Cultural double standards

Whenever a social scientist compares a non-western, indigenous population with a western one, the culture of the western population is usually defined as faulty, while the culture of the indigenous population is described positively.

In a Press article entitled "NZ past seen as damaging to men," (Saturday, February 2) concerning a new study by Otago University Professor Alistar Fox, it is suggested that British culture and colonialism are key factors in the violent behaviour of Maori men.

However, rather than just making the point that cultural alienation may be a factor in the violent behaviour of a certain section of the Maori population, and that European culture has often clashed with traditional Maori culture, the author of the study, at least according to the article, seems to suggest there is something wrong with European New Zealand culture per se.

For example, despite the fact that European New Zealand society has had one of the world's lowest white crime rates for over a century, the author of the study argues from New Zealand literature that European New Zealand values such as "a strong work ethic," "self-repression" and a "mistrust of emotions," have prompted white New Zealand males "to engage in a range of transgressive behaviours."

In reality though, the empirical evidence, in the form of very low crime rates, suggest that for violent behaviour at least, "self-repression" among white males may well have been a factor in lowering, rather than increasing serious anti-social behaviours. In fact, it is only in the few decades, as traditional protestant values have started to wane, that anti-social behaviour among white males has started to increase along the lines seen in other western countries like Britain.

Sure, protestant values may not have the same effect on Maori, who had a more open and communal culture, but that isn't to say such values haven't had a positive, civilising effect on European New Zealand males. Imagine if a social scientist said something like: "traditional Maori culture was brutal and collectivist, with little emphasis on personal responsibility or emotional restraint."Such a statement would immediately be regarded as racist and arrogant, yet saying that European New Zealand culture was "repressive" and led to "transgressive behaviours" is seen as perfectly acceptable by most left-liberal whites.

The article then includes some comment from Chief executive of Maori Family Violence Unit He Waka Tapu Daryl Gregory, which though possibly accurate, glosses over the high level of violence that existed in traditional Maori society prior to the arrival of Europeans:

"The process of colonisation was violent and left Maori feeling subservient to the coloniser.

"Seeing themselves as warriors made them feel strong, when in fact Maori men worked in a range of fields, such as gardeners and midwives, he said."

While colonisation was extremely disruptive and may well have had a negative impact on some aspects of Maori society, extensive archaeological evidence indicates high levels of violence were a fact of life in almost all pre-industrial societies, so it is highly unlikely that rates of crime among Maori increased significantly after European laws and customs were established.

Rather than blaming Europeans culture for the problems of a non-European group, social scientists and social workers should be focusing on how Maori can either adapt to European culture, or come up with their own ways of dealing with the challenges of colonisation.

It's totally non-sensical to blame one culture for the behaviour of people who don't come from that culture, but in liberal theory, there always seems to a need for a villain and a victim.