New Zealand considers itself a bicultural society. It regards its own
identity as a combination of two cultures: Maori and colonial
English. This is affirmed in everything from myths about our
country's formation to our use of Maori language and symbolism in
official ceremonies (Kolig, 2004). Te Reo is one of the three official languages of New Zealand and all
of our public services are officially bilingual, though for the most
part they are known by their English names.
However a policy of encouraging biculturalism (and defining New
Zealand identity as bicultural) means excluding all those who do not
belong to one or both of the cultures. For those who are not members
of the majority culture or the indigenous minority – immigrants,
typically in New Zealand from the Asia-Pacific or Latin America –
they have no means of identifying with the identity of a nation which
explicitly excludes them. More than that, any attempt to continue the
practices of their own culture and religion (practices which are
outside those of the majority or the indigenous minority) serve to
further distance them from the bicultural community and can lead to
tension and even prejudice against minorities with visibly different
religious practice to the bicultural mainstream (de Bres, 2007).
If we are to embrace cultural and religious diversity in New Zealand
we must abandon a strict policy of biculturalism and adopt another
model of identity that both recognises the indigenous identity of New
Zealand (Maori people and culture) and includes minorities who have
religious and cultural practices outside of the majority.
One such model we could look at would be an adaption of Quebecois
interculturalism. This model is based on
- the primacy of the French language,
- equality of gender, and
- strict lacite secularism.
While using common language (and one that has a strong tie to the
cultural history of the region) allows all members of Quebecois
society to form a common identity and certain basic liberal rights
are guaranteed by gender equality, individuals who have religious or
cultural practices outside of those of the majority are free to
continue these practices (within the confines of the law). An
immigrant from a country that has highly different practices to that
of Quebec, whether religious or cultural, can continue those
practices without feeling excluded from the shared identity of
Quebecois, based as it is on common language and values rather than
religious or cultural practice.
If we were to adapt these three
components of Quebecois interculturalism to New Zealand we could
formulate them as
- the primacy of Maori culture and spirituality as a form of civil religion (see Kolig, 2004),
- equality of all citizens (including gender, sexual, religious, ethnic and cultural equality), and
- strict disengagement from religious or cultural bias
This would allow the formation of a New Zealand identity that
recognises the importance of Maori culture and spirituality while
still allowing participation from all members of society, regardless
of background. Point (3) as in Quebec ensures that New Zealand
identity is in no way based on religious or cultural practice,
allowing for religious diversity within New Zealand, while point (2)
ensures that all citizens are free from discrimination and maintains
that any religious or cultural practice may be acceptable so long as
it remains within the boundaries of the law.
The ability of all New Zealanders to participate in Maori culture as
civil religion is evidenced by our current usage, often by non-Maori
politicians, of Maori language in public ceremonies. We can also use
Maori culture as a creation myth of New Zealand, particularly the
story of Maui raising New Zealand out of the depths with his
grandmother's jawbone. This story gives us a compelling narrative of
Maori arriving in New Zealand in boats, much as many immigrants do
today. This is reflected in the traditional practice of greeting with
Mihi, in which one of the first lines is usually “ko... te waka.”
This means of introduction, originating in the indigenous culture of
New Zealand but making explicit reference to the fact that all New
Zealanders at some point in their history had to arrive here in their
own waka, could be hugely valuable to a recent immigrant seeking to
identify with New Zealand culture without compromising their own
religious or cultural practices, as they would have to do when
identification is based on homogenity and interaction between two
dominant cultures (as in a bicultural system).
No comments:
Post a Comment