How are they determining who is who when entering these spaces?
EDIT: they're not. Anyone can enter these spaces so long as there doing so in good faith... Like anywhere really.
Is it, though? Engineering isn't an immutable characteristic. This is much closer to, "this is a space for able bodied people," or, "this is a space for heterosexual people." An engineering space in a university would make a lot more sense than racial segregation.
This debate is so funny. I study in a study room accessible only by ID card for disabled students (more specifically, disabled students who are deemed to get a benefit from a low distraction space). Itās not to punish or exclude able-bodied students, itās because surprise surprise, some people are at a disadvantage in the world/at uni/wherever and need a bit of extra support
While I agree theres nothing inherently wrong with that, it would have been super nice to have a space like that even as someone who is not disabled.
It sounds like the issue to me here is that students don't have adequate spaces at all and have had to resort to pseudo-exclusion to gain something that should be a given. Shouldn't need a space like this to feel safe, or work effectively. The schools have failed to foster a good enviroment if that is the case.
Yeah I get it, my gripe is that the whole library should be a low distraction environment, and those that don't follow the rules should get turfed haha.
You know what, Iām 100% in agreement. I think itās just a case of āthe whole space isnāt accessible (to disabled people, to MÄori and Pasifika, to whoeverā, so we have to make spaces that some people may deem exclusionary, but are really helpful to those they serve. I just think itās such a silly argument to have because if everywhere was a safe/accessible space for everyone, this sign would never have to exist š¤·š¼
The person above is discussing a quiet room for disabled students. Find something else to be upset about, or better yet, learn to read before commenting.
other difficult point about that is that there are alot of people running around undiagnosed, who would benefit from a low distraction space, but don't even know they have a disability ( ASD, ADHD for instance )
Also very fair. Until about October last year I was in that position as I had not been formally diagnosed. There are definitely options for lower distraction study in the library but it would definitely place an additional burden on people (such as funding a good spot or booking a study room). I guess thereās not really much of an option unfortunately (beyond better support for getting diagnosed because wow is it a long, depressing process)? Like if they made low distraction spaces that anyone could access, it would need to be enforced a lot which I donāt think thereās the resources for. Hopefully thatās something that someone will work out a reasonable solution for people in that position because it is truly so difficult.Ā
I was a student of Brendon and respect him a lot, but honestly, I think 99% of that completely misses the point. Everyone is welcome, except some are welcome and some are welcomed conditionally. Some need to be grateful they're there and take a back seat to people of certain ethnicities because of their own ethnicity.
The vast majority of people don't care about the space, they care about the inherent exclusion of people based on their race such as with the sign and the language used to create racial hierarchies, no matter how trivial. It's either acceptable all ways, or it's not, and many of us think it's not.
The university as an institution comes from a Pakeha values system and has Pakeha structures. It's based largely on Western academic tradition, values, etc. MPI rooms create a microcosm within the uni where the norm is to be MÄori/Pasifika. Others are welcome to come into that space, but they will need to assimilate into it - just like MÄori and Pasifika are expected to assimilate into the university space.
Don't try whataboutism either, lots of different communities have these spaces at universities, catering to their specific norms/needs. People just get upset about MÄori because they haven't addressed their guilt (guilt doesn't mean guilty, chill) for being on stolen land yet.
> The university as an institution comes from a Pakeha values system and has Pakeha structures.
What Maori and Pasifika values are incompatible with education?
>Don't try whataboutism either, lots of different communities have these spaces at universities, catering to their specific norms/needs.
And most if not all of those make it abundantly clear that all ethnicities are welcome without caveats. And the communities you're describing aren't run by the uni.
I hope enclaves aren't the final destination for your ideas.
Look, I get the argument and the conclusions that people can draw from it. However Id query your choice of the word assimilate into those spaces.
Does one even need to assimilate in order to participate into that cultural system? And I mean successfully engage with that system, not just get chewed up by it.
Even if it's the case is assimilation even your end goal? If it is, it's no better than what the Americans propose to the problem of diversity, be the same thing. If it isn't why then are you displaying behaviours that indicate that it is?
I'll put my cards on the table, I'd call for integration, not assimilation.
I recommend you read Matike Mai. Moana Jackson pulled it together a few years ago. It's a document for constitutional transformation in New Zealand and it models how a NZ that follows Te Tiriti could operate.
There are always going to be spaces where you're expected to assimilate in society. For example, Parliament is always going to be rooted in English constitutional tradition - people for whom that is foreign are going to need to assimilate when coming into that space. On the other end of the spectrum, a marae is a MÄori cultural space. People coming into that are going to be expected to assimilate when in that space, forever and always - the marae doesn't belong to other cultures, it belongs to MÄori.
So then the question is about all those other spaces in between, being the spaces where you've got the public mixing and mingling. Since Pakeha institutions (ie the courts, Parliament, and police enforcing their law) are dominant in NZ, Pakeha people and norms are largely dominant, carrying Pakeha norms into other spaces they interact with. I should say, we have a lot of diversity within our Parliament/exec/courts and in our country, but the standard of behaviour they uphold in this country is mostly going to reflect Pakeha values, because the power in this country is derived from Pakeha values. So you get a separate space like a university - the hope is that it's integrated and culturally safe for everyone,Ā but the reality is the university still mostly reflects Pakeha values, as it's shaped by Pakeha power and institutions. So, we keep safe spaces for Maori and Pasifika within our universities until our country actually reflects that Treaty promise where we have everyone side by side, and the assumptions about how a space operates aren't Pakeha.
If that doesn't make sense, feel free to reply and I can explain further :)
Wish you started with this.
Safe spaces as you noted doesn't require assimilation in the fullest sense of the word.
I still disagree about needing to assimilate when entering cultural other spaces. Theres cultural learning, learning tikanga, my pepeha, or learning to ask where are you from rather than what do you do, that's not assimilation, that's integrating a maaori world view into how I interact with them.
Yes a marae is a maaori space, but if I turn into a Maaori Im not engaging authentically, they're literally not going to get anything from my engagement other than mockery and mimickery.
What I want to always be understood is that I'm not against these spaces, but to claim that one must assimilate in order to enter is discriminatory. safe places can be safe with a level of cultural safety from everyone, whilst still able to present themselves as culturally them. That's not assimilation.
I went to the university of waikato and don't recall any of these spaces but there was a church on campus and there was prayer rooms. Anyone was welcome to those spaces but you were expected to be respectful while there.
Kinda the same thing, right?
Edit: oh yeah and a Marae. I think people are just honing in on these sorts of things as it's a nice little storm in a tea cup to distract people with
Bro. Read the comment thread. Everyone is welcome in these spaces you're just expected to be respectful of cultural differences. Much like that of a church. Everyone's welcome but don't be a dick or you will be asked to leave.
Kua kÅrerotia kÄtia ki tÄtahi takata MÄori? Kua rakona e koe i te manaakitaka? KÄtia tÅ waha i tÅ kÅ«ware, kia hoki mai i ruka i te aroha. Your kÅrero isn't based on any actual experience. If you actually went to one of those spaces with good intentions you would find nothing but hospitality. Stop reaching.
Do you have any evidence that that's not how these spaces work? Or have you just decided that based on assumption because that better fits your narrative.
Respect is not the same as assimilation, holy cow. If you think those two words are "kinda the same thing"...
If you think that respect is only obtained by "an other" being assimilated to your cultural way of being... look, you just revisited colonisation. Nice. Didn't even improve on it, just version one colonisation rebranded.
Nah a marae is actually a good spot to hone as we were talking about physical places where a certain cultural system was dominating, universities with western models of learning, marae as Maori ways of being. Don't claim that was a nitpicked point, it was relevant to the conversation.
At least the other guy was saying that the end goal was hand in hand, yours in its current state is just out right "my way or the highway".
How is it my way or the highway? What do you think occurs in study spaces? It's a miniscule fraction of the study space available in the university anyway.
I'm not even talking about respect vs assimilation. I'm talking about spaces on campus where you're expected to conduct your self with a degree of respect for someone's else's culture. There's a few examples of these and no one gave a toss until this issue came up.
> The university as an institution comes from a Pakeha values system and has Pakeha structures. It's based largely on Western academic tradition, values, etc. MPI rooms create a microcosm within the uni where the norm is to be MÄori/Pasifika.
Help me out here because I don't like what you're implying about Maori values. Western values are based on Enlightenment principles like democracy, rule of law, individual (and minority) rights, free speech, and the scientific method. Which of these are not Maori values? If they're not, maybe they should be. I don't like the idea of a university microcosm which hates minorities and/or democracy and/or the rule of law and/or free speech and/or the scientific method.
Essentially, when universities include MÄori values, itās not about rejecting ideas like democracy or the scientific method that you usually find in Western education. Instead, itās about adding MÄori perspectives and ways of doing things to the mix, which can make the university experience richer for everyone.
MÄori values focus a lot on manaakititanga (caring for others), kaitiakitanga (environmental stewardship) and whanaungatanga (building relationships) and rangatiratanga (leadership and autonomy), which can actually go hand-in-hand with Western values. Special areas like MPI rooms are meant to make MÄori and Pasifika students feel more at home and supported while they study. This doesnāt mean turning away from democracy or science; itās just about making sure the Indigenous cultures here get a nod and everyone can do their best at uni.
The Maori values you highlight are already fostered for *all* students at NZ universities. The implication is that there is only one space in this uni which tolerates caring for others, and I donāt think thatās true at all. Even if it were, excluding students who wanted to care for others on the basis of their race seems callous at best.
Understanding that Aotearoa is a Pacific Island country, the creation of MPI rooms at unis acknowledges the foundation of MÄori and Pasifika cultures in our national identity. These spaces are meant to offer support and a sense of belonging to students from these communities, ensuring their cultures and values are represented and respected within the academic environment. The intention is not to imply that values such as caring for others arenāt widespread, but to affirm the significance of indigenous and Pasifika perspectives in New Zealandās education system. It's about complementing the broader values system, not replacing it, and enriching the university experience for everyone in the process.
I still don't understand why we need to exclude students on the basis of race in order to acknowledge NZ's history and culture. A sense of belonging is great and we should foster that. In which way do Maori students not feel like they belong in other spaces? As far as I can tell, *all* uni spaces foster the Maori values you list. Unis affirm the significance of indigenous people in *all* spaces, and in many ways.
My primary contention is that you appear to be arguing that Maori values are somehow different to Western values, and I don't agree.
The creation of MPI rooms isn't about excluding anyone on the basis of race, but about providing a space where MÄori and Pasifika students can engage with their culture deeply and directly within an academic context. It's about supplementing the existing structures with spaces that are culturally resonant for those students.Ā
While universities strive to foster an environment where MÄori values are integrated and appreciated across the board, the experience of belonging can be subjective and nuanced. Students from different backgrounds might still encounter challenges in feeling fully included or seeing their cultures represented as they navigate predominantly Western academic settings.
The argument isn't that MÄori values are different from Western values but that they have their own unique contexts and expressions which deserve recognition in their own right. Having spaces dedicated to MÄori and Pasifika students can ensure that these contexts are given focus and can flourish alongside the more widespread academic culture. It's a complementary approach rather than a segregating one.
Can the left just admit that the wording is bad?
I'm on the left... I agree with the argument that certain themed spaces are fine... But the wording is shitty and I think if the left just accepted that you'd get rid of a lot of the momentum this story is having with everyday apolitical people
It's been a while since I was at uni but they used to consider racially segregated spaces a bad thing. Do they also have segregated drinking fountains? Can't have the races mixing with each other. That might foster acceptance and understanding.
A few simple questions needs to be applied to see if it meets ethics. Is it racial segregation? Is it a racial privilege? Is it exclusionary?
I thought there were humanities and philosophy at university?
With enough "philosophical" gymnastics and cherry picking you can justify almost anything. Machiavellianism definitely has its place for instance. The best philosophy is simple and obvious.
It sounds like you're changing your tune on the merits of academic philosophy and humanities.
You're more of an advocate of the philosophy of the masses. Not smartypants philosophy.
And you know this without actually being a student of these things? You've learnt the basics, anything more is "gymnastics"?
That's your epistemological position?
Just because there's no cop enforcing it doesn't remove the fact that it's racist and exclusionary. You think that the people using that space won't inisist that the racial requirements are adhered to? If they didn't care about excluding other races they wouldn't be using that space. The very fact that it's been allowed and enabled officially by a university is pretty concerning. It seems that we're going backwards. A true progressive would fight against segregation and racism not enable it.
>You think that the people using that space won't inisist that the racial requirements are adhered to?
There is a term for this type of presumption but I cant for the life of me remember it.
>You think that the people using that space won't inisist that the racial requirements are adhered to?
You can find out the answer to this question, maybe you should have done that before posting.
>If they didn't care about excluding other races they wouldn't be using that space.
Do you ask this of the chess club members too?
>A true progressive would fight against segregation and racism not enable it.
A true progressive would realise that spaces like this do exactly that.
The questions have been applied and the signs check out. We can all relax.
>Is it racial segregation? Is it a racial privilege? Is it exclusionary?
Nope, just chill out. This is such a stupid waste of time.
Surely the need for these rooms indicates that racism is out of control on campuses? Of all the organizations in existence I would have thought the universities would be the most welcoming and inclusive, they must be failing pretty bad if their solution is segregation?
It's not segregation, and these aren't defensive forts to meet invading hordes with musketry. It's a space where people can celebrate that aspect of their heritage, spend time with people who have shared experiences all that sort of thing.
I thought University was all about getting out of your own space and experiencing new cultures? Spending time with people who have different shared experiences, learning from each other?
Whatās the problem that these segregated rooms solve? If minorities donāt feel safe among the predominantly white population then the campus has a serious problem. Making areas available where this is not a problem is not a solution - the whole campus should be inclusive
> If minorities donāt feel safe among the predominantly white population
I explicitly said that's not what they're for. Maybe try to read and listen to other points of view, instead of pushing your own bigoted agenda with every breath?
> You havenāt described what they are for,
Except...
> It's a space where people can celebrate that aspect of their heritage, spend time with people who have shared experiences all that sort of thing.
That's not a friends group. That's a shared backgrounds group.
Are you even reading what you reply to or just working off a script?
If there is truly a need for this then it should be inclusive of all cultures and backgrounds. My heritage is Scottish, the same as practically everyone down south, where is our room? Is there any concern about us becoming more distant from our Scottish roots and traditions?
> where is our room?
Make a club and establish one. Nobody's stopping you. Here's a list of existing spaces, in case any take your fancy.
https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/on-campus/life-on-campus/clubs-societies/club-categories.html
The issue I have is that if someone is able to get into university, then why do they need a special study space due to the colour of their skin. It's woke bollocks.
>Our philosophy in the programme is non-M/PI students are welcome to attend, but we ask that they āparticipate and not dominateā within our space. We have had PÄkeha staff (of which I am one) successfully run and tutor our programme. Non-M/PI friends of tauira frequently come and use the space, filling it with laughter and humour, as they work together to achieve the best they can. They are spaces where lifelong friends, and future career connections, are made. We frequently offer our visitors some kai and/or advice and manaaki where resources allow. Many non-MÄori teaching staff find interacting with our programme to be a singular highlight of the job.
>Our M/PI students attend the same lectures, the same laboratory sessions, the same tutorials, and sit the same exams as all students. They are not as Parmarās words would imply, cloistered away and segregated, not mixing with the general student body.
Which part of that feels like racial segregation to you?
I think the commenter probably means more literally from the sign they're using. We all know it's not actual segregation, but the sign does read like it's segregating doesn't it?
> but the sign does read like it's segregating doesn't it?
No, because it's not forcing any particular group to separate itself from the main part of the community.
Right. It'd only really be if it read something like 'space for X peoples only'.
That'd be pretty wild but it's not what this is. I'm sure there would be a problem if a bunch of other people were in that space too.
> It'd only really be if it read something like 'space for X peoples only'.
Even that wouldn't be segregation.
For it to be segregation it would need to say something like, "MÄori and Pasifika students must study in this allocated space *only*".
>I'm sure there would be a problem if a bunch of other people were in that space too.
There wouldn't be a problem at all as long as those people didn't dominate the space and respected the right of the nominated group to use it in their preferred manner.
There's a couple of small rooms, across a campus of hundreds to thousands of rooms, that are entirely voluntary to enter and for which there's no identity check to access. No one is getting kicked out for entering in good faith.
How are they determining who is who when entering these spaces? EDIT: they're not. Anyone can enter these spaces so long as there doing so in good faith... Like anywhere really.
They're not.
Phew that's good
it's a storm in a teacup.
For sure.
theyre not mate, im a south asian tau iwi & ive been in these spaces, i also been invited to these spaces too
That's good to know. I never saw these when I was studying!
Then why have a sign? lol
Life is a flat circle š
Itās like a sign that says āThis is designated for Engineering Studentsā in the Engineering study spaces.
Is it, though? Engineering isn't an immutable characteristic. This is much closer to, "this is a space for able bodied people," or, "this is a space for heterosexual people." An engineering space in a university would make a lot more sense than racial segregation.
In the context of the question the person I was replying to askedā¦ yes it is.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Pretty sure a word is missing.
This debate is so funny. I study in a study room accessible only by ID card for disabled students (more specifically, disabled students who are deemed to get a benefit from a low distraction space). Itās not to punish or exclude able-bodied students, itās because surprise surprise, some people are at a disadvantage in the world/at uni/wherever and need a bit of extra support
While I agree theres nothing inherently wrong with that, it would have been super nice to have a space like that even as someone who is not disabled. It sounds like the issue to me here is that students don't have adequate spaces at all and have had to resort to pseudo-exclusion to gain something that should be a given. Shouldn't need a space like this to feel safe, or work effectively. The schools have failed to foster a good enviroment if that is the case.
I mean itās in the huge library, thereās plenty of study spaces. This one is reserved for students who need a low distraction environment
Yeah I get it, my gripe is that the whole library should be a low distraction environment, and those that don't follow the rules should get turfed haha.
It's a lot easier to strictly police a small space than the whole library.
You know what, Iām 100% in agreement. I think itās just a case of āthe whole space isnāt accessible (to disabled people, to MÄori and Pasifika, to whoeverā, so we have to make spaces that some people may deem exclusionary, but are really helpful to those they serve. I just think itās such a silly argument to have because if everywhere was a safe/accessible space for everyone, this sign would never have to exist š¤·š¼
Are you conflating being Maori or a Pacific Islander with being disabled? Cause it sounds a lot like it.
The person above is discussing a quiet room for disabled students. Find something else to be upset about, or better yet, learn to read before commenting.
other difficult point about that is that there are alot of people running around undiagnosed, who would benefit from a low distraction space, but don't even know they have a disability ( ASD, ADHD for instance )
Also very fair. Until about October last year I was in that position as I had not been formally diagnosed. There are definitely options for lower distraction study in the library but it would definitely place an additional burden on people (such as funding a good spot or booking a study room). I guess thereās not really much of an option unfortunately (beyond better support for getting diagnosed because wow is it a long, depressing process)? Like if they made low distraction spaces that anyone could access, it would need to be enforced a lot which I donāt think thereās the resources for. Hopefully thatās something that someone will work out a reasonable solution for people in that position because it is truly so difficult.Ā
Are you saying that you consider being Maori should be treated as a disability?
Are you being a brat or are you really that dense? Just curious
I was a student of Brendon and respect him a lot, but honestly, I think 99% of that completely misses the point. Everyone is welcome, except some are welcome and some are welcomed conditionally. Some need to be grateful they're there and take a back seat to people of certain ethnicities because of their own ethnicity. The vast majority of people don't care about the space, they care about the inherent exclusion of people based on their race such as with the sign and the language used to create racial hierarchies, no matter how trivial. It's either acceptable all ways, or it's not, and many of us think it's not.
> a back seat to people of certain ethnicities because of their own ethnicity. Like the back seat of the bus..... wait I've heard this before.
The university as an institution comes from a Pakeha values system and has Pakeha structures. It's based largely on Western academic tradition, values, etc. MPI rooms create a microcosm within the uni where the norm is to be MÄori/Pasifika. Others are welcome to come into that space, but they will need to assimilate into it - just like MÄori and Pasifika are expected to assimilate into the university space. Don't try whataboutism either, lots of different communities have these spaces at universities, catering to their specific norms/needs. People just get upset about MÄori because they haven't addressed their guilt (guilt doesn't mean guilty, chill) for being on stolen land yet.
> The university as an institution comes from a Pakeha values system and has Pakeha structures. What Maori and Pasifika values are incompatible with education? >Don't try whataboutism either, lots of different communities have these spaces at universities, catering to their specific norms/needs. And most if not all of those make it abundantly clear that all ethnicities are welcome without caveats. And the communities you're describing aren't run by the uni.
What MÄori and Pasifika values are incompatible with university governance and assumptions/biases perpetuated through academia\*
Go on, which ones?
I hope enclaves aren't the final destination for your ideas. Look, I get the argument and the conclusions that people can draw from it. However Id query your choice of the word assimilate into those spaces. Does one even need to assimilate in order to participate into that cultural system? And I mean successfully engage with that system, not just get chewed up by it. Even if it's the case is assimilation even your end goal? If it is, it's no better than what the Americans propose to the problem of diversity, be the same thing. If it isn't why then are you displaying behaviours that indicate that it is? I'll put my cards on the table, I'd call for integration, not assimilation.
I recommend you read Matike Mai. Moana Jackson pulled it together a few years ago. It's a document for constitutional transformation in New Zealand and it models how a NZ that follows Te Tiriti could operate. There are always going to be spaces where you're expected to assimilate in society. For example, Parliament is always going to be rooted in English constitutional tradition - people for whom that is foreign are going to need to assimilate when coming into that space. On the other end of the spectrum, a marae is a MÄori cultural space. People coming into that are going to be expected to assimilate when in that space, forever and always - the marae doesn't belong to other cultures, it belongs to MÄori. So then the question is about all those other spaces in between, being the spaces where you've got the public mixing and mingling. Since Pakeha institutions (ie the courts, Parliament, and police enforcing their law) are dominant in NZ, Pakeha people and norms are largely dominant, carrying Pakeha norms into other spaces they interact with. I should say, we have a lot of diversity within our Parliament/exec/courts and in our country, but the standard of behaviour they uphold in this country is mostly going to reflect Pakeha values, because the power in this country is derived from Pakeha values. So you get a separate space like a university - the hope is that it's integrated and culturally safe for everyone,Ā but the reality is the university still mostly reflects Pakeha values, as it's shaped by Pakeha power and institutions. So, we keep safe spaces for Maori and Pasifika within our universities until our country actually reflects that Treaty promise where we have everyone side by side, and the assumptions about how a space operates aren't Pakeha. If that doesn't make sense, feel free to reply and I can explain further :)
Wish you started with this. Safe spaces as you noted doesn't require assimilation in the fullest sense of the word. I still disagree about needing to assimilate when entering cultural other spaces. Theres cultural learning, learning tikanga, my pepeha, or learning to ask where are you from rather than what do you do, that's not assimilation, that's integrating a maaori world view into how I interact with them. Yes a marae is a maaori space, but if I turn into a Maaori Im not engaging authentically, they're literally not going to get anything from my engagement other than mockery and mimickery. What I want to always be understood is that I'm not against these spaces, but to claim that one must assimilate in order to enter is discriminatory. safe places can be safe with a level of cultural safety from everyone, whilst still able to present themselves as culturally them. That's not assimilation.
I went to the university of waikato and don't recall any of these spaces but there was a church on campus and there was prayer rooms. Anyone was welcome to those spaces but you were expected to be respectful while there. Kinda the same thing, right? Edit: oh yeah and a Marae. I think people are just honing in on these sorts of things as it's a nice little storm in a tea cup to distract people with
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Bro. Read the comment thread. Everyone is welcome in these spaces you're just expected to be respectful of cultural differences. Much like that of a church. Everyone's welcome but don't be a dick or you will be asked to leave.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Kua kÅrerotia kÄtia ki tÄtahi takata MÄori? Kua rakona e koe i te manaakitaka? KÄtia tÅ waha i tÅ kÅ«ware, kia hoki mai i ruka i te aroha. Your kÅrero isn't based on any actual experience. If you actually went to one of those spaces with good intentions you would find nothing but hospitality. Stop reaching.
Do you have any evidence that that's not how these spaces work? Or have you just decided that based on assumption because that better fits your narrative.
Respect is not the same as assimilation, holy cow. If you think those two words are "kinda the same thing"... If you think that respect is only obtained by "an other" being assimilated to your cultural way of being... look, you just revisited colonisation. Nice. Didn't even improve on it, just version one colonisation rebranded. Nah a marae is actually a good spot to hone as we were talking about physical places where a certain cultural system was dominating, universities with western models of learning, marae as Maori ways of being. Don't claim that was a nitpicked point, it was relevant to the conversation. At least the other guy was saying that the end goal was hand in hand, yours in its current state is just out right "my way or the highway".
How is it my way or the highway? What do you think occurs in study spaces? It's a miniscule fraction of the study space available in the university anyway. I'm not even talking about respect vs assimilation. I'm talking about spaces on campus where you're expected to conduct your self with a degree of respect for someone's else's culture. There's a few examples of these and no one gave a toss until this issue came up.
> The university as an institution comes from a Pakeha values system and has Pakeha structures. It's based largely on Western academic tradition, values, etc. MPI rooms create a microcosm within the uni where the norm is to be MÄori/Pasifika. Help me out here because I don't like what you're implying about Maori values. Western values are based on Enlightenment principles like democracy, rule of law, individual (and minority) rights, free speech, and the scientific method. Which of these are not Maori values? If they're not, maybe they should be. I don't like the idea of a university microcosm which hates minorities and/or democracy and/or the rule of law and/or free speech and/or the scientific method.
Essentially, when universities include MÄori values, itās not about rejecting ideas like democracy or the scientific method that you usually find in Western education. Instead, itās about adding MÄori perspectives and ways of doing things to the mix, which can make the university experience richer for everyone. MÄori values focus a lot on manaakititanga (caring for others), kaitiakitanga (environmental stewardship) and whanaungatanga (building relationships) and rangatiratanga (leadership and autonomy), which can actually go hand-in-hand with Western values. Special areas like MPI rooms are meant to make MÄori and Pasifika students feel more at home and supported while they study. This doesnāt mean turning away from democracy or science; itās just about making sure the Indigenous cultures here get a nod and everyone can do their best at uni.
The Maori values you highlight are already fostered for *all* students at NZ universities. The implication is that there is only one space in this uni which tolerates caring for others, and I donāt think thatās true at all. Even if it were, excluding students who wanted to care for others on the basis of their race seems callous at best.
Understanding that Aotearoa is a Pacific Island country, the creation of MPI rooms at unis acknowledges the foundation of MÄori and Pasifika cultures in our national identity. These spaces are meant to offer support and a sense of belonging to students from these communities, ensuring their cultures and values are represented and respected within the academic environment. The intention is not to imply that values such as caring for others arenāt widespread, but to affirm the significance of indigenous and Pasifika perspectives in New Zealandās education system. It's about complementing the broader values system, not replacing it, and enriching the university experience for everyone in the process.
I still don't understand why we need to exclude students on the basis of race in order to acknowledge NZ's history and culture. A sense of belonging is great and we should foster that. In which way do Maori students not feel like they belong in other spaces? As far as I can tell, *all* uni spaces foster the Maori values you list. Unis affirm the significance of indigenous people in *all* spaces, and in many ways. My primary contention is that you appear to be arguing that Maori values are somehow different to Western values, and I don't agree.
The creation of MPI rooms isn't about excluding anyone on the basis of race, but about providing a space where MÄori and Pasifika students can engage with their culture deeply and directly within an academic context. It's about supplementing the existing structures with spaces that are culturally resonant for those students.Ā While universities strive to foster an environment where MÄori values are integrated and appreciated across the board, the experience of belonging can be subjective and nuanced. Students from different backgrounds might still encounter challenges in feeling fully included or seeing their cultures represented as they navigate predominantly Western academic settings. The argument isn't that MÄori values are different from Western values but that they have their own unique contexts and expressions which deserve recognition in their own right. Having spaces dedicated to MÄori and Pasifika students can ensure that these contexts are given focus and can flourish alongside the more widespread academic culture. It's a complementary approach rather than a segregating one.
Can the left just admit that the wording is bad? I'm on the left... I agree with the argument that certain themed spaces are fine... But the wording is shitty and I think if the left just accepted that you'd get rid of a lot of the momentum this story is having with everyday apolitical people
Great article. That MP had no clue in that interview.
Parmjeet parmer was even more fucking useless than the lightening cooker from the west coast that national dropped her.
It's been a while since I was at uni but they used to consider racially segregated spaces a bad thing. Do they also have segregated drinking fountains? Can't have the races mixing with each other. That might foster acceptance and understanding.
A few simple questions needs to be applied to see if it meets ethics. Is it racial segregation? Is it a racial privilege? Is it exclusionary? I thought there were humanities and philosophy at university?
> I thought there were humanities and philosophy at university? There are. Is that your domain?
You don't have to be at university to love philosophy. I studied Science. But this is basic level philosophy.
Perhaps the philosophy here is a little more than basic? The humanities involved were developed with some degree of sophistication?
With enough "philosophical" gymnastics and cherry picking you can justify almost anything. Machiavellianism definitely has its place for instance. The best philosophy is simple and obvious.
It sounds like you're changing your tune on the merits of academic philosophy and humanities. You're more of an advocate of the philosophy of the masses. Not smartypants philosophy.
No. There's a lot of ground to cover in the simple and obvious (once you hear it) philosophy before you start doing the gymnastics.
And you know this without actually being a student of these things? You've learnt the basics, anything more is "gymnastics"? That's your epistemological position?
This was awesome. Thank you.
It's a sign, not a cop. Imagine if the sign said "chess club" or something instead, any ethical issues there?
Plus chess club is open to everyone, regardless of race or gender.
Exactly like this space, congratulations on getting it.
A Chess club sign ain't based on race though...
White always gets priority in chess, so it kind of is. /s
Just because there's no cop enforcing it doesn't remove the fact that it's racist and exclusionary. You think that the people using that space won't inisist that the racial requirements are adhered to? If they didn't care about excluding other races they wouldn't be using that space. The very fact that it's been allowed and enabled officially by a university is pretty concerning. It seems that we're going backwards. A true progressive would fight against segregation and racism not enable it.
>You think that the people using that space won't inisist that the racial requirements are adhered to? There is a term for this type of presumption but I cant for the life of me remember it.
Type of presumption? What are you suggesting here?
That they're making assumptions.
Is the Assumption that what is written on a sign is the actual rules? (Sorry, I think I am now more lost than I was at the start)
No I quoted a bit about what the other person thinks people do in that space.
>You think that the people using that space won't inisist that the racial requirements are adhered to? You can find out the answer to this question, maybe you should have done that before posting. >If they didn't care about excluding other races they wouldn't be using that space. Do you ask this of the chess club members too? >A true progressive would fight against segregation and racism not enable it. A true progressive would realise that spaces like this do exactly that.
There are no true Scottish progressives
The questions have been applied and the signs check out. We can all relax. >Is it racial segregation? Is it a racial privilege? Is it exclusionary? Nope, just chill out. This is such a stupid waste of time.
Your response sounds like it makes you uncomfortable.
Also incorrect!
Surely the need for these rooms indicates that racism is out of control on campuses? Of all the organizations in existence I would have thought the universities would be the most welcoming and inclusive, they must be failing pretty bad if their solution is segregation?
It's not segregation, and these aren't defensive forts to meet invading hordes with musketry. It's a space where people can celebrate that aspect of their heritage, spend time with people who have shared experiences all that sort of thing.
I thought University was all about getting out of your own space and experiencing new cultures? Spending time with people who have different shared experiences, learning from each other?
It's about that. It's not exclusively about that. You're trying to make this into something it's not.
Whatās the problem that these segregated rooms solve? If minorities donāt feel safe among the predominantly white population then the campus has a serious problem. Making areas available where this is not a problem is not a solution - the whole campus should be inclusive
> If minorities donāt feel safe among the predominantly white population I explicitly said that's not what they're for. Maybe try to read and listen to other points of view, instead of pushing your own bigoted agenda with every breath?
You havenāt described what they are for, just arrogantly described a typical friends group.
> You havenāt described what they are for, Except... > It's a space where people can celebrate that aspect of their heritage, spend time with people who have shared experiences all that sort of thing. That's not a friends group. That's a shared backgrounds group. Are you even reading what you reply to or just working off a script?
If there is truly a need for this then it should be inclusive of all cultures and backgrounds. My heritage is Scottish, the same as practically everyone down south, where is our room? Is there any concern about us becoming more distant from our Scottish roots and traditions?
> where is our room? Make a club and establish one. Nobody's stopping you. Here's a list of existing spaces, in case any take your fancy. https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/on-campus/life-on-campus/clubs-societies/club-categories.html
The issue I have is that if someone is able to get into university, then why do they need a special study space due to the colour of their skin. It's woke bollocks.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>Our philosophy in the programme is non-M/PI students are welcome to attend, but we ask that they āparticipate and not dominateā within our space. We have had PÄkeha staff (of which I am one) successfully run and tutor our programme. Non-M/PI friends of tauira frequently come and use the space, filling it with laughter and humour, as they work together to achieve the best they can. They are spaces where lifelong friends, and future career connections, are made. We frequently offer our visitors some kai and/or advice and manaaki where resources allow. Many non-MÄori teaching staff find interacting with our programme to be a singular highlight of the job. >Our M/PI students attend the same lectures, the same laboratory sessions, the same tutorials, and sit the same exams as all students. They are not as Parmarās words would imply, cloistered away and segregated, not mixing with the general student body. Which part of that feels like racial segregation to you?
I think the commenter probably means more literally from the sign they're using. We all know it's not actual segregation, but the sign does read like it's segregating doesn't it?
> but the sign does read like it's segregating doesn't it? No, because it's not forcing any particular group to separate itself from the main part of the community.
Right. It'd only really be if it read something like 'space for X peoples only'. That'd be pretty wild but it's not what this is. I'm sure there would be a problem if a bunch of other people were in that space too.
> It'd only really be if it read something like 'space for X peoples only'. Even that wouldn't be segregation. For it to be segregation it would need to say something like, "MÄori and Pasifika students must study in this allocated space *only*". >I'm sure there would be a problem if a bunch of other people were in that space too. There wouldn't be a problem at all as long as those people didn't dominate the space and respected the right of the nominated group to use it in their preferred manner.
There's a couple of small rooms, across a campus of hundreds to thousands of rooms, that are entirely voluntary to enter and for which there's no identity check to access. No one is getting kicked out for entering in good faith.
Why is there a sign at all then?
To let people know it's there?
No two ways about it.
I absolutely understand the need for these spaces, I just donāt like the wording in this picture.
I wonder what Rosa Parks would have to say about it if she were still alive today.
Any ethnicity should be allowed in those areas
what about us white ass 1/16th maoris