Dunedin public talk: The early Labour Party and anti-Chinese racism

Posted: July 29, 2015 by Admin in Uncategorized

Labour’s latest scapegoating of Chinese people – or people with “Chinese surnames” – is a reminder of the hostility of the early Labour Party for the Chinese and their full-on support for the ‘White New Zealand’ policy.  For instance, immediately following WW1, Labour competed with the Liberal and Reform parties to see who could be most gung-ho for the ‘White New Zealand’ policy and most anti-Chinese (it was a draw!). The White New Zealand policy is one of the dirty secrets of NZ history and its role in that policy is one of the dirty secrets of the Labour Party.  For instance, when Helen Clark apologised for the treatment of the Chinese in New Zealand, she left out any mention of her own party’s role. Come along to this public talk, which focuses on the period immediately following the First World War.  The talk deals with the main political parties and civil society organisations promoting anti-Chinese discrimination, particularly the NZ Labour Party.

Speaker: Dr Philip Ferguson

(Phil’s PhD was on the White New Zealand policy; he subsequently taught at Canterbury University for ten years)

2pm, Saturday, August 1
Otago Room
Clubs and Societies building
84 Albany Street

Advertisements
Comments
  1. daphna says:

    The sordid motives of Labour continue to be exposed.

    The Sunday Star Times today has a letter to the editor from Keith Ng and Tze Ming Mok. They take Rob Salmond, the author of Labour’s ‘Chinese sounding names’ analysis, to task over an opinion piece by him. Salmon in his article on July 19 ‘A place to call home: The Kiwi dream’, implied Keith Ng and Tze Ming Mok considered Labour was well-intentioned. In their letter to the SST they state that is absolutely untrue.

    “We said Phil Twyford knowingly scapegoated Chinese New Zealanders. We described Labour’s strategy as ‘cynical, reckless dog-whistling’. These are not ambiguous statements that could be misinterpreted.

    “Labour’s claim that it did was (in Salmond’s own words) ‘informed speculation’.
    “We think it’s a dodgy leap of logic, which they’ve tried to plaster over with fancy jargon, and this speaks volumes about their intentions.”

  2. Malcolm says:

    Damn, I can’t come. Will be working.

  3. Phil F says:

    Thanks for spreading the word about the meeting. It will be taped, so you can listen to it.

    Also a couple of articles will go up on Redline with the contents of the talk.

    Phil