The BFD | The NZ Govt Has Stirred the Pot of Racial Division

During my travels around the world working in countries with various systems of government, it became apparent that in countries with conflict zones there has been a rise in “Ethnic Entrepreneurs” (EE). Contrary to logic, these aren’t people from an ethnic minority who have become business people and entrepreneurs but are actors who exploit a situation that exhibits ethnic conflicts and splits.

The concept of EE emphasises the usurping of the politics of the situation by the exploitation of ethnicity. This is done by individuals exploiting the situation.

I have written a dissertation on this subject but will just submit a few extracts from it in this piece and question the relevance of the theory to modern New Zealand.

“Ethnicity is promoted as the main malefactor of conflicts: as the source of irrationality, deep divisions and violence that lead to forcible transfers of people and, in general, to chronic instability within multi-ethnic societies”.

Bozic-Roberson, Agneza 2001, p17.

This research argues that some politicians use ethnicity as a calculated, maximising strategy if ethnic mobilisation of their supporters offers a political opportunity or access to power. Specifically, this study seeks to explain how political leaders and entrepreneurs draw upon existing non-violent ethnic tensions and conflicts (a phenomenon existing in every multi-ethnic society) to generate ethnopolitical conflict

This was further developed by Batterthai 2015, who commented that:

“ethnic mobilization where ethnic actors manipulate ethnicity thereby subsuming the diverse and rich network of ethnic group relations. Along with the success and excitement of the ethnic movement, ethnic entrepreneurship as a new phenomenon has emerged in the new democratic set up where selective leaders and activists are mobilizing ethnic sentiments.”

Bhattarai, I. 2015.

Of the factors that lead to politicisation of ethnicity Bozic singles out elements—particularly ethnic entrepreneurs as actors who use the tools of mass media and political rhetoric to capitalise on the changing socio-political environment and on the vulnerabilities of ethnic identities. (Bozic-Roberson, 2001).

What is concerning is the way in which New Zealand’s government has allowed (encouraged?) this division and legitimate concerns to develop along ethnic lines instead of socio-economic or political lines. The danger in allowing (promoting?) this is that it will result in resentment and deepening divisions between different ethnicities in the country. Once this path has been chosen it will become increasingly difficult to retrace its steps back to a position of balance should it result in feelings of anomie.

Anomie, a condition much loved by sociologists “ is a social condition in which there is a disintegration or disappearance of the norms and values that were previously common to the society”.

This was originally promulgated by Emile Durkheim. He discovered, through research, that anomie occurs during and follows periods of drastic and rapid changes to the social, economic, or political structures of society. It is, per Durkheim’s view, a transition phase wherein the values and norms common during one period are no longer valid but new ones have not yet evolved to take their place. He saw it as a breakdown of the ties that bind people together to make a functional society, a state of social derangement. Periods of anomie are unstable, chaotic and often rife with conflict because the social force of the norms and values that otherwise provide stability is weakened or missing. Crossman, Ashley. (2020, August 29).

“The conflicts we see today are the work of mainly of middle echelon politicians who use the politics of cultural difference to further their ambitions for leadership. This is tempting to them because in ethnic identities they see a potential constituency, so to speak, waiting for them, and all they need to find is the key to set the process in motion.

Leaders seek these constituencies and mobilize them by making select, contrastive cultural differences more salient, and preferably by linking them to grievances and injustices, whether in the past or escalating in the present.

They mobilize such constituencies in dissatisfaction so that they can lead them to a promised satisfaction. They engage in confrontational politics where, in fact, the ethnic appeal of competing leaders or candidates is one that constantly aggravates conflict and contrast, because once you are on this trajectory, the more you can prove your own commitment by vociferous rhetoric, the more support and more authority you can claim”.

Barth, F. 1995.

To cut a long story short, New Zealand is entering a stage of enhanced ethnic divisions, either as an unintended by-product of social engineering or what is worse, as an intended outcome of the changes in legislation encouraging more participation by Iwi. It is apparent that there has been a rise of ethnic entrepreneurs who are exploiting the situation for their own reasons. I have grave worries for the future of New Zealand as the divisions grow greater and once commenced it will be difficult to slow down and almost impossible to stop.

The economic disasters resulting from the Government’s handling of Covid and the economy can be rectified in the fullness of time whether it be 5, 10, 15 years or more. The segmentation of our society will have deep and lasting ramifications which will take far longer to repair. The results of economic stress and ethnic conflict are too horrific to contemplate unless they are addressed now.

References.

Barth, F. (1995). ‘Ethnicity and the concept of culture’ in Douglas R. Imig and Pamela Slavsky, (eds.), Non-violent Sanctions and Cultural Survivals Seminars, Cambridge, MA: Center for International Affairs, Harvard University.

Bozic-Roberson, Agneza, “The Politicization of Ethnicity as a Prelude to Ethnopolitical Conflict: Croatia and Serbia in Former Yugoslavia” (2001). Dissertations. 1354. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/1354

Bhattarai, I. (2015 “Ethnic Entrepreneurs and Political Mobilization: Exploring a Case of Tharu-Pahadi Conflict”, Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 9, pp. 191–208. doi: 10.3126/dsaj.v9i0.14028.