The BFD | From the Desk of a Male Pale and Stale

OPINION

The University of Auckland in New Zealand was founded in 1883 as Auckland University College, initially serving as a constituent college of the University of New Zealand. Its humble beginnings were in a disused courthouse and jail, where it started with 95 students and 4 teaching staff. Regretfully amongst these early educators, there was not a historian⁽¹⁾. Even today Auckland University does not have a “History Department” though it does have ‘study options’ for history⁽²⁾ and the current (2023) situation of ‘segregated study areas’⁽³⁾ provides ample opportunity for a history lesson, a whole thesis. We don’t have to go back too far in New Zealand history.

The 1981 Springbok rugby tour of New Zealand was a pivotal moment in the country’s history, sparking intense debates, protests, and social divisions as many citizens demonstrated resistance to a country with apartheid policies.

(Authors note: the second picture is from Auckland Universities’ own records regarding an exhibition concerning the tour and the issues involved. https://www.news.library.auckland.ac.nz/2021/08/06/winter-of-discontent-1981-springbok-tour/ )

The Springboks, South Africa’s national rugby team, were scheduled to tour New Zealand in 1981. At the time, South Africa was under the oppressive system of apartheid, which enforced racial segregation and discrimination. (Is this ringing a bell so far?) The tour became a flashpoint for discussions about racism, human rights, and sports diplomacy. Anti-apartheid activists, students and concerned citizens rallied against the tour. The “Stop the Tour” movement gained momentum, with protesters advocating for the cancellation of the Springboks’ visit. Demonstrations, marches, and clashes with police became common during the tour.

In a recent article by Stuff Magazine they remembered the tour in an article titled 1981 “Springbok tour 40 years on: ‘1981 was the battle for the soul of New Zealand'”⁽⁴⁾. Credit where credit is due, Stuff and one of the people it interviewed were prescient as to how apartheid was a danger to New Zealand and could develop.

“After what we had seen in New Zealand, we could see [apartheid] coming here,” says Polynesian Panther Tigilau Ness.

Apparently, they were and are correct.

I’d like to know exactly how this works (and will continue) for the following people:

The (non-Maori or non-Pasifika) spouses of privileged groups.
Those that are of mixed blood.
Those that identify as a privileged group.
In situations of scarce resources, e.g. you need to use a computer, but it is only available on “hallowed” or “tapu” ground; are you left without?

However, as per usual, I only write my articles if I have a solution to proffer. This solution was developed in South Africa and ‘fortunately’ could be equally applicable at Auckland University and other places exercising segregation. I think this first graphic is self-explanatory and the direction we are headed is illustrated in the second graphic, the Harvard “Black Only” Graduation⁽⁵⁾.

By the early 1980s when New Zealanders came out to protest apartheid, we had come a long way toward better managing race relations, e.g. the Waitangi Tribunal (established in 1975)⁽⁶⁾. Now we have a rehabilitation of racism under a different guise and dissension is being sown, particularly in our schools and universities amongst our young and impressionable. (Note that I find it particularly noxious that many of those same people who protested in 1981 are now promoting these ideas of segregation. For those not promoting this new racism – where are your protestations now?)

Recently, I wrote an article about the RBNZ and how it aims to develop a “DEI Centre of Excellence”, and it is not alone; all over New Zealand there are government departments and hundreds of businesses adopting these ideas, putting them into policy or even putting them into practice. Soon there will be hundreds of “segregated places”.

Make no mistake that the messages these places send are both intentional and designed to reinforce an ideology and stir disgruntlement. This needs to stop.

A solution is funding cuts to universities and departments that support this hateful ideology of “Woke”, that dishonestly presents itself as ‘caring and nurturing’ under the banner of “diversity, equity and inclusion” whereas, as we can see, with Auckland University being a prime example, it results in racist exclusion and segregation.

Additionally, there may be a legal solution as according to the New Zealand Human Rights Act 1993 Section 21(1), it is unlawful for an educational establishment, or the authority responsible for the control of an educational establishment, or any person concerned in the management of an educational establishment or in teaching at an educational establishment:

To refuse or fail to admit a person as a pupil or student; or
To refuse any other person the use of any facilities in that place or vehicle which are available to members of the public.

Therefore, even in the context of a university, discrimination based on race is prohibited, i.e. universities must not deny admission or access to facilities based on a person’s racial or ethnic background.

Maybe a lawsuit would introduce “Equity” into this situation.

References

If you enjoyed this article please share it using the share buttons at the top or bottom of the article.

If you would like to access exclusive Member content or just remove the ads to make your reading experience more enjoyable click here to browse our Membership options.

From the Desk of a Male Pale and Stale

Related

Dr Michael John Schmidt