Who is New Zealand’s head of state?

This isn’t surprising, the Queen has little to do with Aotearoa in practical terms. Officially:

The Queen of New Zealand’s formal title is: Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, Queen of New Zealand and Her Other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

In the Maori language, The Queen is known as Kotuku, which means “the white heron”, a cherished bird rarely seen in New Zealand.

That’s appropriate in one way – the Queen is rarely seen in New Zealand. She has visited here ten times in nearly seventy years, the last time in 2002 (as part of the commemoration of her Golden (50th) Jubilee so it was about her, not us).

So if you want to see the Queen you have to got to the other side of the world, and then will struggle to get a sight of her.

It’s a lot easier to go to Whataroa to a White Heron Sanctuary:

We offer the only tour to New Zealand’s one and only White Heron (Kotuku) nesting site.

Located on the West Coast of the South Island 30 km north of Franz Josef Glacier, 100 km south of Hokitika, Whataroa is the start point for White Heron Sanctuary Tours.

I’ve been there, it was a great experience. You go by jet boat downriver to the coast, change over to quieter boat to go to the sanctuary where there are kotuku and spoonbills as well as shags.

I’ve never been to see the Queen, nor any of her family, I have had no interest in doing that.

 

Super Rugby Aotearoa starts tonight

Super rugby resumes this weekend after a suspension of the full competition due to the Covid-19 lockdown, but in a revamped local only competition as Super Rugby Aotearoa.

Tonight the Highlanders play the Chiefs in Dunedin. It is cold but dry here outside as well as under the roof. – I decided to go to the stadium to watch, a large crowd is expected.

It is the first rugby game in the world to be played in front of a crowd and broadcast since the Covid lockdown, and one of the few sports events taking place.

Tomorrow the Blues play the Hurricanes. The Crusaders have a bye first up.

Each team will play all other teams twice. It will be a tough competition, especially for the Highlanders who struggled at the start of the season before it was stopped.

They will be operating under some experimental rules.

Any drawn games will go to golden point extra time. Draws tend to be flat finishes.

Anyone red carded can’t come back on to the field during the game but can be replaced after 20 minutes. This is to try too reduce the unevenness of playing for a lot of the game with a player short.

And the change that interests me the most is an attempt to clean up the breakdown and make them more fair and even contests.

Breakdown interpretation expected to speed game up

Announced earlier this week among other innovations like golden point time and the ability to replace a red-carded player after 20 minutes, the existing breakdown laws will be applied stricter to create faster attacking ball and a fairer contest said New Zealand Rugby National Referee Manager Bryce Lawrence.

“Fans enjoy Investec Super Rugby because it’s a fantastic spectacle and our referees like to allow the game to flow. We’re confident we’ll see a contest that is faster, fairer, safer and easier to understand. We’re not changing the laws of the game, we’re being stricter about how we referee them,” Lawrence said.

“It’s just about learning to roll away east to west, rather than north to south,” Gareth Evans responded when asked about how he is dealing with the stricter application of the breakdown laws for the competition kicking off on Saturday June 13.

“A lot of turnovers these days aren’t actually from the person making the tackle it is from the next arriving player,” Evans said. “The tackler now pretty much just has to roll out and go side to side and can’t slow the ball down. If you are the jackler you only have one crack at the ball now.”

“It sort of slowed the game down a bit previously so it’s going to be different but I guess you’re going to have to be more precise on when you pick and choose. The referee is not focusing on who is holding onto the ball now, they are focusing on who is rolling away or who is not rolling away so they can award the penalty or not,” Evans said.

I think this is an overdue change. What has been happening is that the tackled player has been positioning themselves in front of the ball to protect it, often crabbing forward, and often keeping their hand on the ball which was illegal – the law has long said a tackled player must play the ball immediately and then can’t play it again.

I hope the referees are strict on this. The next players arriving at the tackle will be critical in securing the ball.

referees say they will also police the offside line much more strictly. Also overdue, it had become too easy to shut down attacking rugby.

Game details, news and teams:

It will be broadcast and streamed around the world: https://www.superrugby.co.nz/news/where-in-the-world-can-you-watch-investec-super-rugby-aotearoa/

Pulling down statues and changing names

There is renewed focus in different parts of the world to re-evaluate the appropriateness of statues and of place names.

This has come to New Zealand (increasingly commonly referred to as Aotearoa).

Newshub:  Bye Hamilton, hello Kirikiriroa? City mulls name change after statue’s removal

Hamilton City Council contractors this morning removed the statue of British army captain John Hamilton from the centre of town, after a formal request from the Waikato-Tainui iwi.

The removal has revived a wider debate about what should be done – if anything – with colonial-era monuments and names around the country.

Captain Hamilton died leading British forces in the Battle of Gate Pā in 1864, regarded as one of the most important battles of the New Zealand Wars.

Local man Kip Ormsby said the statue needed to be removed from public areas because it represented a painful time in history for Māori.

“I just believe it should go. Yes, it is a part of history, but for Māori people it’s not a good part of history,” Ormsby said.

“So why are we glorifying it for Māori people to see it every day? We believe he is responsible for a lot of the atrocities that happened to our people.”

Ormsby said the statue should be in a museum, with a plaque outlining his full history, allowing people to make up their own minds about what sort of character he was.

The Waikato-Tainui iwi formally requested the statue be removed last year.

It seems reasonable to me to not glorify Captain Hamilton.

The statue’s removal is only one part of a longer-term conversation the iwi is having with the council – they have been working together for more than a year on a review of culturally sensitive names and sites.

The removal of the statue of the city’s namesake begs the obvious question of whether the city should be renamed.

“We certainly favour Kirikiriroa over Hamilton,” Schaafhausen said. “Kirikiriroa was acquired as a result of the New Zealand Settlements Act passed in 1863, and that resulted in just over 1.2 million hectares of our land being confiscated.

“The name Hamilton does really confront us as the stark reminder of the raupatu – the confiscations.”

I think there are valid arguments for renaming Hamilton, perhaps as Kirikiriroa.

This of course raises issues of the names of other cities here, like Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch. Those were all imported names, although they now refer to much wider city areas than they originally applied to.

Perhaps Dunedin could also be considered, but at least it is a Scottish name (for Edinburgh), and Scotland was also oppressed by England, so it doesn’t have the same overbearing colonial problems that some other names may have. But the Scottish were also colonisers.

Apparently the Robbie Burns statue in Dunedin’s Octagon is safe for now – No plans to remove statues in Dunedin

Dunedin statues and street names depicting historical figures with problematic pasts are unlikely to be scrapped.

A statue of Queen Victoria in Dunedin’s Queens Gardens was spraypainted with the words “Return stolen wealth Charles” and “Uphold Te Tiriti” last year.

There is also a statue of poet Robbie Burns in the Octagon.

Critics of Burns have alleged he planned to make his fortune in the slave trade before his early death.

But:

But Te Runanga o Otakou kaumatua Edward Ellison said he saw no particular issue with any statues in Dunedin.

“Our focus is on developing our own narratives and seeing artworks that convey our stories, place names and associations, an area that has been neglected, we would suggest, for a long time.

“So while I welcome the discussion on the issue of racism and its negative legacy, how we might deal with the physical reminders, I am less focused on compared to seeing our stories being seen and told.”

Sounds like a sensible approach here.

There’s a lot of prominent street names linked to England and royalty – George, Princes, Great King and Queen streets as well as Victoria, King Edward and Prince Albert roads.

A childhood place name that seems very un-Kiwi and perhaps should be contentious is Cromwell.

Some name changes have already happened. Mount Taranaki is totally appropriate. Aoraki and Mt Cook seem to co-exist without much problem.

Of course the big one is the name of the country. I’d be happy for Aotearoa to replace the irrelevant and inappropriate New Zealand.

The country wasn’t new when Abel Tasman came here briefly in 1642 and he named it Staten Landt – it was later renamed Nieuw Zeeland or Nova Zeelandia by Dutch cartographers in 1646,  and it was later anglicised to New Zealand.

I know that people argue about the history and appropriateness of Aotearoa, but it is at last a lot more suitable than what we currenntly have.

 

 

Reimagining the future of Aotearoa

I don’t particularly like the term ‘reimagine’ but it is being used a bit lately. It’s use is new to me but according to Merriam Webster it was first used in 1825.

An email from James Shaw and Marama Davidson (to the Green Party contact list: Let’s reimagine Aotearoa 💚

We’re at a critical moment where we can rewrite the rules to ensure cleaner, greener communities where everyone is supported to thrive.

All we need is the political will to be bold and to do what’s right.

So what do you want for our future [name]? Take a moment to tell us about your vision for Aotearoa, so we know we’re pushing for a COVID-19 Recovery that New Zealanders want.

There’s huge potential to support everyone to live with dignity, to create meaningful jobs and build greener communities throughout New Zealand.

You may have already seen some of our big ideas to ensure we kick-start our economy after COVID-19 in a way that helps nature and communities thrive. We’ve pushed out our ideas on creating nature-based jobs, as well as building high speed passenger rail to connect the regions to our cities. We have more exciting ideas to come, but we also want to know what you think.

Our Let’s Reimagine Aotearoa survey should only take a few minutes of your time, and has the option to send us a video or voice message if you’d prefer.

Right now, we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to change the direction of our country. Let’s not let this chance go to waste. 

RNZ:  Māori seek ideas on Aotearoa’s future after pandemic

The Iwi Chairs Forum is launching a campaign today encouraging people to share their vision for New Zealand post-Covid-19.

Ngāti Kahu leader Professor Margaret Mutu is leading the campaign and says the pandemic has given the country an opportunity to re-imagine its future.

“Covid-19 has given us the opportunity to pause and reflect on how we would like to be as a nation. We have a special chance to build a country based on our shared values,” she said.

“That’s about our constitution and constitutions should come out of communities not governments. Why would iwi leaders be interested in community vision? Iwi leaders have always worked with communities in creating future pathways as demonstrated in the 1835 Declaration of Independence and Te Tiriti o Waitangi 1840.

“We have been fair and we have honoured agreements for the wellbeing of all. This campaign continues that work.”

She said the Iwi Chairs Forum invited all individuals, organisations and communities to share their vision through online video or written statements with the hash tag, #aotearoa2020vision

Statements will be reviewed and prominent themes and priorities will be reported via the forum’s Facebook page, to the national Iwi Chairs Forum and stakeholders. In addition, a rōpū (a group), led by rangatahi will be formed to identify the shared priorities that will contribute to a community vision for Aotearoa into the future.

This reimagining has been going on for a while.

The Dig (August 2019) – There Is A Field: Reimagining Biodiversity In Aotearoa

We are in a moment of existential peril, with interconnected climate and biodiversity crises converging on a global scale to drive most life on Earth to the brink of extinction. However, our current worldview and political paradigm renders us incapable of responding adequately due to its disconnected and divisive default settings. These massive challenges can, however, be reframed as a once in a lifetime opportunity to fundamentally change how humanity relates to nature and to each other.

IdeaLog:  Using Māori culture and urban design to reimagine Aotearoa’s past, present and future

Our social, political, and economic consciousness is shifting as a nation. As we begin to understand and embrace what being Maori can say about Aotearoa, our conversation as designers turns to the land and to the built environment. How do we brand our face to the world, yet remain true and authentic to a history and knowledge that runs deep beneath the pavement of our roads and cities, emerging only sporadically in our built environment as glimpses of another past? As Isthmus’ Damian Powley discovers, these deep narratives have as much to say about what once was, as they do about our collective identity now in 2019, like holding a mirror up to catch a glimpse of where we may be heading.

Tourism Industry Aotearoa:  Private Sector Ready To Reimagine Tourism

The tourism industry is ready and willing to join the Government in planning the future of tourism for New Zealand, Tourism Industry Aotearoa says.

TIA looks forward to actively participating in the project to reimagine the way tourism operates in a post-COVID-19 world, announced by Tourism Minister Kelvin Davis today.

There’s even a website Re-Imagining Social Work in Aotearoa New Zealand

There’s nothing wrong with using our imaginations, nor imagining what the future of Aotearoa might look like.But if we are to make any major changes or “rewrite the rules” this should follow good democratic processes, and will take some time, like years.

Diving in to make make big changes while we are still dealing with a crisis would be a mistake.

Communists and socialists in New Zealand

In the 1970s and 1980s socialism in New Zealand was much more prominent than it is now, especially through links to unions and unionists.

Have socialist ideals fizzled out? Not entirely, some activists promote something similar – somehow getting rid of capitalism and replacing our financial and political systems with something like socialism. But with previously communist countries USSR and China now embracing a lot of capitalism the socialist ideals are more low key and fringe.

Someone at Reddit was Wanting to know about communism in NZ

Does anyone have any links or info for any current communist or socialist parties in NZ ? I’ve done a bit of a search online but keep just finding info about defunct parties and terrible NZ herald articles. Anything specific to the Otago area would be amazing.

One unappreciated response:

I’ll tell you for $15

Another probably wasn’t very helpful:

Both of our major parties have been infiltrated by the Communist Party of China and we are in the process of becoming their puppet state.

Why not start by joining one of those parties?

It was pointed out that the Communist Party of China (if there is such a thing) mustn’t be very socialist these days.

There were some more helpful suggestions:

The International Socialists in Dunedin are pretty active right? Give them a yell. They like protesting.

Also:

Organise Aotearoa aren’t a parliamentary party but are probably one of the more active groups having only just kicked off last year. They do have a Dunedin branch too. Active on social media with their links at the bottom of the page, their twitter follows a lot of their members who are mostly very chatty.

The New Communist Party of Aotearoa is also a thing that exists as of last year but I’m not so familiar with them.

Organise Aotearoa (modern socialist groups seem to avoid using socialist names) explains their aims:

Organise Aotearoa is a new movement for liberation and socialism. We believe that the current political and economic system is rotten to the core. This system is killing our planet, creating massive inequalities, and undermining the tino rangatiratanga of Māori.

I don’t think the tino rangatiratanga of Māori is particularly socialist. Rangatira relates to chieftainship.

If we want to live in a truly just, fair, and democratic world, we need to do things differently. We need a system that puts people and the environment before corporations and their profits. We are fighting for socialism because we need a system that shares wealth and prosperity among all people.

We cannot simply rely on politicians in Parliament to do what’s best for us. Time after time, politicians have made promises and failed to deliver. Even worse, most politicians don’t even try.

It’s hard to see how any meaningful changes will be made to our political system without doing it through Parliament. This is no sign of any popular inclination for revolution in Aotearoa.

And it would probably have major difficulties dealing with the Treaty of Waitangi.

History has shown us that people in power only make the changes we actually need when everyday people get organised and demand them.

That’s why Organise Aotearoa wants to do politics differently. We’re committed to doing politics in a way that enables all of us to transform our living conditions together. We want to build the power of ordinary working people so that our collective needs, desires, dreams, and aspirations can’t be ignored. Together, we can make Aotearoa a more equal and democratic place, where everyone can thrive.

“Ordinary working people” is far from everyone, and it is claimed that socialism tends to discourage people from being working people.

Also r/kiwisocialists “has a list of groups around the country”:

A place for socialists, communists and anarchists to discuss current events and organise within Aotearoa.

But it’s not exactly reaching the masses:

157 Comrades

Communism hasn’t been able to prove it is a workable alternative – it has largely been a big failure – so socialist activism is a fringe idealist activity.

Socialist groups had some connections with the Mana Party (also called the Mana Movement) but that flopped when joining forces with a big capitalist Kim Dotcom and fizzling.

British politicians on monarchy “wouldn’t that be an appropriate time to call it a day”

Prince Andrew may have done significant damage to the British monarchy. His disastrous interview led to his brother Charles asking their mother Elizabeth to dump him from royal duties. British politicians are suggesting that once the Queen’s reign ends maybe all royal duties could be dumped.

Daily Express: End the monarchy? SNP Sturgeon demands talk on Royal Family future after Prince Andrew row

The Royal Family has been caught up in the furore surrounding Prince Andrew’s car crash BBC interview over his relationship with the disgraced US financier Jeffrey Epstein. In the biggest crisis the Queen has faced since the death of Princess Diana, some are now calling for a national debate over the monarchy’s future. Jeremy Corbyn has led the way with calls to rid the UK of its Royal tradition, saying that he would create a Head of State to replace the Queen.

In an interview with GMTV, Mr Corbyn said: “I think it’s time that we just moved on and said, when the Queen completes her reign, wouldn’t that be an appropriate time to call it a day and have an elected Head of State.”

And now it seems that Nicola Sturgeon has lent her support to Mr Corbyn’s republican agenda.

In an interview on ITV News At Ten on Thursday, the SNP leader argued that it was time to have a debate over the role of the monarchy.

When asked whether the Prince Andrew affair made her consider whether the monarchy is fit for purpose, she replied: “I think it raises a number of questions.

It’s most unlikely anything will happen (beyond whittling down the hangers on like Andrew) while Elizabeth remains queen, but if party leaders in the UK are openly questioning the monarchy, or saying it should end in the next decade or so, then it must have just about done it’s dash.

There’s even less need for the monarchy here on the other side of the world. It really isn’t relevant to us in Aotearoa, apart from providing a bit of hob nobbing and rubbing shoulders with royal celebrities for some of our politicians.

Prince Charles has just visited and that was very low key. I think that most of us just didn’t care.

It would be simple for us to become independent of a ruling system that hasn’t ruled for a long time, here or in Britain. We could keep something like the Governor General here, maybe renamed, for some official signing stuff and a token check on the power of politicians, but we wouldn’t need much.

I don’t think we need a president, or anything called a president. That would imply some sort of power that they shouldn’t have.

I doubt our politicians would have the gumption to drop the monarchy. Jacinda Ardern seems to like the hob nobbing. Simon Bridges seems quite conservative so I doubt he would do anything semi-radical on the monarchy.

But it could be forced on us if Britain separates it’s governance from the monarchy. If they do that it would be more ridiculous than it is now to maintain a connection that has no relevance to modern New Zealand.  they Queen hasn’t been here for yonks and won’t be back.  Princes come and shake a few hands every few years but I’m sure we could manage without that sort of poncing.

Māori immigration and population

This story was on 1 News last night: Story of Polynesian voyagers who first discovered New Zealand told through animation

Long before Captain James Cook, great Polynesian voyagers first discovered New Zealand.

Now, after centuries of neglecting to tell the story of the great Pacific migration, Dunedin animator Ian Taylor is gifting the story to the nation.

Mr Taylor, the founder of Animation Research Ltd, has created a free tool that replicates the journey of revered navigator Tupaia.

“It’s incredible because I turn 70 next year and I’m only just learning this story now,” he said.

After studying the topic for decades, Professor Lisa Matisoo-Smith, from the University of Otago, said the topic has been ignored for too long.

“[The voyage was] incredibly complex, and that is the scientific knowledge of Pacific people, of some of those very skilled navigators,” she said.

“It hasn’t been incorporated in our history books, and that’s sad generally for world history, but it’s particularly sad for New Zealanders.”

The tool will be used in schools around the country.

It is incredible how little we were taught about Māori history at school half a century go, and since, so this is a good project

The New Zealand wars are getting more attention now too. RNZ – Te Pūtake o te Riri: Fierce welcome for Ardern and Māori ministers

Hundreds of Māori toa, warriors, have given Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Māori ministers a fierce welcome to Ōwae Marae in Waitara for the commemorations of the New Zealand Land Wars.

Te Pūtake o te Riri, He Rā Maumahara is a national initiative to commemorate the New Zealand land wars and raise awareness of the events that shaped the country’s modern history.

Timed to coincide with the anniversary of the United Tribes of Aotearoa’s declaration of independence in 1831, Taranaki is this year’s focus after the inaugural event was held in Northland in 2018.

After a pōwhiri which ended with Ms Ardern being offered a white feather or raukura as a symbol of peace, the Prime Minister said she did not favour a national day of commemoration.

“Putting the teaching of New Zealand history into our schools, into our education system, for all our young people to learn, I think that is the most significant and important thing that we can do going forward.”

Key event organiser Ruakere Hond said the New Zealand Wars have always been about Waitara, where the first shots in the conflict were fired.

In their haka pōwhiri, the warriors paid homage to all their tūpuna who died in the New Zealand Wars around Aotearoa.

After the official welcome RNZ’s NZ Wars: Stories of Waitara series and panel discussions have been launched.

So good to get more of our own history better known.

It is believed (based on a broad range of evidence) that New Zealand’s first permanent settlements were established between 1200-1300.

NZ History:  Pacific voyaging and discovery

It was only around 3000 years ago that people began heading eastwards from New Guinea and the Solomon Islands further into the Pacific.

Great skill and courage was needed to sail across vast stretches of open sea. Between 1100 and 800 BCE these voyagers spread to Fiji and West Polynesia, including Tonga and Samoa.

Around 1000 years ago people began to inhabit the central East Polynesian archipelagos, settling the closest first.

New Zealand was the last significant land mass outside the Arctic and Antarctic to be settled.

Around the end of the first millennium CE Polynesians sailed east into what is now French Polynesia, before migrating to the Marquesas and Hawaii, Rapa Nui/Easter Island and New Zealand, the far corners of the ‘Polynesian triangle’.

The direction and timing of settlement

A broad range of evidence – including radiocarbon dating, analysis of pollen (which measures vegetation change) and volcanic ash, DNA evidence, genealogical dating and studies of animal extinction and decline – suggests that New Zealand’s first permanent settlements were established between 1250 and 1300.

These migrants, who sailed in double-hulled canoes from East Polynesia (specifically the Society Islands, the southern Cook Islands and the Austral Islands in French Polynesia), were the ancestors of the Māori people.

Sketch of Double-hulled voyaging canoe

British Library Board. Ref: 23920 f.48

This double canoe was sketched off the New Zealand coast in 1769 by Herman Spöring. It has a double spritsail rig and appears to be made from two canoes of different length and design lashed together. Archaeologist Atholl Anderson argues that the double spritsail was the most likely type of sailing rig used by the Polynesian voyagers who reached New Zealand in the 13th century.

It had earlier been believed there had been one one way ‘great migration’, with Aotearoa being discovered by chance. But it is now thought that there were many voyages, some of them in a return direction.

It makes sense that when Aotearoa was first discovered (by Kupe?) the discoverers returned to tell of the land they found, much more land than the islands they came from

Although it was once believed that the ancestors of Māori came to New Zealand in a single ‘great fleet’ of seven canoes, we now know that many canoes made the perilous voyage. Through stories passed down the generations, tribal groups trace their origins to the captains and crew of more than 40 legendary vessels, from the Kurahaupō at North Cape to the Uruao in the South Island.

If there was say an average of 50 people in each waka, times 40 that makes possibly about 2000 immigrants. There must have been many Polynesian people who immigrated here.

TEARA: Population

At the beginning of the last century New Zealand was occupied by a Maori population estimated at between 100,000 and 200,000, and by about 50 Europeans.

The actual size of the pre-European Maori population is uncertain. Captain Cook, whose first visit to New Zealand was in 1769, estimated that there were about 100,000 Maoris, but he did not visit some of the most populous inland centres, and his estimate was almost certainly low.

Can a population increase from the low thousands to hundreds of thousands in five hundred years?

Simon Chapple (NZH): How many Māori lived in Aotearoa when Captain Cook arrived?

An important question puzzling historians is how many Māori lived in Aotearoa at the time of Cook’s arrival. This question goes to the heart of the negative impacts of European contact on the size and health of the 19th-century Māori population, which subsequently bottomed out in the 1890s at just over 40,000 people.

The conventional wisdom is that there were about 100,000 Māori alive in 1769, living on 268,000sq km of temperate Aotearoa. This is a much lower population density (0.37 people per square kilometre) than densities achieved on tropical and much smaller Pacific Islands.

The Cook population estimate

It was published in a 1778 book written by Johann Forster, the naturalist on Cook’s second expedition of 1772-1775. Forster’s estimate is a guess, innocent of method. He suggests 100,000 Māori as a round figure at the lower end of likelihood. His direct observation of Māori was brief, in the lightly populated South Island, far from major northern Māori population centres.

Later visitors had greater direct knowledge of the populous coastal northern parts of New Zealand. They also made population estimates. Some were guesses like Forster’s. Others were based on a rough method. Their estimates range from 130,000 (by early British trader Joel Polack) to over 500,000 Māori (by French explorer Dumont D’Urville), both referring to the 1820s.

A second method takes the population figure from the first New Zealand-wide Māori population census of 1858, of about 60,000 people. It works this number backwards over 89 years to 1769, making assumptions about the rate of annual population decline between 1769 and 1858.

Still only a rough estimate.

The third method used to estimate a population of 100,000 Māori predicts the number forward from first arrival in New Zealand. Prediction requires a minimum of three parameters. These are the arrival date of Māori in New Zealand, the size of the founding population and the prehistoric population growth rate to 1769.

The current consensus is that voyagers from Eastern Polynesia arrived in New Zealand between 1230 and 1280 AD and then became known as Māori. However, even a 50-year difference in arrival dates can make a large difference to an end population prediction. Geneticists have estimated the plausible size of the Māori female founding population as between 50 to 230 women.

That implies far fewer immigrants than my 2000 stab.

The high population estimate is therefore nearly five times the size of the low estimate. Such a broad range is meaningless.

The third big unknown of the prediction method is the growth rate.

Indeed, historically recorded population growth rates for Pacific islands with small founding populations could be exceptionally high. For example, on tiny, resource-constrained Pitcairn Island, population growth averaged an astounding 3 per cent annually over 66 years between 1790 and 1856.

Arguments for rapid prehistoric population growth run up against other problems. Skeletal evidence seems to show that prehistoric Māori female fertility rates were too low; and mortality, indicated by a low average adult age at death, was too high to generate rapid population growth.

This low-fertility finding has always been puzzling, given high Māori fertility rates in the latter 19th century. Equally, archaeological findings of a low average adult age at death have been difficult to reconcile with numbers of elderly Māori observed in accounts of early explorers.

However, recent literature on using skeletal remains to estimate either female fertility or adult age at death is sceptical that this evidence can determine either variable in a manner approaching acceptable reliability. So high growth paths cannot be ruled out.

All of this is very vague.

Because of resulting uncertainties in the three key parameters and the 500-year-plus forecast horizon, the plausible population range for Māori in 1769 is so broad as to make any estimate meaningless.

Perhaps one reason why not much pre-European history was taught is that not much was known or recorded in a form that could be taught, especially nationally.

It wouldn’t have helped that European immigrants were more interested in their own history, pre-immigration and post immigration. And most teachers, and most pupils, were of European origin.

While there is a lot more Māori history that can and should be taught (and available to those who want to inform themselves), there also seems too be a lot of research required to fond out more about the early history of Aotearoa.

General strike 4 climate in Aotearoa

A strike or protest against inaction over climate change is planned around the country today.

The Spinoff:  General strike for climate: everything you need to know

What and when?

The School Strike 4 Climate movement has invited people of all ages to a nationwide strike today. More than 40 rallies and marches are planned around the country and upwards of 90 businesses, including The Spinoff, have committed to downing tools and joining the movement.

In Auckland, protestors will gather at noon at Aotea Square.

Hamilton protestors are meeting at Civic Square at 1pm.

In Tauranga, it’s a 12pm start at the south end of The Strand.

Wellington protestors are meeting at 11am at Civic Square ahead of a march on parliament.

In Christchurch, protestors will gather at 1pm in Cathedral Square.

Dunedin’s strike kicks off at 12pm outside the Dental School ahead of  a march to the Octagon.

Events are also planned in Whangārei, Lower Hutt, Dunsandel, Porirua, Greymouth, Golden Bay, Thames, Whanganui, Foxton, Nelson, Kāpiti, Hawke’s Bay, Alexandra, New Plymouth, Timaru, Whakatāne, Gisborne, Great Barrier Island, Palmerston North, Invercargill, Kaitaia, Kerikeri, Marlborough, Taupō, Motueka, Karamea, Coromandel, Opunake, Rotorua, Opononi and Wānaka. In Oamaru, Forest and Bird and the Waitaki Girls’ High School Environment Club will be planting trees after school at Cape Wanbrow.

School Strike 4 Climate NZ’s Sophie Handford said opening the strike to workers and employers strengthened the movement and diversified their base.

Newsroom – Uni scientists: Why we’re marching for climate action

Professor Quentin Atkinson from the School of Psychology studies the evolution of language and human cultures. He has contributed to a book on how New Zealanders can tackle climate change and is founder of climate action group Claxon

What troubles me most about the climate crisis is the profligate insanity of the whole thing. The stakes could not be higher. Livelihoods lost. Lives lost. Species gone forever. Real threats to our planet’s life support systems. Positive feedback loops like dieback of the Amazon rainforest or methane released from thawing permafrost causing truly scary runaway climate change. And these warnings are coming not from some lunatic or charlatan, but from hundreds of scientists, the best minds in the world, paid to question every assumption and temper every conclusion. Indeed, climate change is hitting sooner and harder than they initially predicted.

Dr Brendon Dunphy from the School of Biological Sciences studies the metabolic strategies animals employ to adapt to environmental change and potential effects of climate change on seabirds, fish and invertebrates

It’s a struggle to capture the complexity of what I feel as I fluctuate daily between outright despondency to a more pragmatic “Right, let’s get on with solving it”. However, it is one unimpressive number that really captures me…3mm. A small number, but 3mm is the annual sea level rise attributed to climate change we are currently seeing.

It’s a slow march. From talking with people, I get a sense that the thinking is one day we simply won’t wake up, that we will have undergone a cataclysm that sterilizes the planet of life. But it won’t be like that. It will occur slowly, but surely, in increments of 3mm per year. The struggle I have as a parent is trying to alleviate the anxiety my children have for their future. However, I remain positive that we will respond…there’s no other choice.

Professor Shaun Hendy from the Department of Physics is a physicist and science commentator whose book #NoFly: Walking the Talk on Climate Change will be published next month. He is director of the centre for research excellence, Te Pūnaha Matatini

The discovery that fossil fuel emissions are heating the planet is one of science’s greatest achievements. The scientific detective work that led to this discovery was a collective effort, built on the inquiry and insight of many minds, over many decades. For the first time in human history perhaps, we are not only able to see centuries into our future, we also know how our actions will shape that future. Despite this we have struggled mightily to decide how to use this knowledge. While we must each take responsibility for reducing our own carbon footprints as best we are able, it is only by acting together that we will avoid dangerous climate change.

Professor Niki Harre from the School of Psychology studies the human drive to participate in the common good. Her books The Infinite Game: How to Live Well Together and Psychology for a Better World: Working with People to Save the Planet, were published in 2018

For well over a decade I’ve been aware the climate change threat is my problem. Along with other citizens of industrialised nations, I live within social systems damaging to the ecology of our planet and it is up to us to change those systems. I am marching to show I will accept whatever is required for an effective response. This includes more limited, expensive travel options; government-backed insurance for people with homes vulnerable to sea level rise; creating employment for those whose income-stream is not viable in a climate friendly society. I am not asking others to bear the cost of these changes,

I am also prepared for a significant rise in my taxes to support transition that protects the wellbeing of all. I am not afraid of reduced access to material goods and consumer experiences. I am afraid of a world where people are pitted against one another in a scramble to survive in a harsh environment. I want to live in a world that brings out the best in us – pulling together and focusing on what really matters.

Professor Richard Easther is Head of the Department of Physics and a leading theoretical cosmologist who is a regular commentator on science issues and science research

Our nervous systems respond quickly to clear and present danger — the clench in the gut if we see a child at risk of harm and our instant response. As a physicist and astronomer I know why carbon dioxide traps heat, and why we can’t blame the sun for increasing temperatures: I can follow the math and appreciate the complexity of the data. But it is still more head than heart.

For most adults, climate adaptation is like saving for retirement — present desires often take priority. But if the detached perspective of adulthood is “mature”, the flipside is that kids do a better job of appreciating the urgency climate change deserves. The students I interact with are smart, articulate, thoughtful, committed and passionate – and my strongest emotional response is admiration for the commitment and composure of the kids participating in the climate strikes.

And that’s why I’ll be marching.

RNZ:  Climate change report underlines sea level rise threat

The latest international climate report sends a stark message about the fundamental importance of the world’s oceans, a New Zealand scientist says.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Special Report revealed the clearest information to date on the future of the planet’s oceans and frozen regions, and the price civilisation will pay if there is not urgent action.

“Changes that have been under way in these systems imperil the health and wellbeing on life on this earth. It’s a pretty stark message for us to listen to and to act on,” Massey University professor Bruce Glavovic said.

Prof Glavovic, one of more than 100 authors from 36 countries who worked on the report, said sea level rise was an immediate and real issue, not a problem for future generations to worry about.

“Importantly it’s not going to stop. Even if we stop greenhouse gas emissions tomorrow sea levels will continue to rise for centuries.”

Global sea levels are rising at 3.6mm a year, more than twice as fast than during the 20th century, the report said.

Even if greenhouse gas emissions were greatly reduced and global warming is limited to well below 2C, sea level rise could still reach 30-60cm by 2100. That would increase to 60-110cm if greenhouse gas emissions continue to strongly increase.

Prof Glavovic said if any country should be concerned it was New Zealand, with 90 percent of the population living within about 10km of the seashore.

“The struggle for sustainability is essentially going to be won or lost in the boardrooms in the communities in the government offices in the cities and towns of our coastlines.”

Newsroom – IPCC: Ocean’s future depends on emissions

The ocean has protected us from experiencing even worse effects from global warming, but changes to fisheries, coasts and cyclones are beginning to bite. What happens next depends on us, says the latest IPCC special report.

The state of the ocean will enter “unprecedented territory” this century, and it will take an unprecedented social transformation to stop things getting worse from there, according to the latest IPCC special report.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere is out, drawing on more than 6,000 studies, reviewed and synthesised by a panel of 104 scientists from 36 countries.

The fate of the Antarctic ice sheet and the Southern Ocean – two areas of intense research and monitoring by New Zealanders – feature heavily in the report’s gloomier findings, regarding ocean heating around Antarctica and the potential for surprise runaway ice melt.

The report’s key messages are that we’ve already locked in significant changes to ocean levels, cyclones, fish stocks, glaciers and beaches, but we can avoid more extreme changes by acting fast. That would require “unprecedented” social change, though.

It’s hard to ignore the the overwhelming numbers of scientists and growing number of people warning and demanding more action climate change.

Naysayers will keep naysaying, but they are now losing the PR battle. The tides of science and opinion are rising against them.

The question is not whether we have climate change, it is how bad the effects could be.

The question is not whether we should we do anything about it, but how much we should do and how quickly.

And what we do will generally benefit us and our planet regardless of the extent of climate change and how much we manage to minimise the effects.

One way or another this will affect all of us.

 

Can Extinction Rebellion Aotearoa NZ help save the world?

Reposted as requested:

Extinction Rebellion was established in the United Kingdom in October 2018 as a movement that aims to use tactics of nonviolent direct action in order to avert the effects of climate change. Since its formation it has rapidly spread to at least 35 other countries, including New Zealand, who have recently carried a few headline-grabbing protests, with the promise of more to come.

Aotearoa Workers Solidarity Movement are encouraged by the fact that the movement has managed to tap into the sense of alarm over climate change, and mobilised many people not previously involved in protest, and we do not want to undermine the important work that they are doing, but we feel that there is a conversation that needs to be had about some of their demands.

While we support the means of using direct action tactics it is their ends that needs greater examination. Extinction Rebellion is essentially a reformist movement, whose earnest activists lack a real vision of what is needed if we are serious about halting the damage to our environment. Instead, they are pinning their hopes on merely making adjustments to the present system which is destroying our world.

We argue that this isn’t enough, and the only way to effectively campaign to halt climate change is to impart a true picture of a capitalism whose insatiable hunger for profit is not only undermining the working and living conditions of hundreds of millions of working people but the basis of life itself. The future of our planet depends on building a livable environment and a movement powerful enough to displace capitalism.

Extinction Rebellion Aotearoa NZ are guilty of thinking that their demands can create an idyllic capitalism, managed by the state, that can end the destruction being caused to the Earth’s environment They see their role as just needing to make enough noise to wake up political and business leaders. Theirs is a view which sees capitalism moving towards sustainability and zero growth. It is the idea that capitalism can be reformed to become a green system. In this model of capitalist society lifestyles change and infrastructure are reformed while technical green advances are applied. It supposes that all would be well if we all bought organic food, never took a holiday anywhere which would involve flying, and put on more clothes in winter rather than turn up the heating. Green capitalism presumes it will be enough to replace fossil fuels with renewables, whilst leaving the overall system intact.

We argue that such a scenario completely ignores the way capitalism operates, and must operate, and is therefore hopelessly utopian. The present capitalist system is driven by the struggle for profit. The present system’s need for infinite growth and the finite resources of Earth stand in contradiction to each other. Successful operation of the system means growth or maximising profit, it means that nature as a resource will be exploited ruthlessly. The present destruction of the planet is rooted in the capitalist system of production and cannot be solved without a complete break with capitalism. Yet ending capitalism is something that Extinction Rebellion Aotearoa NZ does not appear to be prepared to countenance, they are only attacking the symptoms rather than the cause. They see their green capitalism as a type of capitalism worth fighting for.

We, rather, see the need to create a different form of social organisation before the present system destroys us all. The entire system of production based on wage labour and capital needs to be replaced with a system which produces for human needs. All the half measures of converting aspects of capitalism to limit the damage to the environment, while the fundamentals of capitalism remain in place, are just wishful thinking, and to pretend they could solve our problems is deception on a grand scale.

The fact is that before production can be carried out in ecologically-acceptable ways capitalism has to go. Production for profit and the uncontrollable drive to accumulate more and more capital mean that capitalism is by its very nature incapable of taking ecological considerations into account properly, and to be honest it is futile to try to make it do so.

A sustainable society that is capable of addressing climate change can only be achieved within a world where all the Earth’s resources, natural and industrial, are under the common ownership of us all, as well as being under grassroots democratic control at a local and regional level. If we are going to organise production in an ecologically sound way we can either plead with the powers that be or we can take democratic control of production ourselves, and the reality is to truly control production we have to own and control the means of production. So, a society of common ownership and democratic control is the only framework within which the aims of Extinction Rebellion can be realised. In reality, to achieve their wish of halting climate collapse, those within Extinction Rebellion should be anarchists.

One of the demands of Extinction Rebellion is a call for participatory democracy, and yet they also talk of giving governments emergency war-time powers. It’s not altogether clear what they mean by this. Does it mean, for example, seizing fossil fuel industries and shutting them down? Enforcing new low-carbon, low-travel, and low-meat shifts in consumption? Or imposing sanctions against companies or countries trafficking in fossil fuels? Will it see imprisonment for those whose protest when they feel their interests may be compromised by green government legislation?

In the past, warlike conditions and major disasters typically were seen to justify the temporary abolition of democratic liberties, but how long will they last for this fight, what will be the endpoint, or will the special war-time powers last indefinitely? Would such a suspension of democracy be easy to reverse anyway? These are big questions, and, for those of us that value the limited freedoms we have, they need to be addressed.

Giving more power to the state is also a case of putting all your eggs in one basket as there is no one simple response to fixing climate change. Climate change will bring many issues, those that we can have a go at predicting, but also many unforeseen. Increasing the powers of the state reduces its ability to be flexible and capable of learning from policy mistakes. The fight against climate change must be associated with greater local democracy. We need more democracy, strengthening local and regional capacities to respond to climate change. For those in Extinction Rebellion who think that there can be only one pathway to addressing climate change, the erosion of democracy might seem to be “convenient.” History, however, tells us that suppression of democracy undermines the capacity of societies to solve problems.

Those campaigning with Extinction Rebellion are no doubt sincere and caring people who want something different for themselves and future generations. In their own lifestyles they probably have made genuine changes which are in line with a more ecologically sustainable way of living. So have we, but we are well aware that our individual lifestyle changes are not going to change the fundamental nature of the social system which is damaging the planet. Millions of us might give up using products which destroy the environment, but what effect do we really have in comparison with the minority who own and control the multinational corporations. Just 100 companies have been responsible for 71% of global emissions since 1988. They, and all businesses, have an interest in keeping their costs down, and profits up. If their profits come before the long-term interests of people, who can blame them for sacrificing our needs? They can act no other way.

We do not have faith that capitalists, or their parliamentary representatives, can act in time to limit climate change in a meaningful way, but when we make a call for revolution, the answer we mostly get is that the lesser evil of piecemeal reforms will take less time to achieve than our grand anarchist aims. However, we think it is an ill-advised attitude to take that small improvements are more worthy of support than realisable big ones. There is unlikely ever to be a government passing meaningful green legislation. Governments may pass a few minor reforms to appease green voters, the business owners themselves may realise that some of their brands may be harmed by a lack of environmental concern, and greenwash their product, but ultimately these acts will be a sticking plaster when what is required is major surgery.

If anyone concerned with Extinction Rebellion read this and grasps the impossibility of what they are asking for, then we would say it’s time to keep the methods of direct action that you are advocating, but change the demands. If Extinction Rebellion ever wants their arguments to carry any force, then they need to campaign to abolish capitalism and create a system of grassroots democracy.

In the UK a Green Anti-Capitalist Front has been created to work alongside Extinction Rebellion but with a greater focus on the capitalist roots of climate catastrophe. We feel that such a coalition is needed here in Aotearoa / New Zealand. If anyone is interested in working with us to create such a group we can be contacted via our e-mail address.

http://awsm.nz/2019/03/12/can-extinction-rebellion-aotearoa-nz-help-save-the-world/

More on Aotearoa New Zealand name recognition petition

Yesterdays post on the petition calling for renaming the country Aotearoa New Zealand – Should New Zealand also be called Aotearoa? – was done in a hurry and put up as something I though worth discussing. here is more information about it.

It was published on 23 May 2018 so has been going for some time. It has just received publicity via Facebook and NZ Herald. It is an official petition on the Parliamentary website:


Petition of Danny Tahau Jobe – Referendum to include Aotearoa in the official name of New Zealand

Published date: 23 May 2018

Petition request

That the House of Representatives pass legislation requiring a referendum, to be held during the term of the current Government, on whether the official name of New Zealand should change to include the name Aotearoa.

Petition reason

Official documents of national identity, birth & citizenship certificates, passports and money-notes have Aotearoa and New Zealand together as the names of the country. Only ‘New Zealand’ has official status. Both names together will officially confirm/enhance nationhood and uniqueness in the world.

Closing date: 28 Feb 2019 NZ Time

Number of signatures: 2345


As far as petitions go that’s not a lot of signatures.

A Facebook page Petition for Aotearoa New Zealand was started last June. It has been liked by 520 people and has 529 followers.

It includes this information showing how widely Aotearoaa is already shown alongside New Zealand.

Image may contain: bird and text

 

No photo description available.

No photo description available.

On country names and renaming:

Aotearoa New Zealand isn’t a long name!
Check these Country short and official names out, some will suprise you,
but first, heres three;

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The Unitied States of America
The Federative Republic of Brazil
The Democratic Republic of Congo

Aotearoa New Zealand – not long at all.

http://www.fao.org/countryprofiles/iso3list/en/

Also, Country name changes, they happen more than you might think:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographical_renaming

A petition run on Facebook. As of 29 January:

  • 52.4% want some form of change, Aotearoa to used in one form or another as a name of our Country
  • 47.4% want no change
    – 2,792 respondents.

Some  thoughts on the petition from Scott Hamilton:


I support the spirit of this petition, but I wonder its creators have thought through what they’re advocating. They want the name change to be a decolonising gesture, but it could lead to some strange & uncomfortable formulations & titles. Let me give two examples.

In addition to her various other titles, QE2 is officially known as the Queen of New Zealand. That sounds bad enough to my republican ears, but under the proposed name change, she’d ipso facto become Queen of Aotearoa New Zealand. Given the use of Aotearoa by anti-imperialists like Tawhiao, ruler of the Waikato Kingdom, in the 19th century (Tawhiao named his bank, for example, Te Peeke o Aotearoa, & used the name on his currency), allowing QE2 the title Queen of Aotearoa seems like a rather unfortunate move.

There’s also the fact that New Zealand is not just the name of a nation state, but of a rump Pacific empire. The Realm of New Zealand is defined as the entire area where the Queen of NZ is head of state – that includes Tokelau, Niue, the Cooks, & NZ-administered Antarctica.

Would it be any better, from the perspective of decolonisation, if the Realm of New Zealand, with its parcel of old colonies, became the Realm of Aotearoa New Zealand? The name wouldn’t seem any more representative, for Tokelauans, Cook Islanders, Niueans.

It’d be good to amend or abolish the name New Zealand, with its colonial history, but it seems hard to understand how such a change could make much sense except as part of a constitutional package that involved the ditching of the monarchy & a new r’ship with the Pacific.


As Scott suggests, I think that a name change won’t happen on it’s own. It is likely to be included in monarchy/republic and constitution discussions and possible changes.

I think that eventually New Zealand will be officially renamed as Aotearoa. I’d be happy for that to happen, but I don’t know if I will see it happen in my lifetime.

In the meantime Aotearoa and Aotearoa New Zealand are being increasingly used as alternatives, and I think this de facto change of name will continue to grow strength.