Over the past few days you might have seen that viral clip of New Zealand lawmakers interrupting a legislative session with a haka -- the foot-stamping, tongue-wagging, eyes-bulging, loud-chanting ceremonial dance of the nation’s indigenous Maori communities.
What was that about? The haka was led by Maori lawmakers opposed to a new bill that would curtail certain special privileges for their community, which has historically suffered discrimination. Thousands of Kiwis have also marched to the capital, Wellington, as part of a broader protest against the bill.
The back story: Maori rights were first spelled out in a 19th century treaty with the British Crown. But it was never codified or properly translated, opening the way for exploitation of the Maori, who today make up about 18% of the population.
In recent decades, courts have brought the spirit of the treaty into various laws seeking to address that legacy of discrimination. Some have included quotas for Maori communities in public institutions.
The bill’s backers say that’s unfair. The small, rightwing ACT party, part of the governing center-right coalition, wants to codify Maori sovereignty but outlaw preferential treatment for any groups.
But critics from across the political spectrum say the bill would upend one of the world’s most successful experiments in equitable relations with indigenous communities, opening the way to fresh exploitation of Maori people and lands.
The bill won’t pass. Even the prime minister is opposed to it.
But it brings to New Zealand one of the most contentious culture war questions of the day: do communities that have suffered exploitation or discrimination have a right to preferential treatment in the name of social justice – or does that spotlight race and ethnicity in ways that deepen social divides?
