Opinion: Walking down to AUT on Friday I stopped by the statue on Symonds Street, which thousands of us have walked past each day for a very long time. Like many things in our lives it becomes part of the background, unheeded but always present. We very seldom stop to notice or think. Not sure why I did on this occasion but it got me thinking.
The statue inscription says:
“In memory of the brave men belonging to the Imperial and Colonial Forces and the friendly Maoris who gave their lives for the country during the New Zealand Wars 1845-1872. Through war they won the peace we know.”
There are so many reasons to be offended or angered by this. I will not list them but simply note that, certainly without explanation as to context and correction as to intent and meaning, it does not belong in our community. Maybe John Key could pay for its removal if only to protect his expressed view that our colonial period was peaceful.
The same day I saw a wryly amusing cartoon which featured Goldilocks and some porridge plates while noting that our childhood stories often made her the heroine while invading someone else’s property but escaping unscathed with a full tummy and a good sleep. Colonialism in action.
The female figure admiring the offensive inscription in the statue does not appear to be a traditional version of Goldilocks but maybe she is. Anyway, I reviewed my understanding of the fable and found that the original story from the 1830s had the bears setting fire to Goldilocks, then impaling her on the church steeple. Obviously someone drew the awkward colonial comparison and adjusted the outcome to avoid any copycat reactions from indigenous populations.
Anyway, I digress. The point I want to make is about the final idea of the statue inscription that peace was, is, or can be, “won” by war. This has always been, and remains, a false idea.
Peace, after all, is really defined by the absence of war. It is not the same thing as justice or equity. Justice and equity are goals to which people aspire and which other people aim to deny, or at least dispute. We may aim to achieve justice and equity as we understand them by peaceful means, but there are any number of examples of people being prepared to sacrifice peace to reach those goals.
War is simply the (typically government) organised application of violence, far from always in pursuit of those twin human goals. Often far from it no matter what the slogans of the war mongers may say.
A banner from my own days of student activism on anti-war matters stated: “Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.” I think that is right. War may achieve or “win” many things, but peace is not one of them. Peace is won by what can be built together not by what can be destroyed together. Most often war only wins control of one group of people by another, and temporary control at that.
Here we are back at the offensive statue. That recognition I had of the assumptions, practices and normality of life which we don’t question much until it strikes us. And when it becomes inconvenient or unpopular to question we park it, if we can. Of course those on the receiving end of inequity or injustice cannot do that so easily, though many do reach forms of accomodation, acceptance and adjustment. That is the nature of colonial, class or caste systems and how they survive.
When there is a reaction, a visceral response to inequity or injustice, it very often springs from the young, as much as from the oppressed. From the educated as much as from the excluded. From those with resources as much as from those without. This is surprising, even shocking, for the privileged. It is especially dangerous when it effectively links with the excluded and denied. We see it often enough in modern history. The privileged often respond excessively. Seek to blame “outsiders” or link to those who instil fear. We may be entering one of those periods, where previously strong institutions become exposed for their real interests and their weaknesses. Here and in other “western” countries. (An odd phrase itself if one understands the world as a globe and observes where such countries are located on it.)
How we handle such discontent, rebellion, call it what you will, is what will determine what is written on the monuments of the future. I would like to think it will not be exclusive, racist, violence-driven triumphalism, but something more along the lines of “through peace and activism they won the equity and justice we know”.
To say that ‘peace is not won by war’ is simplistic activist rubbish. If we had not fought the nazis they would have taken over Europe. Only by waging war did we achieve peace. Sometimes you have to fight.
And what about the vindictiveness of the victors of WW I which set the tortured conditions that made Hitler’s extremism welcome?
All so true. And, Keeping the Peace is achieved by Continuing the War!!
Rob, thank you for this important statement. We need constant reminding and your review is perfectly timed.
And when one over another does occur it is necessary for acknowledgement, reconciliation – by both sides; compensation, resititution to the extent that is feasible, possible and affordable.
Leaving a people oppressed, displaced; devoid of dignity, opportunity, the fundamental elements, rights to achieve happiness, or to share equitably in prosperity to the extent possible is a most unwise proposition. A wise conquerer has respect and empathy for the conquered, facilitates a voluntary stay and integrate versus relocate decision and tries to restore balance for mutual benefit.
Great observations Rob, thanks
Keep the peace by waging and continuing war? Presumably those making such comments were never in war zones! I nursed in the Vietnam War; later studied the military industrial complex [BA] and dynamics of arms races [MA in UK]. I appreciate Rob’s writing but must challenge the narrow definition of peace offered: ‘Peace is defined by the absence of war. It is not the same thing as justice or equity.’ With Israel and Palestine as an example, let’s consider a more nuanced view. Could Palestine be considered at ‘peace’ between outbreaks of ‘war’ over the past 70 years of oppression? Peace researcher John Galtung would argue, not. Structural violence – eg, apartheid policy and practice – interacts closely with direct violence, which holds it in place from above, while resistance arises from below. Peace researchers in UNESCO’s 1980 Report on Disarmament Education argue it cannot be limited to disarmament initiatives and data on weapons but should include ‘the root causes of individual and collective violence and causes of tensions, crises, disputes and conflicts…’ as well as factors underlying arms production; social, political, economic and cultural repercussions of arms races; impacts on human rights, development and international law.
A useful comparison is WHO’s (World Health Organisation) redefinition of ‘health’ since 1948 to ‘a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and NOT merely the absence of disease or infirmity.’
And the ending of Hitler’s Germany gave great power to the United States, who saw great advantage of taking over resources in too many countries to name and even today, they have hundreds of military bases around the world to ensure their hegemony remains. According to an article published for the Bolivian Information Agency (Agencia Boliviana de Información, ABI), “gives account of a new plan of the United States to carry out the recolonization of Latin America.”
This new interventionist plan, according to the press agency, is aimed at consolidating the rupture of the political party Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) and creating an “outsider” candidate for the 2025 elections, with the aim of seizing natural resources such as lithium and rare earths containing significant resources….
FYI, according to Google.com: USA has 750+ military bases around the world in 80 countries. Russia has 21 outside of Russia and China 1 outside of China. Who are the war mongers?
Behind the support for militarism is the belief that security is best ensured by our ability to murder and destroy. This is an element of primitivism that curses the human race, and needs to follow our belief in slavery, male dominance, cultural and racial prejudice, marginalisation of minorities and many other curses of mankind which are being slowly addressed over the last few centuries.
It is exciting to have Rob Campbell’s voice regularly raising the fundamental issues of equity and justice. It would be good if the mostly excellent comments here led to a wider discussion in the community. The irony is we have just commemorated Anzac Day, an annual reinforcement of the myth that people gave their lives freely in war. We hear the sabres rattling again now urging New Zealand to join AUKUS and even NATO.