Posts by Yamis
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Tze ming mok:
and much prefer KRS-One to the Clean
Damn, I love KRS-One!!!
The list of things I wrote as things which are part of NZ culture was not a be all and end all list and of course you have people within races around the world who like totally different things. My wife is Korean and likes cats while her Korean friend staying with us is scared shitless of them. In Korea I know Koreans in underground punk rock bands while others have never heard of it, some love hip hop, some love horrible pop music, some are into football hardcore and some couldn't give a shit.
I'm not saying all NZers are interested in the things I mentioned. Even I'm not interested in half of them, but they are all things that stand out AT THE MOMENT about NZ. In 20 years time things like online gaming might be considered strong parts of NZ culture along with Karaoke rooms and Norei bungs, PC bungs and Po-jang macha on street corners.
Anyway, I'm about out on this topic. I think I've said about as much as I can. Some understood, some totally misunderstood.
Two more things though.
Firstly...
I asked a Maori teacher of Te Reo at my school if Pakeha meant "non-Maori" just last week and she said YES. People don't have to agree with her but she is seriously clued up on all matters Maori as you might expect so conclude what you will.
Secondly...
If New Zealand European is somebody who is white does a French person or Dutch person who happens to be black comes to live in New Zealand, do they have to start putting "African" on their census form? People are assuming that all Europeans are white.
-
I'm just saying that based on Pakeha becoming a 'non racial' term (well to the extent that it doesn't distinguish what specific ethnic group you are from) whereas New Zealand European is making assumptions about where you or your ancestors are from. "New Zealander" on the other hand is also non specific on skin colour, ancestry...
Hard to argue on this topic where sweeping generalisations are virtually impossible to avoid.
On something else I was checking.
There are about 205,000 actual 'European's' living in New Zealand according to the 2006 census. That's not counting Australians, Americans and Canadians or white South Africans. A pretty healthy number. More than half the number of "Asians". If you throw the 4 nations I mentioned in then it climbs to around 250,000.
I wonder in 20 years time how many of them and their kids will be ticking "New Zealand European" category and how many New Zealand Europeans will be ticking "New Zealander".
-
They absolutely must distinguish Pakeha from NZ European because as I've harped on earlier, Pakeha has come to mean non-Maori and therefore there may be many who wrote it who are not 'European'..
I would also think that those writing Pakeha may prefer they be lumped into "New Zealander" ahead of "New Zealand European" if they do have to be put into another category.
-
A teacher friend/colleague of mine has spent the week at school showing the kids a one hour powerpoint presentation entitled "Star Wars as contemporary myth" or something close enough. He says it is going well with classes with plenty of kids who have seen Star Wars. Not so well with those who haven't.
-
On that note and since the rum and coke is starting to wear off, meaning I am finding TV boring and need something else to do, ie. rejoin this argument....
Using the two criteria for 'having' an ethnic group that have been mentioned (stats NZ first and M Brown second) lets see if "New Zealander" fits (in my opinion of course as some will beg to differ).
According to stats NZ...
1) a common proper name
Check. New Zealander (429,429 people agree)2) one or more elements of common culture which need not be specified but may include religion, customs or language
Check. english and a sprinking of Maori here and there, sport, beer, horse racing, fishing, summer holidays at the beach, marmite, gumboots, bush walks, hunting, flying nun bands ;) .....3) unique community of interests, feelings and actions
Check. see above for community of interests. For feelings and actions take a look at our political beliefs regarding no nukes, no going to war in Iraq. Quite distinct from those "Europeans" we are said to have come from, or our Aussie neighbours, or the red, white and blue flag flyers.4) a shared sense of common origins or ancestry, and
5) a common geographic origin."Check. Origins being in NZ, typically (though not exclusively) from parents born in NZ, and grand parents born in NZ. Geographic origin = anywhere in NZ/Aotearoa (what a beautiful name Aotearoa is. Had to sing the national anthem in assembly today and it rolls of the tongue so nicely at the end of the Maori version).
According to M Brown...
1. the group must have a name for itself;
Check. "New Zealander".2. the people in the group must believe in a common ancestry;
Check. See above.3. the members of the group must share historical memories;
Check. Saying otherwise would be akin to saying that not a single thing has happened in NZ ever that had anything to do with us.4. the group must have a shared culture, generally based on a combination of language, religion, laws, customs, [etc];
Check. see above.5. the group must feel attachment to a specific piece of territory, which it may or may not actually inhabit; and
Check. It's called New Zealand or Aotearoa.6. the people in the group have to think of themselves as a group ... the group must be self-aware.
Check. "New Zealanders". -
all of them New Zealanders.
But we don't want any of them tick to that box in the census form though do we? :)
-
Yeah you buggers might talk the talk but do you own 30 of the Star Wars books which carry on the story!!! err, I mean carry on telling us what is happening in a galaxy far, far away through secret dispatches by the bantars??!!
Chewbacca dies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How do you do a little smilie of a crying person? Would it even be a smilie? Would it be a cry -ie ?
-
Last paragraph should read "growing use of "Pakeha". Obviously there is a fair amount of debate on it.
-
here is an interesting piece on the meaning of "Pakeha" by Jodie Ranford. Or rather meanings or how they have changed over time.
And from it...
Pakeha is in common usage, but many have difficulty in defining its meaning. From early records it is clear that the term was used in New Zealand before 1815 to mean ‘white person’. Initially a Pakeha was that person who came from England, and settled or worked in New Zealand. With time, Pakeha was the fair-skinned person who was born in New Zealand. Later the term was even more general. It was applied to all fair-skinned people in New Zealand, no matter what their ancestry or place of birth" (Department of Labour, 1985). By 1960, Pakeha was defined as "a person in New Zealand of predominantly European Ancestry" (Ausubel, 1960). The English – Maori: Maori – English Dictionary (Briggs, 1990) defines Pakeha as "white (person)". Kiwi Words and Phrases (Campbell, 1999) defines Pakeha as a "non-Maori person". Mary-Ellen O’Connor (1990) defines Pakeha as "the dominant white race in New Zealand. This would cover anybody of Anglo-Celtic origin (England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales) and, as the integrated, Northern Europeans (Scandinavians, Germans, and Dutch), white Americans, Canadians and South Africans".
By 1985 a significant development occurs with the definition when King (1985, p12) defines Pakeha as "denoting non-Maori New Zealanders". There is nothing in the definition referring to colour. It is merely all those people who are of non-Maori descent. King’s definition of Pakeha is given weight when we define the term Maori as ‘normal’, that is to say that, in relation to Pakeha, I am Maori. It is merely a means by which the peoples of Aotearoa differentiate between the indigenous peoples and the early European Settlers, or the Maori and the other, irrelevant of race, colour, ethnicity, and culture.
There appears to be two emerging uses of the term. One approach continues the references to those with white skin colour while the more inclusive refers to all those who are non-Maori appears to be gaining currency. My own definition of ‘Pakeha’ is influenced by Ross Himona’s definition. Himona states that linguistically it just means a New Zealander of non-Maori and non-Polynesian heritage without any connotations". He considers that ‘Pakeha’ "is most used to describe white non-Maori, as they were the original colonists, but it can apply equally to Asian, etc. This definition of ‘Pakeha’ is the most expansive that I have found. It gives the term Pakeha a more inclusive and less pejorative tone.
It seems, if the above is correct and I have no reason to doubt it that the current use of "Pakeha" is for all non Maori people (with the possible exception of Polynesians). So Africans and Asians would also fall under the umbrella term. I've always happily referred to myself as pakeha when it's been the most appropriate word.
-
Che does that mean when somebody fills out their census form they have to go for an interview by a panel of experts to verify the accuracy of the aforementioned claim? ;)
Problem with looking for external indicators is that they are too based on race. If somebody from England has moved here with their kids 20 years ago are people more likely to say that they are a New Zealander than they would for a woman who is of Chinese ancestry but whose parents and grand parents were born in NZ? That seems to be the assumption/accusation from some. And I don't necessarily disagree. I just find it defeatist to assume that that thinking can never change and the way to change it is to challenge it, not excuse it or make claims that that is how it is and not consider that it may change.
I reckon you are what you feel you are. If people within that community say you aren't well they had better convince you to change your mind then. And if they are that unwelcoming then you'd probably not want to join em.
As an aside I noticed going through the 2006 stats that about 150? people wrote "I don't know" for the ethnicity question. Poor buggers.