context for Māori to unify against them. Undoubtedly, when we have been together in gatherings, “activations” or protests people feel a sense of kotahitanga (and that’s valuable in itself). But as anyone who has been in an intense relationship can tell you – feelings can be deceptive, so I’m going to pose a challenging question now:
What if it’s a mirage?
What if the feeling of kotahitanga, and actual kotahitanga are two different things. What if we aren’t actually there yet? I know there is a tendency to only think/speak positively about ourselves, and I agree that focussing on deficits isn’t a helpful space to remain in – but it’s also important to ground yourself in reality, and sometimes that requires us to consider difficult truths, and potential barriers to our goal. For me, deficit thinking is not considering these barriers, it’s when we consider those barriers to be insurmountable. Problem is, if you don’t SEE the barriers, you’ll have a hard time surmounting them. I’m keen to surmount the barriers, and see how far kotahitanga can take us – so let’s talk about them. Let’s kick our kotahitanga tyres.
I saw somewhere recently, someone wrote “we all know what the problem is”. But do we? The symptoms of the problem are clear – attacks on our reo and tikanga, and all the negative statistics in health, childcare, education and other social outcomes. But are we all on the same page about what drives these attacks and outcomes?
Go around our people and ask them what they think the problem is that we are currently facing, and you’ll get a range of replies:
- Some will say the problem is an individual, usually David Seymour, or Winston Peters, or Shane Jones, or Christopher Luxon (these folks generally respond by campaigns that smear the individual).
- Some will say it’s a particular party (eg ACT, but not so much National, and look out for NZ First employing this narrative as we approach the next election).
- Some will say it’s this coalition together (certainly Labour supporters will take this position)
- Some will say it’s how we do government (these people are generally focussed on a Tiriti centered constitution, a Māori parliament OR setting up a new iwi structure to interface with this government on behalf of Te Ao Māori)
- Some will look beyond this government to international thinktanks like The Atlas Network (these people will look to expose and limit the impact of such thinktanks on government)
- Some will look to broader systems like capitalism (these peeps might propose that we all grow our own food, go off-grid etc – OR they may seek to “win” at capitalism, and use capitalist business models to reduce dependency on the government)
And of course many may say it’s a mix, or even all of the above, but have different ideas about which approach should be prioritised. In any case, I’ve just highlighted at least six different views of what the problem is (and even more ideas about what solutions we should engage in). Now I’m no kotahitanga genie, but I do know that for us to come together around a solution, we need to get on the same page about the nature of the problem. That doesn’t mean we should all be doing the same thing – a diverse approach is good but even a diverse approach still needs to understand what the problem looks like, to guide where our energy is best placed. For instance, if too many people think the problem is David Seymour, but hardly anyone is focused on how we do government, we run the risk of missing an opportunity to block the next David Seymour from coming along (and believe me, there is always a David Seymour around the corner, he’s not a one-off).
It’s difficult, I know, but if we don’t take our time to wānanga and get strategic, we will continue to get pulled into a reactionary space. If we keep reacting to every announcement, we are playing into the distraction tactics of those in power, and we run the risk of being fatigued in 2026 – when we most need our energy. There is a real possibility that in avoiding the difficult discussions, we will condemn our future generations to even more difficulties.
Now, even if we are able to get a unified idea about the nature of the problem, there are a few other matters that can create divisions if not discussed, and managed:
1. Personality over politics – The role of personality is huge. Being a media personality got Donald Trump elected into president, and is arguably going to get him elected back in, even as a convicted felon. He is a rather extreme example though, and we have plenty of examples of this much closer to home. People will endorse someone’s political takes because they are a celebrity artist, or because they are a social influencer, a powerful orator or a successful business person. Increasingly there are concerns about the role of content creators in politics – but for rangatahi, social media is an inescapable fact, and a forum that really resonates for them. Social media is also not the only way we can be swayed. In Te Ao Māori, we love a good tune. I can’t tell you how many hui I have seen swayed by someone who can sing the right song, at the right time. Not always a bad thing, but we need to be aware of how these truths might be used against our collective interests.
2. Iwi/identity over politics – In Te Ao Māori, we are also swayed by the position that our iwi might take. We often have deep, emotional ties to our iwi and don’t want to be seen as being out-of-step with the iwi position. The subtext to being out-of-step is that you may be seen as somehow “less” of an iwi member. Truth is, the iwi position on any kaupapa can be influenced by many factors, not all of them easily seen by hapū, whānau or individuals. It won’t necessarily be the case that iwi will all share the same view on the problem, or the correct solution. Some iwi might not even feel we should change how we do government. This might come across as harsh but let’s be real: Iwi leaders have fought over the past few decades to lift their people from oppression. Many of them haven’t seen their own children grow up, because of their dedication to this struggle. They’ve gotten to the point where finally, they can knock on the doors of power and demand exclusive meetings, where they can acquire funding before a budget is released, and avoid contestable funding rounds. It’s understandable that after an intergenerational fight to get that far, not all of them will be so keen to change how we do government. Especially if there is no clear vision for what will replace it.
3. Disinformation – As I’ve said before, numerous times, Te Ao Māori are particularly susceptible to disinformation networks, because our confidence in institutions such as government, media, and science are understandably low (if not completely shot). When distrust is a survival tool, it can also be weaponised against you, to create even more distractions for your energy.
4. Capitalism/material need – As I mentioned above, there are some who believe we can capitalism our way out of colonialism, and that if we can economically flourish, that this will represent the liberation of our people. For them, they would prefer we focus on capitalist success, and this could be another group who is not so upset by this government’s values. The idea of material wealth as a solution is also attached to another concern around the material needs of our worst impacted whanau. While a number of us may be chasing political authority over our worlds, there are real concerns that this overlooks the immediate, and urgent needs of those worst impacted by colonialism.
5. Incremental change vs Radical change – there are also those who disagree on the appropriateness of radical change, compared to incremental change. For those opposed to radical change, if you reach for too much, you’re not being realistic. They might not feel Te Ao Māori is ready for political authority over our own worlds. They might feel that reaching for such change is a waste of important energy, and we are better to just go for a slow, steady increase in rights and opportunities. For those who support radical change, this may be seen as a rare opportunity for important shifts – especially when we are dealing with time-bound issues such as the climate crisis, and that small incremental change might never actually get us where we need to be.
6. Competing issues and power – What we are facing is a political crisis, but because of the way political power shapes society, it impacts us across multiple fronts, causing reo crises, hauora crises, economic crises etc. If we cannot come together over the role of political power, we can get caught up thinking this is about multiple competing issues, and (this next part is important) political power is just another issue, alongside all the other crises rather than shaping them. To complicate it further, there are people who strongly believe that focusing on Wellington ignores the power you have in your own community to make a change about the reo, or your taiao – they feel that talking about the political arrangement we all live under gives Wellington too much power. Our failure to address these differences has led to many hui about self-determination being derailed, or diluted, by multiple competing interests and ideas.
For many of these issues, what is needed is not only wānanga, but Indigenous critical thinking. By that, I mean a way of assessing our crisis that takes into account who we come from, what we have been through, and where we want to be headed. A way of thinking that is rooted in tikanga and mātauranga Māori, without excluding those who have been culturally dispossessed by colonialism. A way of thinking that is aware of how colonialism works, and how it’s infiltrated our worlds. We need to support ways of seeing our problems so that we are responding to the problem, not responding to a personality, or an identity, or a song or an insecurity, or even worse, responding to an illusion that doesn’t even exist.
So, you see, there are multiple barriers to kotahitanga. This doesn’t mean they are insurmountable – but if we are to surmount them, we will need more wānanga (at more levels than just national hui) and we will need to apply more critical thinking. We don’t have to all think the same, or act the same, but if enough of us can come to a consensus on the nature of the problem in front of us, and can respect our different strengths and approaches, then we may fully see the power and potential of kotahitanga.
For more discussions on Indigenous critical thinking, check out the new Tūturu episode, dropping 11 September. Here are some sneak previews of the wānanga:
