Rob Rattenbury: How pervasive is white supremacy in NZ?

I do not like the term white supremacist being applied as a generalising term for Pākehā, writes Rob Rattenbury. Photo / Getty Images

OPINION

When I see or hear the term "white supremacist" I automatically think of men in white sheets, burning crosses, overweight, heavily armed American civilians baying for the right to be white. I think of fascism, the Nazis and the damage white supremacy has inflicted on the world over the centuries.

New Zealand is not immune to this term either. The founding of our modern nation was guided by paternalism and racism - matters now, 181 years later, we are confronting in brave ways as a community. We are striving towards a fairer, more inclusive nation, especially now that the country is a true melting pot of nationalities and ethnicities.

Being white means I am still part of the biggest population group in this country, easy to identify and easy to judge.

This country has always been a home to refugees. Maybe your ancestors sailed from Hawaiki in huge waka into the unknown ocean seeking new lands.

Maybe your ancestors were economic or religious refugees from the potato fields of Ireland, the highland clearances of Scotland or the Industrial Revolution where the agricultural labourer ceased to exist as a viable occupation in Britain in the mid-19th century.

Maybe you came here as a small child in the mid-50s to escape the brutal actions against the Hungarian people for daring to seek their own way in the world.

In recent decades you could have arrived here from war-torn Somalia as small scared children out of place in a white society that opened its arms to you but did not really give you a place or a voice in the homeland you sought.

Refugees come in all sizes and shapes. They also come in all colours. New Zealand is still predominately a white western society struggling to come to terms with the 21st century expectations of different ethnic and religious communities.

A white supremacist would feel angry, fearful and insecure when they look around at all the different hues that are now Kiwi. They will react with rudeness, hurtful words, actions that intentionally marginalise others because those people do not fit into their idea of New Zealand. Those people sadly do exist in our country, hopefully not in great numbers.

In my view, the term "white supremacy" is now being used by social commentators when talking about wider white New Zealand society and its institutions. It is the role of social commentators and opinion writers to provoke comment and thought. Why bother commenting if you are not seeking to make others thinks, make others agree or disagree with you?

But there is a responsibility with all that provocation and invocation of different thoughts. Responsibilities to not engender disharmony or hate by the use of words that mean one thing but may not apply to the matter you are writing about.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines a white supremacist as "a person who believes that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races" – a description of a flawed individual.

I do not think many Pākehā are white supremacists. I do not think that our public institutions are greatly affected by white supremacy. I spent most of my working life in such institutions. If anything these public institutions now strongly encourage racial, gender and social diversity in their workforces. They are very committed to showing their workplaces as places of ethnic safety and inclusiveness.

I do not like the term white supremacist being applied as a generalising term for Pākehā. I am Pākehā and I am not a white supremacist. I do not know any such people. I do not want to know any.

A white person questioning government policy and the opinions of social commentators does not make that person a racial bigot. Perhaps the questions are posed to help the person understand why certain things are being done or said.