We're not the only ones afflicted with a great desire for recognition.
And on the other end of the scale, there are nations that are fearful of losing their dominance.
1. up to the end of the second world war, the vast majority of immigrants to nz were from britain and ireland. there were very tiny minorities from places such as central europe, nordic countries, the balkans and southern china.
And Australia. Australian immigration in the 19th century and early 20th century is a massive influence (most had origins in the UK).
during the gold rushes, a lot of people came from other gold rush locations (California, South Africa, Australia, etc). But they were nearly all born in Britain or Ireland. and some came from southern China.
I've often wondered: are the people of other countries filled with such endless angst about their own provincialism and insularity? Or do they just not give a toss?
i live in Tokyo. Japan is quite insular in many ways. not much immigration or emmigration. language that is only spoken here. etc, etc. BUT, it has 30 times the population of NZ and is located just to the east of the world's most populous continent. so the insularity is a different flavour to NZ's, imo. NZ can't really afford to be insular in the same way big countries can.
BUT, in a metropolis of over 30 million people, you don't get a lot of provincialism or parochialism. there used to be a lot of angst comparing themselves with Amerika. not so much now. people unconsciously realized that the american empire is not really anything they should aspire to.
in summary: nz needs the rest of the world more than they need us. nz has to try that much harder because it is small and very far away.
nz has to try that much harder because it is small and very far away.
No, no, no. Why should we try at all? I like living here because it is so small and far away. Why oh why do we have to be tryhards. Fuck 'em. IMVHO, we need to cut it out with the trying thing. We need to stick to what we do well, and not worry so much about what the rest of the bastards are doing. When everyone else is being blown up by atomic bombs, and suffocated with their own filth, we're down here quite happy. Good job.
i meant that we need to try to be less narrow-minded and insular, not try to copy anyone else. i think this complex Key seems to have about "catching up with" Australia is complete bullshit. BUT thinking we know everything and the rest of the world is inferior or owes us a living and not being curious about other cultures is really boring and bigoted, imho. being small and far away means it takes more effort to get out and really see what's outside our little archipelago.
BUT thinking we know everything and the rest of the world is inferior or owes us a living and not being curious about other cultures is really boring and bigoted, imho.
So do we have an inferiority complex or a superiority complex? (It's not that I disagree with your main point, but you can be happy living in NZ without thinking those things or acting that way. Also: having lived in the USA, I find it hard to rustle up indignation about NZ's insularity, because... yeah. We don't even know what insularity is in comparison.)
So do we have an inferiority complex or a superiority complex?
Not everybody. But there are more than a few with an insecure need to declare that we are "the -st in the world" at some particular attribute.
It's a convenient mythology. See the way NZ is advertised in Australia.
But there are more than a few with an insecure need to declare that we are "the -st in the world" at some particular attribute
George, surely you understand that that is a universal thing? Every countries citizens do that, in my experience. And similarly, everyone does that shake of the head, laughs, and then says "Only in......." which is patently ridiculous, really.
Cultural diversity is not some exotic backdrop that provides good food and the odd festival. Immigrants have some serious international connections; they know the markets we are selling into; they provide new trade links and opportunities. Locally, they grow new businesses and new business sectors. They contribute disproportionately to research and development (about half of Silicon Valley employees are immigrants).
But that isn't diversity
We could take the top percent of IQ's from India China; eventually they would be earning the top incomes; living in the best realestate, but would the economy be structurally changed to increase incomes for a larger population?
New migrants (because they are generally younger and better skilled than average) lower the mean age of the population and increase the number of net contributors vs net beneficiaries.
Migration is one of the few ways open to us to get production to the levels needed to support peoples retirement. (One alternative would be to cede Tauranga).
Australian Productivity Commision
It is also a fallacy that higher immigration counteracts population ageing. Beyond an annual immigration level of around 100 000 people, the demographic benefits have been shown to diminish greatly, with migrants impacting much more on the size of the population than on its age structure. The main reason is that migrants age too! We would need to bring in increasingly more of them to ‘backfill’ the age structure over time. Indeed, the Commission calculated that to preserve the current age profile of the population, the immigration-to-population ratio would need to rise to three per cent (triple its peak of 2008-9). This would make Australia a population ‘super-power’ of 100+ million people by mid-century!
Yeah, the only way immigration is a remedy for ageing populations is if you make it only for a limited term. Which doesn’t work either, because it limits the total number of immigrants (as Japan has been finding).