
Pākehā author Elizabeth Cook has learned that people like her need to see and understand that they are white.
I was born in 1956 in Whangārei into a white, middle-class family. This is just a fact, not a negative.
My father milked cows in the morning by hand before he went off to his day job, where he eventually became the circulation manager at the Northern Advocate newspaper. My mother was a stay-at-home mum who dreamed of being an artist. Despite a lack of support from my father, she went on to produce a body of work in ceramics and painting.
Here’s a fact which does include a negative: When I look back at growing up in Whangārei, my childhood experiences were of ”white” life alongside pepper-potted Māori neighbours with whom my family had little meaningful interaction.
My family origins, community culture and identity were dominated by English culture, and we never interacted with te ao Māori. The Māori and Pākehā worlds slid past each other and existed apart.
Despite this, I somehow, all on my own, understood te reo Māori to be the language of this land. But there were no learning opportunities available to me at school or in the community at that time.

Elizabeth on her way to graduate in December 2010 with an undergraduate degree in Te Reo Māori and Cultural Studies, aged 54. (Photo supplied)
As I progressed through life, I went to university to get a degree and learn te reo Māori. I read New Zealand history by historians such as Vincent O’Malley, Alan Ward, Ranginui Walker and Tony Simpson. I discovered the writing of Ani Mikaere and Moana Jackson.
I slowly became aware that colonial oppression doesn’t belong only to the past. On the contrary, I see how Aotearoa remains colonial to this day, with white power structures ruling Māori, and many Pākehā still thinking they have every right to dominate.
I became motivated to find the underlying causes for why white people in Aotearoa have normalised, and are oblivious to, their daily practices of oppressing Māori. My curiosity set me off on a five-year course of study to uncover why some white people behave and think the way they do.
Along the way, I discovered that the idea of Māori being the boss in their own land challenges many white people. Even referring to Aotearoa as “Māori land” stirs fear and anger. It was this fear, or arrogance, or both, that I really wanted to dig into.
I wrote my book, Unsettled Bliss, out of a conviction that we white settlers need to be aware that our colonising actions are not something that belongs to the past.
Colonisation is happening now, and the reason we don’t know much about it, or find it hard to see and name it, is simply because it’s not being done to us.
Māori have been trying to work with us for 190 years, and in return, we have constantly behaved like dismissive, violent, and untrustworthy bullies who, as the dominant white voting bloc, elect governments who are dismissive, violent and untrustworthy bullies.
Rather than being defensive about these descriptive words, white people need to understand the practices these words refer to, and take responsibility for changing this behaviour.
As one example, the current government has “decommissioned” (sacked, to use normal language) the kaupapa Māori organisation I worked for as a policy and reporting advisor.
For 11 years, Te Pūtahitanga o Te Waipounamu supported people to realise their aspirations and dreams with new businesses, job creation, healing from trauma, and community and home gardens for whānau. We provided opportunities to build life skills for people of all ages with specific events for māmā and pēpi, rangatahi, wāhine, tāne, and kaumātua. This improved whānau health, contributed to the uptake of further education, and gave people hope through connections and partnership to help them make changes in their lives. The organisation was a shining example of whānau-centred development and delivery.
That’s gone now. So here now in 2025, I find myself looking for work, competing with hundreds of others who’ve also lost their jobs.
Through both writing my book and the personal experience of losing my job, I’ve discovered that it’s naive to think the government and related power structures are necessarily here “for the people”. It’s a lesson Māori have already learned many times, but one that many people like me are still taking on board.
The research that went into this book was liberating. I discovered that whiteness is a viewpoint, and I became more aware of history as seen from a Māori point of view.
My experience throughout my childhood and teenage years was that Māori and “us” rarely intermingled. The two worlds were kept separate by non-Māori who lacked respect for Māori and were reluctant to understand, and engage with, Māori society.
But whiteness goes further than separation. It invents sub-persons and locates them as the “other”. The sub-person is not equal and is not included in the “we” of everyday life. Those outside the “we” are “them”. “They” are repudiated, marginalised, dismissed, ostracised and persecuted.
For example, Pākehā aren’t persistently portrayed as a frightening, unmanageable “other” by media and politicians. These same institutions relentlessly focus on “gangs”, three-quarters of whom are Māori, to feed white public hysteria.
Fear-mongering about Māori gangs preys on susceptible people, making them fearful and fuelling racism. It diverts attention away from the way wealth accumulation distorts the economy, and avoids focus on the root causes of poverty, where very wealthy individuals pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes compared to people on the lowest incomes.
Pākehā are far less likely to frame their own digressions from the law as representative profiles of harm and fear for other communities to worry about. Pākehā can be bankrupt numerous times and never pay people for completed work. They can commit “white-collar” fraud that may cause others to lose their home, their marriage, suffer depression, lose their businesses, and, in some cases, commit suicide. But at no point are these aberrations gathered into a fear-stoking narrative about a terrifying Pākehā “other”.
Rather, whiteness lays claim to being the universal and natural way of being, and many white people assume that whiteness is the best and most acceptable way to be in the world.
As a result, we non-Māori fail to understand how our daily practices perpetuate racism and poverty. We tend to think Māori are responsible for their own problems and poverty.
But history tells a different story. Until vast tracts of Māori land were confiscated, Māori had a firm economic footing on their own land. Māori were successful agricultural and horticultural farmers and traders, owning flour mills, printing presses and ships that traded as far afield as Australia.
Pākehā avoid facing up to the truth that they were instrumental in changing this for the worse.
Pākehā have yet to recognise that our dominant role remains obstructive to Māori regaining that self-reliance. Māori, of course, want to make decisions without needing white approval and permission, but that desire can never be fully realised while white systems and institutions retain ultimate control.
The existence of successful independent Māori entities within the community has yet to be seen by white people as a non-threatening normality, rather than an aberration they’re entitled to pass judgment on.
Māori participation in governing Aotearoa threatens those who view such power-sharing as “privileging” Māori. These Pākehā — along with some new settlers in Aotearoa — have difficulty understanding that sharing power with Māori honours the original agreement (Te Tiriti) that gave settlers permission to enter Aotearoa.
They maintain that the sovereignty of the Crown in Aotearoa is indivisible — but this perception of sovereignty as a singular indivisible structure is essentially a white claim of their dominance as rightful, with no possibility of alternatives.
For those who take whiteness for granted as unnoticed and unremarkable, such a critique of whiteness comes as a surprise.
In Aotearoa, white people tend to distance themselves from Māori, the actual victims of whiteness, and blame them for their own suffering. This refusal to come to terms with the cruelty of whiteness is often justified by legalism.
Whiteness focuses on “rights” and rule-following, as we have seen in the punishment of Te Pāti Māori MPs. The usual excuse for our most oppressive public acts is that they are necessary and required by law. Adhering to legalism becomes more important than considering different pathways that avoid cruelty and prioritise the public good. Legalism is a majority tyranny where white majority opinion and power obliterates Māori voices.
Any change that benefits Māori tends to take the form of deceptive tokenism that can be reversed at any time. For example, an assessment of Waitangi Tribunal settlements shows that the state often stalls full settlement for years after the Tribunal has completed the claim. The Tribunal is under-resourced, and there’s an enormous backlog of claims yet to be dealt with while social and environmental harm continues.
Challenging injustices in Aotearoa is about confronting the cruelties within such procedures.
Most Pākehā don’t comprehend how Māori experience marginalisation. Nor do they understand the impact on Māori of not having governance over issues that affect them.
And yet many white people in Aotearoa do things like wear and gift pounamu. They use karakia and waiata. They celebrate Matariki. Such “biculturalism” is performative and doesn’t include sharing power and resources with Māori, where Māori have autonomy over themselves.
The end of white domination in their own country is what many Māori are seeking.

Elizabeth’s book is published by Mary Egan Publishing.
Just as Algeria belongs to Algerians not the French, and Eire (and Northern Ireland) belong to the Irish not the English, Aotearoa is a Māori place within which all non-Māori have made their home. The difference between Aotearoa and both Eire and Algeria is that Māori are now a minority.
The Treaty Māori made with white settlers was for co-existence, a social and economic relationship, and an exercise of governance and responsibility alongside each other. Yet the Pākehā majority maintains a white English-speaking nation and expects all others to assimilate into their English-speaking Anglo-whiteness.
If the lives of Māori are to improve, non-Māori need to fundamentally alter their assumptions and daily practices to recognise the fact that Aotearoa is a Māori place. To be blunt, there is no “Māori problem”. Rather, there is a “white people problem”.
Until white people recognise and name the problem for what it is, it will remain invisible and accepted.
However, many Pākehā voters are part of the white majority bloc that obstructs any Crown initiatives to honour Māori and follow up on Te Tiriti responsibilities. In 2023, this white voting bloc elected an openly anti-Māori coalition. We now have a government that is the epitome of whiteness.
Many people are comfortable within whiteness and have no vested interest in removing racism, poverty and prisons. They endow themselves with righteousness in contrast to the criminality they project onto Māori and those who are poor.
Acting without cruelty in the world today would mean that non-Māori acknowledge te ao Māori and accept differences. The world around us is a negotiated space that is always changing for better or for worse.
If Pākehā people want something different, or want an end to the “Māori problem”, it’s our white-centric social and economic structures that must change, and the way we view the world.
We must be constantly aware of the injustices experienced by those on the receiving end of our practices. There is no time or place for complacency.
Dr Elizabeth Ann Cook is a sociologist, artist and educator, based in Ōtautahi. She spent decades working in music, theatre, and education before turning her attention to the politics of identity, power and language. Her new book Unsettled Bliss is published by Mary Egan Publishing (RRP: $40).
Thank you for reading E-Tangata. If you like our focus on Māori and Pasifika stories, interviews, and commentary, we need your help. Our content takes skill, long hours and hard work. But we're a small team and not-for-profit, so we need the support of our readers to keep going.
If you support our kaupapa and want to see us continue, please consider making a one-off donation or contributing $5 or $10 a month.
I read Elizabeth Cook’s essay with interest, but nowhere does she acknowledge the integration of ‘white’ and ‘brown’ people which is becoming increasingly common. I am of the same generation and it gives me enormous pleasure to hear my mokopuna use te reo in their everyday speech and to know that they are learning of the colonialism of Aotearoa. (And this despite the current government’s efforts to slow it down .) I learned almost nothing, but knew about the Tolpuddle Martyrs and other English history.
One of my brothers married a Māori woman whose mother was half- white; some of their children – although not all – are well-versed in te ao Māori. Some have gone on to marry ‘brown’ people themselves. Another (white) granddaughter studied te reo at secondary school, gaining Excellence at Level 3, and has given speeches in fluent reo. In fact, she has spurred me on to learn te reo myself, which is giving me a deeper understanding of the language and the culture. But I am sometimes made to feel guilty for doing this! Not sure why – I have no intention of appropriating or flaunting it.
Elizabeth your essay was thought-provoking but sees everything in black and white (forgive the expression). We have been steadily working towards a more integrated society, but have a long long way to go and it has come to a hiccup with our current flagrantly anti-Māori government.
Well-put. I now think I know what Elizabeth Cook was trying to get across, but to put it in the terms she used, didn’t work in getting her point across.
The way to necessary change is to not draw attention back to ourselves as a response to being challenged. This is called white fragility and is as useless as guilt. If we focus on the message of my article and my book, that is about the obstacles that participation in whiteness causes for Māori, that is where our actions for change are required. There is no shortcut that avoids being uncomfortable.
I wonder if what we have is a class problem.
When I arrived in the UK from New Zealand, many years ago, I was struck by the bad-news headlines that in NZ I had seen associated with Māori, too many times to mention. Except that they weren’t, of course, about Māori – they were about people in poor or poorer circumstances. Otherwise, the statistics were pretty much all the same – e.g. there are parts of Glasgow where mean male life expectancy is less than that for India as a whole. And this wasn’t at all about ethnicity; in that sense, Scotland is pretty monocultural, and people of colour are not over-represented in the prison system
My other view is that human societies have always struggled to know what to do with ‘the poor’, and if the poor are further marked out by ethnicity, language or religion – often the case in England – it gets more complicated again. Now, while the *causes* of poverty for Māori and Pasifika are hardly the same as they are for people in the UK, the *consequences* are pretty similar.
Further: the first Prime Minister of Trinidad & Tobago, Eric Williams, wrote succinctly in Capitalism and Slavery (1944): “Slavery was not born of racism; rather, racism was the consequence of slavery.” For “slavery”, substitute the word, “poverty”, and you get the idea.
what _we_ – three million unwanted uninvited unconstitutionally white settles unaccountable still here *are* the problem.
the aim to *perfect* colonisation or to *end* it.
white zelaand has chosen to end colonisation by possums, rats, stoats, weasels, and even cats.
white zelaand has chosen to end colonisation by gorse, broom, moths & myrtle rust.
we all know the single biggest threat to Aotearoa’s fauna, flora, and Indigenous Peoples for the last two centuries haw been colonisation by white settlors.
see that and the solution is obvious
is the aim to *perfect* colonisation or to *end* it.
Regretful it is that Geoff fisher missed the points that Cook reveals.
Sad really.
In an ironic way Fisher’s misunderstanding encapsulates the ‘pākehā people problem’. In other words, Fisher’s opinion demonstrates not only his (& by extention, păkehā) misunderstanding but his INABILITY to understand. He states, correctly, “colonialism” (as a cause) and then, ironically, proceeds to talk in what is clearly a defensive mode of the core factors that constitue colonialism. (Head scratching moment!)
I see Fisher means well… but They (sic) all do.
(Political Sociologist, Scholar, Formerly Academic)
DR Baksh, I am so glad you understood my points. I seek engagement with the ideas rather than defensiveness where white people always draw the argument back to themselves. Do Māori feel listened to? Deep listening and inclusion (on their Māori terms) is not for white people to focus on their wee hurt selves.
I cannot make sense out of any that. What are you claiming that I am unable to understand? How can you infer “Pakeha opinion” by “extention” (sic) from my own opinion? What is “defensive” about a critical commentary on colonialism? Dr Baksh, please explain yourself.
I could not disagree more with Catherine Cook. There is no ‘Māori problem’, and there is no ‘white people problem’ in Aotearoa. There is a colonialism problem (and a rangatiratanga solution). Let’s be blunt. David Seymour and Winston Peters are both Maori. They are also unashamedly and vehemently colonialist. Maori and Pakeha are found on both sides of this struggle, and that has been the case since the nineteenth century wars of resistance. The colonialists were only able to secure victory in the wars because they had the passive or active support of some Maori hapu. Some Pakeha sympathized with the Maori resistance and some (admittedly a very few) Pakeha had their land confiscated in the raupatu, along with their Maori brethren. More recently hundreds of thousands of Pakeha supported the Toitu te Tiriti movement. The future of Aotearoa is of a people united in Te Whakaminenga under rangatiratanga. There can be no place for colonialism or any its institutions, but there must and will be a place for Pakeha. Making colonialism, rangatiratanga, mana motuhake and kotahitanga into a race issue is a sure fire way to obstruct and divert our current rapid progress towards the full restoration of rangatiratanga.
i cannot suggest I understand the full complexities of this issue because I do not face oppression, shaming, gaslighting, devaluing and public denigrating for who I am, in my own home. Mentioning Seymour and Winston are Maori feels like a pointless distraction to the reaL issue – and claiming it is not a race issue when clearly it is – debating whether we are pakeha, white, NZ European colonialists and claiming equity blah blah is not coming from Maori it is just a way to avoid asking the question every person, every day and our government should be asking Maori – “what can I/we do to allow Māori an equal voice at every table?” But this will only come when we recognise the enormous value Maori viewpoint offers all of us, our environment, our national pride. I have never felt or seen Maori suggest there is no room for Pakeha – they just ask for the partnership and agency we signed up for and would benefit from honouring
Race has clearly been an issue for Aotearoa since the late eighteenth century, but on the whole it has been an issue the British colonialists and not so much for Maori. That remains the case. So you say “the real issue” is “what can I/we do to allow Māori an equal voice at every table?”. I would be interested to know how you answer your own question. Or don’t you see the need for an answer? Is there comfort in just raising the question?
the idea of an “equal voice” is obscene.
show me in the text of the colonial, doctrine of discovery era treaty & declaration, written by a couple of British Naval offices, where **any voice other than Māori” or “any land ownership other than Māori” is even considered. You can’t, because it’s not even there in the plain meaning of the Victoria ear English text!
now show me from Tikanga Māori where anything like that is even possible. Again you cannot.
finally, explain how what we have today is in any way better for tangata whenua than Māori had listed to their own majority – and not the missionaries – and treated Hobson’s party the same as du Fresne, and HMS Herald the same as SS Boyd.
I agree with Geoff. ‘Race’ discourse (e.g. this language of “whiteness”) leads us all away from the relational potential of Te Tiriti, and ACT refers to ‘race’ and ‘races’ regularly because they know this. Whiteness discourse is imported, largely from the USA where it is typically used in relation to struggles not directly related to Indigenous peoples. A consideration of the differences between ‘being Pakeha’ and ‘being white’ is a useful exercise; the former leads towards relational thinking, the latter towards anxiety, division, rage, stuckness, “I can’t help being white”, and other unhelpful reactions. I think Geoff’s points are all well made.
Whiteness is not a ‘race’ discourse. First, because there is no such thing as ‘race’. However, we are forced to talk about it because the word is either inappropriately used (Seymour et al) or it underpins eugenic thinking based on the Great Chain of Being (many NZers believe they are superior to Māori). Second, whiteness is about white supremacy power structure (Charles Mills). Is that not what this government is? All white settler governments in Anglo-dominant colonised countries are white supremist such as NZ, Aussie, Canada… Not to mention French etc colonies… white people hate confronting their whiteness because it means being uncomfortable. There is dirty work to do examining our vices(Judith Shklar). Being Tangata Tiriti is not a nice wee relationship with long suffering and contining to be trashed Māori. And we do not need a particular population demographic assuming they can dictate how it should be!
If there is “no such thing as race” and whiteness is not about race but about “white supremacy power structure” then we are using the word “white” as a political tag, perhaps rather like it was used in reference to the civil war between “whites” and “reds” in post-revolutionary Russia.
So who or what are white people? Presumably the people who support the “white supremacy power structure…white settler government” which is “white supremist (sic)”
But you go on to inform us that “the current government has “decommissioned … the kaupapa Māori organisation I worked for … So here now in 2025, I find myself looking for work..”
So it was the “white settler government” that hired and then fired you. I understand your sense of grievance. But by your own admission you are a “white” person who worked on behalf of the “white supremacy power structure” even though you were working to lessen your “whiteness” (which is probably why you got the sack).
So get over your whiteness. Completely. When you have done that you will have no regrets about having lost your position in the “white supremacy power structure” (which I call “the colonialist regime”, but that is by the way). It makes no sense for you to remain white. It makes no sense for anyone to remain white (that is to say, colonialist). Just get over it.
Aroha mai, it is Elizabeth Cook of course.
Hmm. It sounds like I have I hit a nerve. The ideology of whiteness is a conformity around a white viewpoint. There are many different peoples who vie to be accepted in a white world. I argue that being white and whiteness has to be examined for real change. We must look at our vices not our virtues. Also pākehā (means white people… it is not an ethnicity) need to be humble and not make claims to wiggle out of responsibity for the ongoing obstacles they enact on a daily basis for Māori.
Yes, you did hit a nerve. Gross generalizations usually do.
So, is the term “white trash” a racist or a classist term? I suspect the latter, to be fair, hence my comments above on social class.
And I agree with Geoff Fischer on the points he make,
*made.
Over time, we are seeing the development of a Māori middle class. This will have some interesting consequences.