Consider the two words 'liberal', 'democracy' and their connection. Both give us something that none of our ancestors living in kinship groups had.
'Democracy' gives us a system of parliamentary sovereignty, of law, of regulation. It recognises that our common humanity justifies equal rights. Those rights belong to the individual citizen, not to the group.
The word 'liberal' gives us the freedom to be different – as individuals and in voluntary associations based on a range of shared interests –culture, heritage, language, sport, music, religion, politics, and so on.
This is what makes liberal democracy remarkable. As citizens we have the same political and legal rights. As members of civil society we are free to be different. This is an enormously important point. It is the combination of rights, responsibilities and freedom within democracy's governance and laws that makes the modern world vibrant and prosperous.
That's why I support the Treaty Principles Bill – because it provides a coherent and succinct statement capturing what liberal democracy is – something we should all know, especially the Members of Parliament who represent us, the People of New Zealand.
First world nations need liberal democracy's creative tension – an invigorating tension between rights and responsibilities, and between having the same rights and having the freedom to be different.
The Bill is the symbolic link to the hope found in both the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi and in the 1852 Constitution Act. Nineteenth century New Zealanders, especially those who had been slaves, decimated by war, of low genealogical birth status, or from impoverished backgrounds – they put their faith in a peaceful and prosperous future for their descendants. In the 21st century we can strengthen that faith for our descendants by agreeing to the principles in this Bill.
New Zealand's future may be that of a prosperous first-world liberal democratic nation or a third-world, retribalised state. A first world tribal nation is a contradiction in terms. It is not possible. There can be no prosperity without individual equality and freedom. There can be no social equality without prosperity.
We are at a crossroads. The value of the Bill is that it not only forces us to confront this fact but allows us to do so within the parliamentary select committee process rather than through cultural posturing, intimidation, perhaps even violence. The very existence of the Bill is liberal democracy in action.
'Democracy' gives us a system of parliamentary sovereignty, of law, of regulation. It recognises that our common humanity justifies equal rights. Those rights belong to the individual citizen, not to the group.
The word 'liberal' gives us the freedom to be different – as individuals and in voluntary associations based on a range of shared interests –culture, heritage, language, sport, music, religion, politics, and so on.
This is what makes liberal democracy remarkable. As citizens we have the same political and legal rights. As members of civil society we are free to be different. This is an enormously important point. It is the combination of rights, responsibilities and freedom within democracy's governance and laws that makes the modern world vibrant and prosperous.
That's why I support the Treaty Principles Bill – because it provides a coherent and succinct statement capturing what liberal democracy is – something we should all know, especially the Members of Parliament who represent us, the People of New Zealand.
First world nations need liberal democracy's creative tension – an invigorating tension between rights and responsibilities, and between having the same rights and having the freedom to be different.
The Bill is the symbolic link to the hope found in both the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi and in the 1852 Constitution Act. Nineteenth century New Zealanders, especially those who had been slaves, decimated by war, of low genealogical birth status, or from impoverished backgrounds – they put their faith in a peaceful and prosperous future for their descendants. In the 21st century we can strengthen that faith for our descendants by agreeing to the principles in this Bill.
New Zealand's future may be that of a prosperous first-world liberal democratic nation or a third-world, retribalised state. A first world tribal nation is a contradiction in terms. It is not possible. There can be no prosperity without individual equality and freedom. There can be no social equality without prosperity.
We are at a crossroads. The value of the Bill is that it not only forces us to confront this fact but allows us to do so within the parliamentary select committee process rather than through cultural posturing, intimidation, perhaps even violence. The very existence of the Bill is liberal democracy in action.
Professor Elizabeth Rata is a curriculum expert and author of A Political Economy of Neotribal Capitalism.
12 comments:
Thank you for your submission Professor Rata, you speak for all reasoned, thinking New Zealanders.
Thankyou for your written and oral submissions on this debate - it was my pick of the day - including your outstanding handling of Duncan Webbs questions that demonstrated just how ignorant of our own combined history we have allowed ourselves and our “leaders” to become - which is serving the woke anti colonialists so well.
You demonstrated very well that it is time to leave the past behind and move forward as one people,
which is and has always been the intention of the treaty.
To anyone continuing to push the tribalist, victim of colonialist racism debate ….visit Zimbabwe/ South Africa where the tribes took over and see what happens.
Maori are not bigger victims of history than women, gays, disabled people, Jews, Palestinians, children, Catholics (yes even persecution and open discrimination against Catholics was a thing up until the early 90’s). The list is endless, and now includes white middle aged men.
Seriously TPM and supporters - it’s time to find a different gravy train. Invent something, make something, create productive and fulfilling jobs, use the knowledge and skills given to you by this liberal western democratic country to live a happy and full life while freely celebrating the language/s and culture/s of your choice.
Deeply grateful for your excellent submission Elizabeth - and Anonymous 11.32 - kinda taken aback at your last paragraph ! what? suggest TPM might consider being useful and productive? a truly novel idea - oh go on, that's not TPM! Hmmm.
Thanks prof Rata for expressing my views. I'm one of the silent population who takes a keen interest in the debate, but I do not want to get rip into by expressing a public opinion. I am very disappointed in the National Party for not providing leadership in this important debate at an important juncture in our history. It will be hard for the NP to retain my vote in 2026.
Sadly a similar submission by an ordinary citizen would likely be accoded no more standing than one of the thousands of common worded maori submissions, to which near all submitters woud be incapable of speaking except for a set of stock obscurely relevant maori plattitudes.
The NP never had my vote, Luxon's failure to even mention what they would do about co-governance at a pre-election meeting in '23 cost them that option. I saw through the man at that meeting.
The only way we are going to get ourselves out of this is if everyone dumps national and labour and all vote ACT. They are literally the only viable political party we have that is ever going to be tough enough to do what has to be done. Without this we are going to be having this "conversation" for the next 50 years or until war breaks out. David does have thick skin. Luxon has very very thin skin. We need a leader who is not easily intimidated because frankly I am so sick of this and wish there was no treaty so we could all get on with focusing on the things that matter most.
For those who saw/heard this at the SC : Duncan Webb (Labour) was rude and dismissive. He asked Professor Rata - an Education professor - if she was familiar with the Education Act that she was citing. Incredible - just rude political behaviour.
PS Webb is British.
Why will not Luxon and the National Party put a stop right now to the ever increasing split to an apartheid system? We are all NZers and should be treated in the same manner. There will always be those that thrive and those that don’t take up the opportunities, with no one else to blame but themselves.
If for no other reason, I will vote ACT at the next election.
Exactly right - time for a major strategic step to change direction towards NZ's future progress.... and even immediate survival ( nothing to do with personal preferences re. politicians). The people can speak this way - they do have a voice.
I suggest all NP voters contact you local mp and lobby for their leader to rethink.
I agree luxon and his colleagues need to have some backbone and support this bill it will stop division in NZ, and do what the treaty set out to do take us forward as one nation. T.R.
Post a Comment