blogging it real

Tariana Turia, appearing to announce Maori Party immigration policy, is calling for fewer migrants from "traditional source countries" such as Great Britain, Europe, Canada, and Australia. Accepting immigrants from these places, she suggests, "may be" the Government's way of combatting the "browning" of New Zealand.

She includes "Asians" (undefined) in this "browning" - clearly adopting a new colour scheme to move away from the "yellow peril" type categorizations.

But, Mrs Turia seeks to reassure us, "we aren't playing the race card, because we are not talking about Asian immigration." Right, so it's not racist to try and shut the door to white folks, only yellow ones? Sorry, brown ones.

Anyone else care to join me in a hearty "fuck you"?

First, one might note that countries such as the UK, Australia and Canada (not to mention the entire continent of Europe) are relatively diverse and include people of various backgrounds. If an Aboriginal Australian or Canadian moves here, for example, that surely contributes to the much-heralded "browning"?

Last time I checked, immigration records country of citizenship, not skin tone, in its immigration statistics?

Actually, the latter are a little harder to find than one might expect, but I finally tracked down this comprehensive document.

It reveals that there were 51,236 applications for permanent residency accepted in 2005/06. There are bugger all Australians, precisely because they don't need to apply, and can simply move here.

But let's look at the largest source countries of official permanent residents shall we?

#1 UK 14,674
#2 China 6,773
#3 South Africa 4,033
#4 India 3,334
#5 Fiji 2,366
#6 South Korea 2,260
#7 Samoa 2,188
#8 USA 1,838
#9 Philippines 1,252
#10 Tonga 968


Canada is rather far down the list, with 559 successful applicants.

So, in the top 10 source countries, there are precisely none from continental Europe, and Canada doesn't appear. (Australia is an exception as noted above).

It is probably safe to assume, based purely on anecdotal evidence/common knowledge, that most although not all of the applicants from the UK, South Africa and the USA are "white".

It is probably safe to assume that the majority of applicants from the other countries are "brown" by the ALL NEW TURIA COLOUR CODING CHART (Patent Pending).

I conclude that New Zealand is not being swamping by white migrants, to the great detriment of the brown population. I also conclude that Turia is a racist ..... [insert epithet here].

Anyone else wondering why she picks out Canada for special attention, when there were twice as many immigrants from the USA (which, in fairness, has 10 times as many people?) Hint: her father was American.

Given that immigrants from Australia, the UK, Canada, and some parts of continental Europe (not to mention the US) are likely to speak and write fluent English, one would think that might be a reason for them applying to live here, and being accepted. Someone from South Korea or Malaysia (703 successful applicants in 05/06) is equally welcome in my books, but is also more likely to encounter language difficulties (on average).

I wonder how brown one has to be to meet the Turia test? Would a black person immigrating from the Netherlands (641 successful applicants in 05/06) be more welcome in her books than a white person of the same origin?

Does she think that for some reason the former is more likely to emphathize with her "brown" bretheren? And is that a sound foundation on which to build immigration policy?

I am almost at a loss for words in describing this racist outburst. The word "fuck" does come to mind quite a lot though.

Labels: racism, turia