The historical record matters.
In the First and Second World Wars, hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders served overseas. The overwhelming majority were not Māori. While Māori contributions — particularly through the 28th (Māori) Battalion — were distinguished and rightly remembered, they represented a minority share of total service. That reality should inform how the day is commemorated, without diminishing the significance of that contribution.
In most of New Zealand’s overseas conflicts, those who served — Māori and non-Māori alike — did so under a single banner: the New Zealand flag. Units may have reflected different backgrounds, but they were not separate forces. They were part of one military, representing one country. That matters.
ANZAC Day should reflect that same unity. It is a national day of remembrance, not a collection of competing cultural expressions. The purpose is to honour shared sacrifice — not to segment it.
In recent years, ANZAC services have increasingly incorporated tikanga Māori — including karakia, waiata, and haka. These can be appropriate acknowledgements of Māori service and heritage. But as they become disproportionately prominent or overly lengthy, they risk shifting the tone of the event away from remembrance and toward performance.
That’s where the concern lies.
This is not an argument against Māori inclusion. Māori served, fought, and died — and their contribution deserves recognition. But recognition should be proportionate and purposeful, not expansive to the point where it reshapes the character of the event.
The same principle would apply to any group. No single narrative — cultural, political, or otherwise — should overtake the core meaning of the day.
ANZAC Day has endured because it is simple, solemn, and shared. It binds generations — across all backgrounds — not through difference, but through a common act of remembrance.
However, ANZAC ceremonies are becoming more performative and less centred on remembrance, which I suggest is a legitimate concern.
Geoff Parker is a passionate advocate for equal rights and a colour blind society.
In most of New Zealand’s overseas conflicts, those who served — Māori and non-Māori alike — did so under a single banner: the New Zealand flag. Units may have reflected different backgrounds, but they were not separate forces. They were part of one military, representing one country. That matters.
ANZAC Day should reflect that same unity. It is a national day of remembrance, not a collection of competing cultural expressions. The purpose is to honour shared sacrifice — not to segment it.
In recent years, ANZAC services have increasingly incorporated tikanga Māori — including karakia, waiata, and haka. These can be appropriate acknowledgements of Māori service and heritage. But as they become disproportionately prominent or overly lengthy, they risk shifting the tone of the event away from remembrance and toward performance.
That’s where the concern lies.
This is not an argument against Māori inclusion. Māori served, fought, and died — and their contribution deserves recognition. But recognition should be proportionate and purposeful, not expansive to the point where it reshapes the character of the event.
The same principle would apply to any group. No single narrative — cultural, political, or otherwise — should overtake the core meaning of the day.
ANZAC Day has endured because it is simple, solemn, and shared. It binds generations — across all backgrounds — not through difference, but through a common act of remembrance.
However, ANZAC ceremonies are becoming more performative and less centred on remembrance, which I suggest is a legitimate concern.
Geoff Parker is a passionate advocate for equal rights and a colour blind society.
18 comments:
You can tell this author has never served in the military. No serviceman would say what this guy is saying. I was at the service on the weekend and it was touching and appreciated by all who attended.
Agreed. We should also be concerned about the priorities of the current military forces.
What the heck is cultural drift? Culture has always been changing. All cultures change. I guess some folks are fearful of change. Moreso the older folks. Recognising NZs unique culture is a pretty awesome thing to be doing. As is paying respects to those who have fought and died for us. An off-base read from my mate Geoff here.
And it defeats the entire argument that the maori activists have been saying all along. Why did they agree to go and fight against colonist mother england who "stole all their land" and enforced westmister law and democracy on their people? Also the war was about protecting freedom and democracy, where there is no master race of people who are above others. This also goes agsinst the maori activist beliefs. They don't like equality or democracy.. They want a tribalist state where a dictator keeps the people in check. You would think they would want nothing to do with anzac day at all.
Indeed Geoff.
Anon 8.36 here. Correction to one sentence. It should say " Why did they agree to go and fight WITH colonist mother.england...
Anon 8.36
Great point about Maori in all our overseas actions to defend democracy.
Why did Maori eagerly go into action in support of their Colonial oppressors to secure democracy on NZ, which they have subsequently destroyed ?
NZ remains a representative democracy. If you want to change that, use your vote! Everyone gets one!
The Dawn Parade in Wellington started with a karakia. Total bullshit and unnecessary. Footage of the Anzac Cove ceremony also show cased Maoridom. It’s an absolute disgrace this is being allowed to happen both here and overseas.
Exactly the same issues dominate in the current Middle East -anti -Semitism and anti Western Values including anti -democracy .
Same issues but fueled by different language - Marxism.
The trouble is now that Marxism has invaded our country along with Islamic influences which readily also uses Marxist rhetoric to further promote their aim of universal Sharia Law.
We should remember the Islamic Great Mufti of Jerusalem sided with Hitler in W. W. 2 in the same way Islam sides with Marxism now . United in the common cause of annihilating Jews and crushing Judeo -Christian values . Two billion Muslims vs seven million Jews.
The whole Maori radical agenda is also fueled by Marxist rhetoric -CRT.
We have the enemy within as well as without different language but same enemy agenda.
The Maori activist, cultural and governing take over movement, knows no limits. It's utter distain for all things colonial only shows them for who they really are.
Maori representation at two world wars was for King and Country.
This modern movement is nasty, selfish and offensive to all who are proud to think of themselves as New Zealanders.
Be aware, unity is not the outcome they desire.
A nod to things Maori have long been an integral component of New Zealand culture, it certainly cannot dominate the culture.
We all became one people at the signing, and for 150 years, how well we did as people from all cultures.
This is no longer our direction.
Contrary to Anon 216's conspiracy theorising, Islam has no truck at all with Marxism, which is after all explicitly atheistic, and rejects the notion of private property. It is difficult to imagine any kind of mutual accommodation between Marxism and the Sharia.
There is some commonality between Islam and neo-Marxism with regard to attitudes towards Western imperialism, but this is rather hypocritical on the part of those Muslims given the imperialistic history of Islam (e.g. the Ottoman Empire).
Love the kiwi culture. Long live the ANZACs.
For those who desire another well researched perspective on the so called 'theory ' see substack "Everyone is Lying to you about the Palestinians" by Yama Bar , Yamaja 2026 . This will explain fully how Islam has been used by Soviet influences to get a proxy into the Middle East . The current narrative is dismantled using verifiable historical facts including the intriguing evidence from Ion Mihai Pacepa a high ranking general who defected to the West.
Tainui (Waikato Māori) resistance to fighting in the First World War was rooted in the 1863–1864 British invasion of the Waikato, which resulted in massive land confiscations (raupatu) and significant loss of life. When war broke out in 1914, and specifically when conscription was extended to Māori in 1917–1918, Tainui leaders and people largely refused to participate, viewing it as a "white man's war".Key Aspects of Tainui Anti-War Stance:Leadership of Te Puea Hērangi: A major figure in this resistance was Te Puea Hērangi, granddaughter of the second Māori King, who argued that Tainui should not fight for the Crown that had devastated their people 50 years prior. She stated: "I will not agree to my children going to shed blood".The "Let Those That Want To, Go" Stance: Te Rata, the Māori King, maintained a position that while he would not stop other Māori from enlisting, he would not encourage Tainui to do so.Resistance to Conscription (1917-1918): When the Military Service Act was applied to Māori in June 1917, the focus was primarily on Waikato-Tainui. Many men refused to report for military service, with some going into hiding or being arrested.Te Paina Pā Gathering: Te Puea sheltered many of the men who refused to be conscripted at Te Paina Pā at Mercer, and also took responsibility for children of soldiers.Consequences of Resistance: Many Tainui resistors faced imprisonment and severe military punishments at the Narrowneck Military Camp in Auckland, though only a small number were ever successfully put into uniform.Hostility and Propaganda: The anti-conscription stance led to intense pressure and accusations that Tainui were "German sympathisers," which was a common label used by opponents of the movement.Reaffirmation in WWII:This opposition was reasserted when war broke out again in 1939, with Te Puea again advising against Waikato men fighting overseas unless land grievances were addressed, though she did not prevent those who chose to volunteer.
I understood that no Maori were conscripted in either WW1 or 2?
I took was disappointed with the Wellington and the Anzac Cove services. Too much emphasis on Maori culture. Especially the Anzac Cove service. Maori were only one of many cultures who fought at Gallipoli
All honour to the Maori Battalion, but why do we not hear of all the similar actions carried out by the other ten or so Battalions whose exploits were at least as noteworthy as the Maori. Many Maori served in those other battalions and carried out actions alongside their non-Maori brothers in a spirit of comradeship and brotherhood. At Cassino 24 and 25 Battalions performed feats comparable to those of the Maori Battalion and in so doing suffered a similar decimation but their glory is forgotten in the exclusive fame reserved for the Maori Battalion. Let us consider the rest of our armed forces rather than reserve the accolades for one small group within them.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.