The Lineup
B.I.R. Column Of Fame
Man of Steel... Wood... and Mud: Bear Grylls
Rock Legend: Tom Morello

League Gods: The Emperor and Alfie

Str-8 Shoota: Malcolm X

Str-8 Shoota: Zack de la Rocha

Super Bad mofo's

Comrade Hillary

Monday, February 26, 2007

Brown New Zealand Policy 

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: ,

What we need is a great big melting pot...... Good song. Awful idea.
Assuming UK, SA and USA are white and all others are .... 'not'. Then it's 20,545 vs 19,141 in favour of the honkies.

However I work with a black South African and have taught a couple as well. So essentially the government may in fact be 'browning' the land as we speak.

If they aren't then the sun sure as hell is. My garden is begging for rain!
Fiji is high on the list.

What does TT make of the fact that the majority of them are of Indian rather than Fijian decent? (Moe jobs in the IT industry than pro rugby) ??

In theory wouldn't she want to stop all immigration?

With global warming likely to make parts of the world very unpleasant to live in in the next few short years we are likely to see a rush of rich whites looking to move here. Already the two-way movement across the Tasman has, for the first time ever, seen more Aussies moving here than Kiwis there.
As a South Pacific country, our first obligation should be to the Pacific Island people who are forced to move.
Rich whites mean land grabs and social exclusion.
Anon - implicit in your comments is the notion that, actually, both "rich whites" and "poor browns" might want/need to move here if/when Global Warming makes their lives unpleasant.

Also, I think you will find that no one ethnicity/skin colour has a monopoly on "land grabs" (whatever this might mean ... is it "grabbing" when there is a willing seller and willing buyer agreeing on a price?) or social exclusion.

See complaints in the early/mid 90s about Hong Kong Chinese "grabbing" the best houses in the best parts of Auckland, and then living exclusive lives, failing to integrate, yadda yadda.

Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

The New
Blogging it Real supports the following sporting organisations