Your search
Results 6 resources
-
<em>Gale</em> Academic OneFile includes KIA TAWHARAUTIA TE MATAURANGA MAORI: DECOLONISING THE I by Eru Kapa-Kingi. Click to explore.
-
Abstract Aotearoa New Zealand acknowledges mātauranga Māori in the two Acts and one Memorandum of Understanding recognising the ‘personhood’ status of three geographical regions—Te Awa Tupua, Te Urewera and Taranaki Maunga. They blend the legal fiction of corporate personhood with the already always understanding of human-nonhuman kinship and entanglement of M!ori philosophy, Māori knowledge and wisdom, and Māori epistemology. Through kaitiaki (trustees) these three entities have volition in their ongoing maintenance, development negotiations, and ‘land-use’, and ‘the rights, powers, duties and liabilities of a legal person’. These attributes suggest something more than mere volition in self-management and protection: they suggest agency. This article explores the implications of nonhuman agency as potential for political voice. As representatives of entanglement for all being—animal (including human), vegetable and elemental—and as a matter of justice they are, perhaps, obliged to participate in democracy and the nation is, perhaps, obliged to give them a ‘seat at the table’. As political agents with equal status to human and corporate persons Te Awa Tupua, Te Urewera and Taranaki Maunga might unsettle settler politics and challenge the imbalances of the Anthropocene.
-
<em>Gale</em> Academic OneFile includes Decolonising Dignity for Inclusive Democracy by Christine J. Winter. Click to explore.
-
This article examines why and how scholars should acknowledge and name each of the diverse political actors and institutions that typically are objectified as ‘indigenous peoples’ on the global stage, or ‘Māori’ in New Zealand. For instance, rather than suggesting a political relationship or conflict exists between ‘Māori and the Crown’, political scientists and theorists should name the political actors and political institutions for which Māori is a shorthand, for example, ‘Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu (the corporate entity of the Ngai Tahu whanui) and the Committee of Tuahiwi Marae disagreed with the Crown’. A variety of reasons are discussed as to why this objectification of Māori (and any other indigenous population) as a single political actor has occurred, the problems are pointed out, and a range of examples are given. Not every use of the terms ‘Māori’, ‘indigenous peoples’ or similar descriptors in political science stands in for a specific political actor (e.g. sometimes, it is suggesting a cleavage or a group at whom a policy is directed), but where scholars are describing or suggesting political action, they should be careful in their use of ethnic labels. I suggest that it would be more productive to study the specific contexts, intentions and actions of individuals and institutions that might consider indigeneity as being part of their identity.
Explore
Topic
- decolonisation
- colonisation (2)
- democracy (1)
- dignity (1)
- discrimination (1)
- economic inequality (1)
- education (1)
- environment (1)
- inequality (1)
- intellectual property (1)
- intersectionality (1)
- mana party (1)
- mana wāhine (2)
- mātauranga māori (2)
- mauri (1)
- periodicals (1)
- rangatiratanga (1)
- self-determination (1)
- sexism (1)
- tapu (1)
- tikanga | indigenous law (2)
- tino rangatiratanga (1)
- wāhine māori (1)
- waitangi tribunal (1)
Resource type
Publication year
-
Between 1900 and 1999
(1)
-
Between 1990 and 1999
(1)
- 1992 (1)
-
Between 1990 and 1999
(1)
- Between 2000 and 2026 (5)