Thread by @alice_tps

I really enjoyed reading this article abt white scholars who represent themselves as something else. I think this is a conversation we dont often have in NZ academia - but this is something we need to think carefully abt as we extend calls for more Māori and Pacific academics

https://twitter.com/hiokinai/status/1397212265951158277

Those calls are important and I will make them until I take my last breath. However, we need to be realistic that some ppl respond in unethical ways to what they see as opportunities. What ethics or tikanga do we want to underpin the conversations abt this in Aotearoa?

How do we find ways to hold space for the range of experiences Indigenous ppl have had #becauseofcolonisation and yet also ensure that we are not naive about ppl who may represent themselves in certain ways to squeeze through the gaps made by aroha?

And, how do we attend to the very different things that matter for articulating connection to different Indigenous communities around the Pacific region? As Māori our thinking abt whakapapa functions in institutions as a ‘one drop rule’ - but should we apply this to other ppl?

How do we ensure our enthusiasm for browning up the NZ academy doesn’t accidentally sidestep these hard questions and inadvertently reinforce problematic hierarchies of power and representation?

And, how do we ensure that we do not swing too far in the other direction - to a place of checklists and suspicion and elitism and a narrowing of what counts as Indigenous experiences to the extent that we agree (with colonialism) to shrink our own worlds?

I am quite familiar with the ppl and matters covered in this article through my connections with Indigenous Studies as a discipline and a community. I think we have often relied on ‘you couldnt do that in NZ bcs we all know who everyone is’ - @tinangata recently challenged this

We do need to find ways to talk about this, mindful that any talk is happening in a context of white supremacy in which we are so hyper aware that we dont want to provide ammunition that would enable more stinkness to be loaded onto our whanaunga

We definitely dont need white academics to think they get to decide who is Indigenous and who isn’t. So this becomes an additional kind of labour for Indigenous academics and communities. I read this article and thought of the many hours and emotions and brainspace wasted on this

Many of the Indigenous scholars in the article have been mentors/ heroes of mine as I have been coming thru Indig Studies - they have built NAISA and written the books and reviewed the funding applications/ tenure files and had the coffees and shared the wisdom for so many of us.

For that labour I am grateful. But. Dealing with these issues (and yes they are incredibly complex) has prevented other work (or indeed rest) for them along the way.

There is no perfect solution here. Our communities and nations have been (and continue to be) ravaged by colonialism in so many ways. May our response in the NZ tertiary sector be underpinned by inclusiveness - always - but also guarded by sharp thinking and eyes wide open.

And, I hope that we continue to be curious about our own conceptualisation of indigeneity in our respective specific contexts across the region. We as Indigenous Pacific thinkers need to think more closely with and towards each other. We must refuse to be defined by whiteness.

Which is to say, we need to understand our various articulations of Indigeneity in different Pacific sites and think about how these broaden our critical questions about these matters. Two big questions emerge here for me...

One, how do we seek to understand (and then grapple with the institutional consequences of) longstanding frames of Indigenous identification in our respective cultural contexts? (avoiding the word #traditional here) (hint: whakapapa is not the only model in the region)

And two: for how long will it be acceptable for citizenship in particular Pacific states function as a proxy for ‘Pacific’ in NZ universities? (hint: this is problematically inclusive *and* exclusive) (hint: states will never be the right starting point for our questions)

I will finish by being clear that I will always defend inclusiveness because the greater tragedy is always to inadvertently exclude Indigenous ppl/ communities. The risk here is that we tire ourselves begging for more crumbs for our ppl that whitebirds will swoop in to eat 👀