Book: The Great Divide, by Ian Wishart

I've put this slant on the Treaty of Waitangi in the farm blog under 5th Dimension stuff, rather than where I normally do book reviews on my jreb blog, given that security of tenure, the foundation of our Kiwi brand of capitalism, has an elephant in its room in the form of indigenous peoples (aka Maori) aspiration, originally over land issues, but now bounding over coastline, water, and air.
Us farmers with our land-holdings and proximity to the latter two, can be forgiven for taking the occasional glance over our shoulders.
You have to hand it to Ian Wishart as being one of the most prodigious researchers in the country, even if he's regarded as too much of a conspiracist in some quarters. His work on climate issues in "Air Con" is monumental, and he's sure made a good dig into the archives with this book.
One of the misfortunes of history is its propensity to be re-invented depending on the world-view of its interpreters, and I think a lot of that goes on with the Waitangi Tribunal. "The Great Divide" wont make any in-roads on that score, rather its benefit is as a good back-grounder for those watchful of us having to make a living under the elephant.
As a whakapapa'd (identifiably lineaged) blended Kiwi myself, (can get to Hawaiki, the original homeland of Maori, in 21 generations), I agree with Wishart's conclusion that the Treaty was embraced at the time, 1840, as the best opportunity for security of tenure for the locals in what was an increasingly "wild west" scenario, with the gun trade taking tribal conflict to an horrific level, and the French and Americans sitting in line for de facto authority, bleak alternatives if ever, particularly when you look at their respective poor record of colonisation and dealing with indigenous peoples.
Indeed you have to ask what Maori left Hawaiki for in the first place. Go to any established Pacific society and you'll find our rangatira level were subordinate to at least two higher levels of society, and often a royal family. Maybe it was they left because more than the heat of the tropics got too great, and not just sailing off for the sake of adventure, but actually to secure turangawaewae, "a place for their feet", somewhere else.
While a number of chiefs and tribes maintained a never say die 'its all ours, bugger off whites' stance over what they considered constituted Aotearoa, and the call still taken up today, Wishart points out the little credited and remembered hui at Kohimarama where the majority of chiefs ratified their defence of the 1840 Treaty and allegiance to the concept of Crown, 20 years later. He argues this as evidence of a desire by the chiefs to advance individual land title, and once enshrined, to enable whatever disposition desired, including sale.
Dunno.... the plot around land sale by chiefs gets pretty thick outside of this investigation.
You can argue back and forth on the legitimacy or otherwise of both sides of the from then till now issue ad infinitum. What I think it comes down to is where NZ society wants to take it to today.
Simply, put it to the vote.
Wishart's concluding plank has much merit too. Do we want a written constitution holding Maori aspiration and the Crown, as jointly superior to the wishes of the people?
That's no constitution at all. If it was to be one, the people would be at the top.
Otherwise, why bother with a Parliament.