Click here to listen to conversations in English on Globalization with Maori and Gaelic speakers involved with indigenous language revitalization efforts.

(left click to listen, right click and ‘save target as…’ to download)

See below for a transcription:

Makere Stewart-Harawira: Where does indigenous self determination sit in this mix and what is it that is the really critical thing about this revitalization of language and culture? What is the really important…why is it so important? What is critical about that? Huge questions, too big, I know…

Sir Mason Durie: I will try and tackle the last one because it might lead on and just talking off the top of my head if that is all right? I see that whole indigenous movement and I am putting in the movement the language cultural revitalization and the political independence or a variant of it to a greater or lesser extent. Through the whole indigenous movement to me it’s done two things. First of all I think it is potentially acting as a protector of the worst excesses of globalization.

So that I think that and If you just take New Zealand situation for example, New Zealands always short of money or we’ve got a surplus but we’re an economy that’s relatively vulnerable in size and natural resources, limited markets , competitive markets concerned with a whole lot of other players. And Therefore we are potentially open I think to take over from other companies and it would not be a huge step of the imagination. Some people say it is already happening. That to make end meet we’ll simply sell the land and let foreign investors come in. I think to a large extent the indigenous approach acts as a counter to that. It doesn’t entirely block it but I think steadies it and I think that’s quite important for the nation as a whole as the nation works out where it stands in the global development. How much we want to be a part of it and the terms of our participation in it. And what I see as the Maori movement as saying “Well hold on let’s not rush that because who earns the resources is compromising our understanding of it” and I think that’s quite an important restraint. Maybe for two or three decades it’s going to be an important constraint as New Zealand works out what is going to be the basis of its economy and what does it have to sell off in order to partner up with global enterprise. So I think that is one thing that is quite important but on the other hand I think that the indigenous rejuvenation and reassertion is in fact a global movement. It’s not, It is certainly not unique to Maori, and so by getting involved in that there is already a move to be part of a global movement and global citizenship has got more than one meaning in the sense and that in enables Maori to be part of the indigenous world movement and that’s been quite important I think as, and not only important in terms of a sense of solidarity that economically is going to be important too you can imagine business ventures and economic where you’ll get preferred providers who might happen to be Indigenous whether it is in fishing or some other arrangement. So I think that Maori-if there hadn’t been this rejuvenation and revitalization the sense of being Indigenous would not have escalated to the degree that it is at now so that we can participate as citizens in that sense. But then the other point is, that certainly from our end, we’ve had this slogan since 2001 which is now part of the education departments broad direction for Maori education is that it should be possible for Maori to live as Maori and be citizens of the world. And so we’ve got that joint, dual pathway, and the sense now in education, I don’t think they are doing a particularly great job at doing it, one should not be at the expense of the other, need not be at the expense of the other. Living as Maori and being citizens of the world are joint requirements in modern times and the education policy needs to be able to see that that is possible, that you don’t have to sacrifice one for the other. And then because Maori mobility has just sort of escalated. 200,000 or so in Australia at present, all around the world so that Maori movement across the globe is pretty high and the other question that seems to come up now that while it’s been good I think, its taken people out. It hasn’t reduced the interest of the global travelers in being Maori and then some quite interesting developments as to how you can be a global traveller and be Maori and still retain links with networks provided you use the technology and so there is quite a lot of whânau [extended family groups or members] now who meet on the web and that never have an annual meeting, the meeting is on the web and that last year there was a tangi [funeral] done on the web that a group could not return from Australia. There were two or three whânau in Australia and the thing was there was an interactive telecast which enabled them to participate from Australia as if they were here and so there was [???] an opportunity for them to say what they wanted to say to come and close ups meet the people who were there. I think that was quite a good demonstration of how in the end distance won’t be a problem and being a global traveller. In fact it might actually be much easier . Its just that one of the big problems getting whânau to agree on things. It’s actually easier on the web where you don’t get all the eye rolling and the body language, particularly if you are just doing email, you get straight to the point, do the business, and make clear decisions. Whereas quite often in a face to face meeting decisions are left unclear because you are responding all the time with body language and you prefer not to be too specific. So in terms of being Maori and being a global citizen there need not be a contradiction in that. and the other thing of course is that you have Maori groups around the world. In London and in Sydney in particular and now in Perth who really might become serious contenders for winning the national kapahaka [cultural competition] in a year or twos time so that there is a diaspora occurring which may not be a bad thing. And you can imagine that if New Zealand did get sold out to foreigner investors the culture might actually be retained in London and in Sydney and in Perth as much as it is in New Zealand. In other words it might be a little bit like the Jewish situation; that the retention of the religion and the faith and the culture was the result of people going away from the troubled land until such times as they could come back. And I think the same is happening in Ethiopia right now that when the political climate got really bad there parents who could afford it, sent the young people off to universities all around the world. That was two or three decades ago. Only now are those peopling coming back home now that it is safe to come home. They come home and they also bring skills and knowledge that would not have been available to the nation. So I think there is a very useful opportunity here that we sometimes see it as a threat. I see it really as opportunities and a protective device, protection in two ways. Maori are protecting New Zealand from takeover by saying “hold on I don’t think you own it. Don’t sell it because I don’t think you own it or you have got to contend with other issues”. There is that sort of protection, that sort of constraint but also the constraint that by Maori being around the world they need not forfeit a Maori identity. In fact quite with the right use of technology which will get better and better I would think. It will be easier and easier to retain that. Certainly they won’t have a foot on the ground and that may be a bit of an obstacle. Yes some of the whânau hopefully will retain their ahi ka [keeping the home fires burning, or place on the land] interest for them so they needn’t, they won’t be entirely displaced as would have happened a couple of decades or even one decade ago when people went abroad.

…

Patu Hohepa: The web does a lot of damage to our stories. When Manuka Henare and that one takes out from a well-liked Hokianga identity…who built a beautiful marae at the back. Beautifully carved and had his own whanau’s but, he’s decided now to start putting things on the web. And then he gets quoted so I find it in here, which becomes pretty well the book of history of our traditional landscape and he’s quoted two things I said, wrong. KUPE live on the other side – that’s part of the tradition and he named a whole lot of other areas- that’s well known. He named PAKANAE for the place where the y built the PA or the fish pond to hold the fish in and this other place that is named -can’t find the source for that but it is fine because it does fit in. Didn’t know that actually the part that held the fish in was a reef called TABAKEROA TABAKA from TABAKEROA the long tailed f…git bird that give you long red feathers. Okay. The TAWAKEROA and that would have been part of the defence that they put there, rocks and that to stop. KANAE will go in but they can’t get out. Also he crossed, because the sand hills were not a good place for growing AKUMBAHI gardens that the Kumara brought across. The Kumara did not come into the country until the time of Toi. Eight generations further on. Now it’s that kind.

MAKERE: So it’s about, we don’t and it really isn’t and excuse, and I’m guilty of it myself having said that. We don’t go to primary source. We rely on other people to tell us those traditions and there they are and they go on the web and use them as is.

PATU: And they go on the w...

On Globalization