The Maori’s first contribution to NZ culture was the genocide of the native people there. I wonder if this part of there culture is still celebrated?

What exactly does Irfan want to do when it comes to having more Aboriginal culture in Australian society? Surly not more Anthony Mundiens?
Sure Aboriginal culture is an important part of Australian history but it is hardly relevant to mainstream society.

I dread the day when the Australian rugby team has to do some silly primitive tribal dance like the Kiwi do to keep minorities happy.

I'm no expert, but isn't Maori culture more unified than that of Australian Aborigines? For example, there are (or were) several hundred different Aboriginal languages, but don't the Maori share a common language?

After all, if Australian Aborigines aren't a monolithic cultural group, I would imagine this makes it more difficult to incorporate representative features of their culture into mainstream Australian society (which isn't monolithic either, of course, I'm just simplifying for the sake of clarity).

Its a bit difficult to make generalisations about a linguistically and culturally diverse group, isn't it Irfan? :-)

Cheers!

Why do people continually refer to Maoris as indigenous to New Zealand? They were migrants like the rest of the population, but they seem to be in denial of their origins. Using that logic, whites of European descent will be indigenous to Australia around 2800 if they haven't been over run by starving invaders from the north.

Irfan - another thoughtful post, and I agree with most of what you say.

A couple of quibbles, though.

The aside about "judeo-christian" influences is a bit snide. Not only does the phrase reflect the huge borrowing of Christian religious, ethical and cultural thought from its Jewish origins, it's also not too far off the mark for modern culture. Jewish people have made a greatly disproportionate contribution to science, arts, politics, philosophy, etc (Marx, Freud, Einstein, Spinoza, Ricardo, Mahler ...).There contributions may have been in the face of anti-Semitism, but they were substantial.

Also, I think you’re definition of “distinctly Australian values” is a bit narrow. Few would argue that ONLY Australians and no-one else value mateship, a “fair go”, egalitarianism, etc. The key issue is that these are perceived as being important and highly valued elements of our culture and national character (if such a thing exists). There’s nothing necessarily wrong with trying to identify and promote such values, unless the implication is indeed that others do not possess these virtues, or as an attempt to enforce conformity to a narrow ideology’s interpretation of who is an authentic Aussie.

I was not going to post here but, by chance, I came across this article from the Institute of Public Affairs. It's titled:

"Islam’s free market heritage"

See:

http://ipa.org.au/files/59-1_Islam+FreeMarket.pdf

I'm really interested to see what you have to say about it Irfan.

For my part, it illustrates what I've often said. Questions like "Is Islam compatible with liberal democracy" are meaningless. The Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism of today are not what they were 100 years ago. Nor are they the same as they will be 100 years from now.

In the end it's not what the texts say but how they're interpreted. For an excellent example of this principle see references to the "Book of Escapes and Ruses" in the article.

The article mentions Ibn Khaldun’s writing. I'm amazed how few Muslims know about this pre-cursor of Adam Smith.

One of the ironies of our stoush, Irfan, is that I think I could do a better job of putting the Muslim case than you. What do you really know about the Muslim scholars of antiquity

"Every peace is based on a war, and that peace contains the seeds of the next war"

The treaty of Waitangi was written in 2 versions. English and Maori.
They differed in ONE crucial word.

That word related to the status of NewZealand Maori sovereignty.

The English version stated they were giving up 'sovereignty', but the Maori version suggested they were simply 'accepting protection of the crown'

Scratch a Maori, and its not long before the reminder of this historic deception brings a knowing smile to their faces.

The White capitalists from Sydney decided New Zealand needed to be populated with many more whites, and they did so in direct contravention of the Treaty. If the Maori decided to link up with some Colonel Gadafi type, we whites would have no one to blame but our own kind.

Kiwi values ? Pretty much like us I'd say. Pity about the history though.

The one 'Kiwi' value which stands out in my mind, was that epitomized by a Maori Chief (female) who, at Gate Par where the British elite were being cut down by superior Maori tactics, was doing the rounds of the wounded and dying Brits inside the Par (Fort) and comforting them, giving them water.. that Maori tribe was Christian in name, and it seems they took part of the sermon on the mount to heart even in the midst of battle.

The reason Maori culture plays a greater role in New Zealand culture than Aboriginal culture does in Australian culture has nothing to do with mutual respect. It comes out of the fact that in the case of New Zealand, two extremely war-like societies encountered each other and had to accept each, albeit with a large grain of fear and suspicion. In the case of Australia, the encounter was less even. This article compares Australia and New Zealand in such a non-sensical way. It's like saying after WW2, the Japanese suddenly realised democracy was the way to go, whilst missing the fact that over the preceding decade, Japan was hell bent on conquest and only greater force caused a change of heart. Cultural acceptance (or non-acceptance) usually comes at the end of a lance (real or figurative), or opposing lances, as the case may be.

To pick up on something another poster wrote, Judeo culture was deemed as relevant and valid in anti-Semitic Europe because of its scientific and artistic power.

Why isn't Muslim culture perceived as relevant or valid? It might be because culturally, intellectually, scientifically, in complete opposition to the Jews who punch remarkably above their body weight, Islam punches absurdly below its (given the 1.3 billion Muslims, how many Nobel Laureates have there been, for example?). When Islam was still a military force, thanks to the Ottomans, it was taken seriously. Now the only reason anyone pays any more attention to the Islamic world is because of that black liquid. Once that runs out, everyone from Beijing to Brisbane to Brasilia will openly view the Islamic world as an unco-ordinated, three hundred kilo simpleton to be openly mocked, if given any attention at all.

Irfan,
You do not say so outright but seem to imply that NZ muslims are held in much higher regard by the non muslim community there, than is the case in Aus. I wonder if the ethnic heritage of NZ muslims is the same as in Aus. Do you, or anyone else, know the approx national make up of muslims in NZ? I do recall you saying that Lebanese make up, by far, the majority of muslims in Aus. This could be a factor in muslims integrating and accepting inclusiveness in NZ.

As you know, I believe we here have an ongoing problem with anti social attitudes of Lebanese muslims. The males act in an arrogant and belligirant manner. Even those of 2nd and 3rd generation. By the way that Muffti of Bosnia seems a pretty cluey bloke. Not only NZ muslims could do well to take in what he said.

I have known plenty of Kiwis and their social values seem exactly the same as ours. I'll even grudingly admit that some of them can play cricket and Rugby. Can't be more neighborly than that.

Irfan Yusuf states: "What will make New Zealand values more meaningful is that New Zealand doesn't pretend it is a Western cultural monolith sitting awkwardly in the Asia- Pacific region."

"New Zealand values are British values, derived from centuries of struggle since Magna Carta. Those things make New Zealand the society it is." - Former NZ opposition leader Don Brash in 2006.

If anything, New Zealanders are more comfortable with themselves because they aren't in Anglo-denial. Nor are they burderned with migrant minority commentators snidely denigrating their nation's Western heritage.

Stephany’s claim of “Islam’s free market heritage” is based on an article that has factual errors e.g.

The article makes the following claim

“It is no coincidence that Makkah (modern Mecca), the site of Islam’s seventh-century theological birth, was also home to a thriving trading community. The early history of the Muslim world is a history of commerce….”

But the truth is that Makkah (modern Mecca) was an important trade and religious centre before the founding of Islam. However after its founding, Mecca became an even more important religious centre (for Islam) but commerce was reduced to a trickle.

The reason was that Mohammed and his band of followers did very little commerce and trading but rather the wealth was obtained by extreme violence through plundering, robbery, terrorising the merchants and caravans that plied the trade routes.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/SherKhan51028.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sword_of_the_Prophet
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/terrorist1.html

Islam opposes free-trade and the free-market even today because of their laws regarding receiving interests on loans and many other irrational practices. Just a few days ago (13/4/2007) a Muslim council in Malaysia issued a fatwa (edict) forbidding Muslims to trade in shares http://news.asiaone.com.sg/st/st_20070414_110410.html

Stephany need not be “amazed how few Muslims know about this pre-cursor of Adam Smith” because there is virtually no such teaching in Islam. Íslam is about what the Muslims actually do, and not how the texts are interpreted.

Put aside NZ for a moment & compare the Aussie experience with India.
http://www.outlookindia.com/rantsmag.asp?fodname=20060123&fname=Cover%20Story&sid=1&pn=10

Philip Tang,

The Sword of the Prophet looks to be an interesting book. I've ordered it from Amazon,

I'm always a little wary of anti-Islam books – as I am of pro-Islam ones. I'm never quite sure I'm getting the full story.

What makes Andrew Bostom's "The Legacy of Jihad" so powerful is that he documents all his claims – often by quoting the relevant Islamic histories.

This is also what makes the Middle-East Media Research Institute (http://www.memri.org) so influential. They document fully any claims they make.

Good article.

Being a Caucasian Kiwi I'm very proud of my NZ heritage and my Anglo heritage from its origins in Scotland with their move by ship to NZ in the late 19th century. I'm very proud to share my NZ heritage and its rich culture that is largely made of the Maori culture, but also the Chinese culture and many European cultures to make what I call home.

Someone ignorant git mentioned the Haka was for the appeasement of the minority population (blah blah bulls**t). The Haka is a cultural clue to what the author of the original article was suggesting and is performed by All Blacks from many cultural backgrounds and is recieved by Kiwis of the same backgrounds with immense pride and respect for what it means to the nation as a whole...Plus, waltzing matilda?...please. ;)

Yes, Australia could learn something from NZ and genuinely celebrate the culture of indigenous Australians and TA's instead of saving them for ad campaigns overseas.

How sad that Irfan resides in Australia instead of the country he admires most.
To be truthful the only difference I find between Irfan and Hilali is the degree of descriptive language. Maybe Hilali is more honest.

Irfan, you are so right about the political position of New Zealand's Maori's compared to the Australian Aborigines. Of course, much of the blame goes to the pre-Federation UK hierachy, including royalty, which had the power before Federation to allow for native representation in the pre-Federal Governing Councils.

Have personally written a series on WA called A Land in Need, in which I tried to push native representation, but was just scorned at even by close friends.

A well known Queensland Roman Catholic padre tried to arrange it more recently, but was also literally howled down by John Howard.

Howard of course has refused to apologise for the taking of Aboriginal lands also.

Some say it is about the danger of monetary claims against us colonialists as happened in Canada, but it still does not say much as regards political ethics, Irfan, as well as historical characterisation for our PM, even though he may still be regarded as our most successful Prime Minister.

Maybe his success could be credited as a very successful neo-colonialist, as could be proven with his backing of the illegal US attack on Iraq.

Irfan is exploiting the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders sentiments to further the cause of Islam. Experience has shown that Muslims don’t even respect the culture of their pre-Islamic ancestors. The Muslims in Afghanistan destroyed the statues of the Bamyam Buddha which they consider offensive to Islam. http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/central/03/12/afghan.buddha.02/

In Malaysia, the government has put a stop to arts and culture inherited from their Hindu past because they are considered un-Islamic.(‘Malaysia's clash of cultures’, By Jonathan Kent, BBC, Kuala Lumpur)
http://www.malaysia-today.net/Blog-e/2005/08/malaysias-clash-of-cultures.htm

If there is a sizeable number of Muslims they would want Sharia law implemented as was the case in Canada http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4236762.stm. This would have lead to discrimination against Muslim women were it implemented.

When Muslims are in the majority, they would attempt setting up an Islamic state. The Muslims in Turkey have voted overwhelmingly for Erdogan, an Islamist who harbours intention of turning Turkey’s secular constitution into an Islamic one.
(Turkey in transition: Less Europe, More Islam)
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,446163,00.html
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/11/europe/EU-POL-Turkey-Next-President.php

If there is any lesson to learn from recent events involving Islamic countries and/or Muslims the world over, abandoning multiculturalism for integration is the only sensible thing to do. The Islamists have been divisive, not the Howard government. New Zealand would soon realize the type of problems facing Canada when her Muslim population increases.

Consider also the case of Indonesia where pre-Islamic culture has been largely obliterated. An excellent book that covers this in more detail is:

Beyond Belief by V. S. Naipaul

Minority cultures do not thrive under Islam

Naipaul has been attacked vigorously by a host of Islamic commentators and their apologists.

Here is what the NY Times book review had to say:

"This is a book of stories, not a book of argument, but there are arguments aplenty in it. The principal one is that Islam is an imperialism, at war not only with the capitalist West but also with the spiritual traditions of the region. It is not native to Pakistan, Iran, Malaya and Indonesia but was an Arab imperial incursion, beginning in the seventh century:"

See:

http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/06/07/reviews/980607.07ignatit.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=login

More of the same from this writer. Religion and racism. Now he's an expert on Kiwis too.

Although some of the posts do exceed the normal ignorance on Irfan's threads. No, we don't need any more surly Mundines. Just Australians of which Anthony Mundine is a big part.

Any chance we could give the Muslim card a rest soon Irfan?

Most of you knocking Irfan appear to be just a bunch of neo-colonialists supporting the present unipolar Anglophilic political economic mindset to the full.

Don't know where you mob went to school, but calling Islam originally just a bunch of half-baked desert Arabs who took over most of the Middle East, would only get you all around four out of ten in any Global history class.

In fact, Mesopotamia of the time, including Egypt, is still regarded as having been influenced by Golden Greek Scientific Reasoning, as a result of earlier conquests of Alexander the Great.

In fact, the Great Library of Alexandria, though unfortunately later sacked by our Christians, is still regarded as one of history's wonders.

A great many Iraqis of the time, especially from around Baghdad, did retain for a period, a rather wonderful mixture of Islamism and Socratic Reasoning, which in the Late Middle Ages did in fact, according to historians, lift Christianity out of the Dark Ages.

Not bad for a mob of ignorant Arabs, as you appear to regard them

As stated by still receiving professors-decan wages at Melbourne University local art-historic guru, non-Anglos are just “a confetti” to a higher race of English-speaking England-related majority.

That is first and last point of feudal values imposed on socially/biologically inferior “free” inhabitants in Anglo-colonies of Australia and NZ.

I'm beginning to suspect that this invidious MichaelK character is some sort of jokester.

It was already explained on these pages that English grammar skills cannot substitute native speakers’ intellectual abilities if any at all someone attempts demonstrating here.

MichaelK, sorry mate I have to mark your last comment as 5 out of 10 for grammar. Read it again and correct for your gold star.

Could you also define what you think neo colonials are? And why some here, including me no doubt, "appear" to be such? Given I have no idea what this label means I would be most interested to know how you drag it into this thread.

Using grab bag labels does not an intellectual make mate.

Oligarch, he is no funster, believe me. He is just a bit dyslectic when it comes to English grammer. A pity really, because sometimes he does have a point to make, but it just gets lost in the translation. He does however, seem to have a phobia toward those of us who have convict/U.K. ancestry.

Neo Colonials? The Elephant in the room, Aspirational? Ladders of Opportunity?
Great words and phrases for those who cannot think.
Hey! I'm not a neo colonial but Great Granpa was.

bushbred: John Howard doesn't speak for me on a lot of things, including apologising to Aboriginal people. I was born in 1976, so why in Bog's name should someone apologise for me, given that I had nothing to do with what happened to any Aboriginal people being taken from their families? By your logic, some French kid now should be apologising to me for the fact that some of his French ancestors did wrong to some of my Anglo-Saxon ancestors. Or maybe my Norman part should apologise to my Anglo-Saxon part, which should apologise to my Roman and Celtic parts, and my Roman should apologise to my Celtic. Then of course, my Norman part should apologise to my Viking part, which should also apologise to my Anglo-Saxon and Celtic parts. That's only for my British ancestry! Phew!

Of course, this says nothing of the fact that no one should be apologising for a Vietnamese or Lebanese person who arrived in Australia after 1976, and thus, also had nothing to do with anything that happened to Aboriginal people prior to 1976.

Likewise, I have no problem with admitting that one thousand years ago, my ancestors were vastly inferior to the Islamic world. However, I live in 2007, not 1007, so I have no problem with stating the fact that the Islamic world now is vastly inferior to the secular West. Probably in 1,000 years, my descendants will be inferior to someone else again.

People are not equal. Cultures are not equal. Enough of the political correctness already.

Could somebody, please, define ‘multiculturalism’. Is it a meaningful semantic segment? Or is it just a slippery political football?

It could mean sharing a beer or a cup of tea with your neighbour who has a funny surname (which is good), or a system of apartheid (which is bad), or anything in between.

Could the next person who writes an article based on this ‘word’, or throws it around liberally within their article, please start by defining the term so that we can at least have something to discuss.

Of course, in environment, where apartheid and segregation rule, “People are not equal. Cultures are not equal. Enough of the political correctness already” (By shorbe, Tuesday, 17 April 2007 5:58:08 PM).

Supposedly, in a democratic world people create cultures, and people are what they were taught and are told.

For you younger ones, who refuse to take lessons from history, it is to be reminded that even Winston Churchill said during WW2, that without a strong knowledge and respect for history, he would rather certain of his generals to be reduced to the lower ranks.

Furthermore, without a strong knowledge of Middle East history right back to WW1, it would be better that some of you pick subjects that you are more acquainted with.

Maybe this is why George W Bush is making such a mess of things in Iraq, without the necessary knowledge, he's relying too much on his own special God whispering in his ear.

Great to see the bush-researcher Stephany back to provide some comic relief. I almost fell off my chair when I read this: "Consider also the case of Indonesia where pre-Islamic culture has been largely obliterated."

I guess islands like Bali are just a figment of our imagination. I guess it is flying pigs who perform Ramayana ballets and preserve Hindu and Buddhist temples in and around the Javanese cultural capital of Yogyakarta. And why do Indonesian mosques keep a traditional Javanese Hindu drum to play before the call to prayer? Or did the Arabs of 7th century Medina worship Vishnu?

Keep writing, Stephany. I love it. Almost as funny as the Chaser.

Hahaha. The laughs just keep coming from Stephany. Here's another one ...

"Minority cultures do not thrive under Islam."

Yes, of course they don't. I mean, Sheik Musa bin Maymoun al-Qurtubi would have faired much better were he with King Richard. And what is the religion of the family that continues to hold the keys to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre? And I guess you think it was Saladdin's troops who massacred all the Jews, Orthodox Christians and Muslims of Jerusalem.

Your absolutist worldview is a barrel of laughs. Keep going.

bushred: So, what you're saying is Winston Churchill wanted his generals to know about his gassing of the Kurds so they could firebomb Dresden properly? ;P

MichaelK: I'm not exactly sure what your point is. Mine is that we can beat around the bush as much as we like, but it does appear strange that, for instance, with 12 million people, the Jews (including non-Israeli Jews) have produced 159 Nobel Laureates, compared to the entire Islamic world of 1.4 billion having produced eight. Don't like the Jews, fine, have a look at the table at the bottom of this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_laureates_by_country

I don't believe it's any co-incidence that of the top twenty nations on that list, only one (Japan) is not Western. Of course, individuals do their own thing, but some cultures are more conducive to producing great individuals than others due to an over-arching worldview that informs such individuals.

To get back to the topic, why should I have any respect for one quarter of the world's population who, despite once being great, have for the past five centuries been lucky to collectively fill a thimble with their intellectual contributions to humanity? If I am, or the West in general is, accused of regarding modern Islam as a culturally and intellectually bereft wasteland that constantly makes a caricature of itself, maybe it's because it (Islam) is very good at living up to that stereotype whilst doing very little to counter it.

I know, I know, we're all biased. Well, everyone used to (probably still do) hate the Jews, but the Jews just invented, discovered, wrote and composed until no one could ignore them. If it weren't for oil and bombs, Islam would be very easy to ignore.

That about 20% of the Nobel laureates are Jews is a statement touted by the Zionist and parroted by its sympathisers such as the Christian Zionist and the lunatic fringe Christian sects that speak of a future rule by 'God' with Jerusalem being the capital of the world.

The fact is that Israel has only 8 nobel laureates. The remaining supposedly 'Jewsish' Nobel laureates are spread among the secular countries of USA, UK, Germany and some other countries.

No theocratic country like Israel and the mainly Islamic countries is ever going to excel in the sciences or achieve social progress because superstition and mindless irrationality stands in the way of scientific thinking.

(A distiction has to be made between Judaism and Zionism)

http://wake-up-america.net/ISRAEL-%20A%20THEOCRATIC%20RACIST%20STATE.htm
http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/differencejudzion.html

"Australia, where indigenous peoples, by and large, live in a state of institutionalised disadvantage"

this is a common misconception - the reality is that no other minority group receives so much support from the public purse, nor is given so much opportunity. unfortunately in general it is wasted, with the receipients not appreciating what is being offered, instead flouting civilised laws, and then complaining about the aforementioned "institutionalised disadvantage".

indigenous australians have some of the worst living conditions and health standards in the developed world, despite receiving so much. instead of blaming others, or wanting an apology for past attrocities which can never be undone, they should work themselves out of the slum they have created for themselves.

Philip: Of course, and I'm not arguing for Israel, Zionism or the Jewish religion (or any religion for that matter!). I'm merely pointing out that one cultural group is disproportionately high on the achievement list. Interestingly, although these guys are part of the broader secular Western nations within which they exist, they still outperform other people within such nations of different background, perhaps because of a subset of other cultural traits peculiar to the subset of (Western) Jewish culture.

It's surprising how much ignorance is out there - not to mention mispelling, misunderstanding and sometimes mad views.

I didn't manage to work through all the entries but was struck by the person who recently spelled Pa as Par, and mentioned a female chief at Gate Pa, Tauranga, who helped the wounded of both sides - but she wasn't a chief as he claimed!

There's talk of the Waitangi Treaty - but no mention of the unpublished version devised by NSW Governor George Gipps. It is different to the English and Maori versions signed by chiefs at the Bay of Islands. It has never been considered in all the debate over this contentious issue.

NZ history is far more complex than armchair historians, or newcomers like Irfan could possibly realise. Maori were supersticious people for whom weather and natural phenomenon played a vital part. Their's was a culture still poorly known today.

Like Australia's Aboriginal people, Maori have proved to be extremely forgiving about colonialism. It says much about their quiet wisdom, that this is so.

“I don't believe it's any co-incidence that of the top twenty nations on that list, only one (Japan) is not Western. Of course, individuals do their own thing, but some cultures are more conducive to producing great individuals than others due to an over-arching worldview that informs such individuals” (by shorbe, 19 Apr-2007). Appreciating this information could notice, that originating from different countries and systems, the Jews - Nobel laureates might hardly be a living belonging of a homogenous culture: as clear AND from Australian media most recently deliberating Einstein’s possibilities to gain asylum in Australia nowadays, a local Jewish Australian would barely pretend on this world prize in the nearest future.

“Maybe this is why George W Bush is making such a mess of things in Iraq, without the necessary knowledge, he's relying too much on his own special God whispering in his ear “(by bushbred, 19 April 2007 4:02:44 PM) – so , what sort of history does Iraq present?

Maybe, it’s handy to recall British map-exercising while all three young Saudi princes were given their kingdoms at the time. Surely, presidential advisers know this according-to-a-recent-view-backwards-perspective historical colonial nonsense.

Holy smoke, Batman, what was that last post all about!

I thought this was a post about NZ and Dear old Irfan!

For those not following a run of discussion the participants' quotes had been included into a next-to-a-last post, Ian Mac.

Nothing occurred in vacuum, especially, if mishmash was being creating by the loyal to local-London-based-royals subjects pretending on absolute biological superiority and logically following it, world hegemony in Iraq, NZ, Australia and wherever.

MichaelK,

If you want to continue a different discussion, why don't you start a new thread?

This is supposed to be a post about NZ, Maori, and Irfan the Muslim newcomer to those shores.

I can't see Zionism and all the other furphies recently raised in this post as contributing to the topic.

Using a tiny bit of intellectual steering, can we all swing this post back on course?

Ian Mak,

Also Israelis -and the Jews- still surely arrive in Australia, I found no "Zionist reference" in this discussion, no even a slight shadow of concern at institutional Anti-Semitism preventing them from mainstream employment in Australia but “family business”. Please, do not point at Coles-Myers (ho,ho,ho), Gen. John Monash and Sir Nossac: even the most oppressive regimes, one of Hitler’s among was, have got their ready-to-herald-equity show-case men.

Following up a notion of “This is supposed to be a post about NZ, Maori, and Irfan the Muslim newcomer to those shores”, one could say logic demonstrated in an article stipulates assumption that absorbing as much Maori of NZ into Australia as possible will improve local “multiculturalism” dramatically.

The question remains, what would then happen to NZ, of which a lax immigration law already contributed to creating Muslim enclaves around a country – and importing them to Australia in increasing numbers prior to known changes in dole payments Kiwis enjoyed on arrival on Down Under ’s shores imminently?

MichaelK,

I was struck, during a visit to Auckland in the last couple of years, to find the CBD at lunchtime was populated by Indo-Chinese. I couldn't spot a European or Maori face anywhere.

Whether or not there are Muslim enclaves also in NZ I do not know, nor whether those folk are exported to Australia. Irfan, if he is still in NZ, will be finding the experience bewildering. His children's children may gain a glimmer of that nation's cultural mix.

My sympathies lie eventually with the Maori people who have shown endless forgiveness first to European ways, and now to the effects of globalisation and the influx of refugees. As I said before, this says much about the spirit of the Maori people and their forgiving nature.