top of page

Subscribe Form

Thanks for submitting!

Search

DON BRASH: THE NEW HISTORY CURRICULUM? IT’S CRAP



I’ve just read a book entitled New Zealand’s History Curriculum: Education or Indoctrination? It makes it clear that Goebbels would have been proud of the new curriculum!


When the Government decided that New Zealand school children should learn something of our history, I was delighted. All citizens should have at least some knowledge of where we have come from, and the forces which have moulded us. And too few of us do in fact know much of our history. I myself majored in History at the University of Canterbury, but can’t recall doing a single course on New Zealand history, at primary school, secondary school, or university.


But what New Zealand’s History Curriculum: Education or Indoctrination proves beyond a shadow of a doubt is that what the current Government has created is a curriculum which is almost unbelievably distorted – indeed, mischievously so.


In the new curriculum, the impression which our children will be given is that Maori were the first inhabitants of New Zealand, that they lived more or less peacefully together until nasty British colonists arrived, that the Treaty of Waitangi created a partnership between the Maori people and the British Crown which successive New Zealand governments have violated, that British troops committed some ghastly atrocities on innocent and unarmed Maori women and children, and that taken as a whole the arrival of European colonists was a huge disadvantage to the Maori people.


I am myself a bit uncertain about whether Maori were the first humans to arrive in New Zealand but for me it doesn’t matter. Even if Maori were the first to arrive – and I’m inclined to believe that myself, despite some evidence to the contrary – Maori are not in any meaningful sense “indigenous”. The word “indigenous” means “native to an area, since time immemorial”, as the Australian Aborigines are indigenous to Australia. But of course Maori themselves talk of arriving in New Zealand on canoes, with their spirits departing at death to their original home in Hawaiki.


Moreover, as the Treaty promised, all New Zealanders, no matter when they arrived, have the same “rights and privileges”, with those New Zealanders who have one or more Maori ancestors having the same rights as a recently naturalized person from China.


The new History curriculum will indoctrinate our children with a huge number of blatant and dangerous falsehoods. One is the impression that prior to 1840 Maori society was trucking along quite nicely, with scarcely a mention of the Musket Wars and their colossal loss of life – some estimates have the loss of Maori life in the Musket Wars just prior to the signing of the Treaty as more than double the loss of life by New Zealand in all wars from 1840 to the present day.


Another is the idea that the arrival of colonists was to the huge disadvantage of Maori. One of the key themes of the curriculum is that “Maori history is the foundational and continuous history of Aotearoa New Zealand”, downplaying the many tributaries which have created modern New Zealand. The curriculum asserts, quite incorrectly, that “Aotearoa” was the original name of the country, despite early Maori having no concept of a nation state and the word not being used in the Treaty, or indeed in the early Declaration of Independence. And the implication of a lot of the text of the curriculum is that the arrival of British colonists was to the huge disadvantage of early Maori – and that is frankly ridiculous: the arrival of the colonists brought the rule of law (thus putting an end of inter-tribal warfare), written language, the wheel, new animals like horses, cattle and sheep, an end to slavery and cannibalism, and more. (Indeed, reciting this list brings to mind the Monty Python skit which asks ‘But what did the Romans ever do for us?’)


The book also notes that, in its determination to play up all things Maori, the curriculum has some quite extraordinary omissions: neither Abel Tasman nor James Cook get mentioned, there is very little about the economic development of the country, nothing about the huge development of the so-called Maori economy, nothing about some of the major events of the last 100 years (such as the influenza epidemic of 1918-19, the 1931 earthquake, the Christchurch earthquakes of 2010-11), and nothing about some of the great New Zealanders of the past, such as George Grey, Richard John Seddon, David Lange, and Ed Hillary.


The book is a must read for all History teachers, and indeed for all those interested in understanding our history. It was written by Roger Childs, himself a teacher of History, Social Studies and Geography for some 40 years. It’s very easy to read, and is available from Paper Plus and independent bookshops, or direct from the publisher, www.trosspublishing.co.nz for $35.


Don Brash

19 February 2023


5,793 views146 comments

146 Comments


Brady Waddington
Brady Waddington
Feb 25, 2023

Might I suggest further reading on the subject matte: “The Treaty of Waitangi” -Claudia Orange; “Making People’s” - James Bellich; “The English Text of the Treaty of Waitangi” -Ned Fletcher. Too much heat and little light in this conversation!

Like
Replying to

That is asking Don to consider a more balanced view. The reason the history curriculum glosses over some of the more unsavoury aspects of our past, is because there are opinions like many presented here that are only critical, or worse derogatory towards Māori and their customs e.g Māori were not indigenous, were cannibals, stone age primitives and ruled by malevolent spirits. You could teach that same history about Europeans in the distant past, but there are more important topics to focus on.

Like

Will Luxon have the guts to undo this neo-Marxian nonsense? Or will he simply insert the butt plug enroute to china like his mentor did?

Like
dewhurst987
dewhurst987
Feb 25, 2023
Replying to

Here is your answer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDmbVTjC7wU&t=1s

Like

To Octavian Augustus

"The original example I gave was the popularly accepted post-WW2 view (i.e. the fundamentally Jewish view) of Nazism and of WW2 in general."


"The idea that the Nazis were irredeemably wicked, and absolutely evil in every and all respects without exception, while the Jews are absolutely good and perfect in every and all respects without exception, is completely laughable, ahistorical and totally implausible if the idea is given even 5 minutes of serious reflection. But the same reductivism is true in the narrative of "US/NATO good" while "Russia/China/Iran bad" currently prominent. These claims don't have to be based on anything objective: they serve a purpose by painting both history and the present in broad brushes without any…


Like
Replying to

It seems to me that politically ambitious people who want authority and power over the rest of us have to promote fear of some "enemies" they say they are protecting us from. These omnipotent moral busybodies wish to be perceived as the alphas in our society who we need to provide for and protect us even though they cannot and do not. These people want us to regard them as Gods or parent figures so that we will be dependent upon and obedient to them. Hitler and his fascist cronies probably believed that their decisions and actions were "for the common good" of the German people and that the discrimination, persecution, enslavement and murder of innocent people was justified and desirable "for the…

Like

maic399
maic399
Feb 21, 2023

Since the politicians (so far) seem unwilling or unable to stop this nonsense it's

up to parents to take a vigilant attitude towards the curriculum content that their children are exposed to.

Yes I know they are busy and dead tired at the end of the day but who else is going to do it?

I know we have some commentators (e.g. Don, Muriel) raising the issues and leading the charge but they need active and vocal support from parents.

Readers who follow political issues in the United States will have read about or viewed Virginia parents taking on their Education Boards who have allowed left wing ideology to infiltrate their children's schools.

We need education reform to stop this…


Like

My youngest child is still to pass through secondary school. My question is, how can I prevent or drastically limit her exposure to this awful curriculum?

Like
Aaron Shanahan
Aaron Shanahan
Feb 24, 2023
Replying to

That common sense answer you've offered is the truth. Good literature, personal choice and responsibility, and critical independant thought are paramount in the shaping of a child's life, and the eventual outcome. And, like you say, talk with your kids, like an adult.

I've a 14 year old son, not to academic, but my God can he work. Practical, like me, and imbued with common sense, like me. Even at 14, he's got it all figured out, and it isn't pipe dreams. It's reality.

The real crime here is the removal of the charter school system that deal in academic success, and can tailor it to fit the student.

It's not easy. At my son's age, they are bombarded wit…


Like
bottom of page