The Daily Bork

March 01, 2005

Blood is thicker than... well it's just thick really

From the insane world of race politics...

The N-word: Is nepotism bad?

Tariana Turia [Maori party leader] says hiring family members is not necessarily a bad thing. And she's not alone. Anthony Hubbard reports on the virtues of nepotism.
Nepotism used to be considered a vice, like theft or child abuse. Now the ancient practice has found new defenders.


How about this instead:

Slavery used to be considered a vice, like theft or child abuse. Now the ancient practice has found new defenders.

No, I didn't think so.

Now, read the following excerpts...
[Note, pakeha = "white" New Zealanders]

Mutu says there are strong Maori sanctions against corruption. "There are all sorts of checks and balances in place that are actually far greater than in the Pakeha world." In her own work in her iwi organisation and as chairwoman of two marae, "I've got to account for every decision I make and every action I do."

Theft and corruption are unacceptable in Maori society, she says, and Maori often blow the whistle on those in their own organisations. "Oh hell, yes - that's why you see it splashed all over the newspapers. You rarely see it from the Pakeha world."

Pakeha commonly think Maori are a bit casual with money. In fact, "what you've got is that Maori are not very expert in how to handle the cash. They get caught out". Maori do not have hundreds of years of experience of a cash-centred culture, "so we have to learn to use it the best way we can, and I can tell you we often make mistakes with it".


How much bullshit can you write in a few sentences? Theft and corruption unacceptable in Maroi society? Like, as in most other societies... so much so that codified laws exist to define such crimes? Who the hell do they think they are kidding here?

Rarely see it from the Pakeha world??? What the hell is most white-collar crime then? Because they are not exposed by someone who prefaces the press-releases/police complaint with "As a white dude, I would like to expose blah blah blah"?

How can someone be so utterly paternalistic about their own culture? "We have to use it the best way we can"??? Because we are just a bit on the simple side and, you know, all those numbers just confuse the poor native mind.


The irony is that, by extension, racist appointments are OK although this seems to escape the proponents of this scheme. Under the logic that pervades the article it is perfectly OK, even good, to employ those more closely related than those who aren't. So as a white manager, I would prefer to employ white people to be my more trusted deputies because, you know, those darkies are unreliable, disloyal and can't keep track of the accounts.

Turia argued that because Maori organisations are in the spotlight, "you are going to put people into positions who you know that you can trust and who are going to be loyal". That means favouring relatives - although the relative, of course, has to be competent to do the job.

Because people are watching my (government funded) organisation I need yes-men, and lots of them dammit otherwise people might cotton on to the fact that there are shenanigans afoot. I guess impartiality, fairness, equality, all those high-falutin' ideas are just western imperialist devices designed to keep the dark brother down. Nepotism, favouritism, corruption... they are all good old noble-savage traits worthy of preservation. Of course these people almost invariably vote to the left, where is the classless PC thought? Does family trump race trump class in the strange world of ethnic politics? How do leftist ideologues get away with the paternalistic trash spouted above? The answer is, as always, that it doesn't matter if the whole makes any sense so long as it sounds good to the audience and perpetuates their power-trip. That's why you need the reliable yes-men from inside the family, those who you can easily lean on because they CAN'T just up and leave. The poor sods are bound to the whole shooting-match, far from having an incentive to blow the whistle as expounded above they are far less likely to do so. If they cause the downfall of family power, who is going to look after THEM? Certainly not the people they just shafted who they must now live with. The strength of frowning on nepotism and discouraging it is that the rank-and-file have less to risk in exposing corruption since they don't lose their family in the process, even if they lose their jobs, or they can up and leave with no shame being visited upon them through the family. You can choose who you work for, but you can't choose your family. You can work for many different people, but you only get one family. I know Western thought and practices are terribly awful, but sometimes there are things in there that do make life better for everybody.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home