JOHN RAINE: The Left is Up for Co-Governance – Could this Mean a Future Ethnocracy?

In an Ideal World……

Most New Zealanders want to live in a unified country where all have equal rights under the law, while respecting the cultures and traditions of the many ethnicities that make up our population - over 200 in the 2023 population census.  Of these, the four major groups self-identified as:

·       European – 67.8%

·       Māori – 17.8%

·       Asian – 17.3%

·       Pacific Peoples – 8.9%

(These total more than 100% because of people identifying with more than one ethnicity.)

Because Māori settlers arrived a few centuries before Europeans, and because of our Treaty of Waitangi history, successive governments, particularly since the mid-1970’s, have made huge efforts to right wrongs that were done to Māori in regard to land acquisition, to give special recognition to Māori culture, and to support the regrowth of Te Reo Māori.

So far so good, but what happens when a combination of activism by some Māori and the sustained actions of progressive liberal non-Māori, who perhaps see coloniser guilt appeasement in supporting future co-governance, begin to destabilise our democratic foundations?

On the one hand we have political parties on the left supportive of co-governance in the future, with the inevitable chaos and societal division that would follow. On the other hand, at least Act on the right, and perhaps New Zealand First, want a one-law-for-all democracy.  Act’s position  has been called racist, when in fact the party is not anti-Māori but simply against discriminatory race-based rights under the law.

The Slide Towards a Society Divided by Race

Amy Brooke’s hard-hitting Substack post of September 23^rd 2026 ^“Who have turned New Zealand into a racist country, without our consent?” (https://substack.com/home/post/p-217022721) squarely blames the same successive governments for having allowed democracy in New Zealand to be undermined by those who seek to establish Māori tribal self-government, along with activist members of the judiciary, and increasing economic power being acquired by now extremely wealthy iwi elites.

My recent post (https://www.brashandmitchell.com/post/john-raine-the-indoctrination-must-stop-but-labour-would-double-down) noted how Te Ao Māori continues to be imposed in the public sector, by professional associations, and in education - with parties of the left resisting a refocusing on knowledge basics and away from indoctrination.

Further, Muriel Newman’s NZCPR Newsletter, “Cultural Capture”, of 15^th October 2026 (https://www.nzcpr.com/cultural-capture/) has drawn attention again to the imposition of Te Ao Māori on the operational culture of the New Zealand Army, and the broader issue of Labour/Greens/TPM/TOP supporting a cultural reshaping of New Zealand where Te Ao Māori would be dominant and co-governance would follow.

And in our the publicly funded Transitional Research Fund, MBIE continues to place cultural expectations on researchers. To get a 7/7 “excellent” ranking for a grant application researchers must meet the following criterion:

"Where relevant, there is outstanding recognition of the distinctive research, science and innovation contributions of Māori people, knowledge, and resources, including Mātauranga Māori. Where not relevant, appropriate explanation is excellent."

Lower rankings on this criterion correspond to a lesser engagement with Te Ao Māori. While the words, “where relevant”  are included, researchers must justify not addressing this funding criterion. In many areas of science and engineering, this criterion has no real relevance and a simple “not relevant” response should be all that is needed.

What is the Endpoint of this Social Re-Engineering?

There are strong socialist underpinnings to the decolonisation movement, hence its natural home with Labour/Green/Te Pati Māori/TOP. Note that TOP claims that it is a centrist party that could work with either National or Labour, but Ani O’Brien’s analysis of their policies (https://aniobrien.substack.com/p/could-opportunity-really-work-with-right?) concludes, “ESG, climate change, and Treaty politics are woven throughout all of their platform” and that their natural synergy sits with the left.

It is a truism that socialism delivers society (except for  the governing elite) equality of economic misery in the long term, but a large part of our population still seems to believe that this is the way forward, despite socialism’s repeated dismal history around the world.

The aim of some who are committed to decolonisation of New Zealand is the establishment of an independent sovereign Māori state. Te Pati Māori has gone further. While promoting the notion of kawanatanga (the settler government) and rangatiratanga (the tribal government), they have proposed a Te Tiriti Commission which could:  

• Investigate Crown decisions for Te Tiriti compliance.

• Issue Te Tiriti Compliance Orders that halt executive decisions

• Require the Crown to go to the High Court if it disagrees with an order.

This Commission would effectively provide de facto ultimate governing authority to Māori alone, although its implementation would require the support of governing coalition partners.

In reality, such power would rest with a group of powerful iwi, not a democratically engaged wider Māori population. Moreover, mixing of bloodlines makes definition of race increasingly uncertain for the majority in New Zealand, and, for many with some Māori ancestry, more a political choice than something defined by blood. That alone would leave any racial division of government in New Zealand without a rational basis.

Setting aside the administratively  impossible and economically dire consequences of trying to operate two separate governments under co-governance within a single geographical territory, if a Māori sovereign  state were able to impact the land, water or wider property rights and assets of non-Māori New Zealanders, this outcome would be immediately untenable. 

Moreover, if there were a Te Tiriti Commission with the powers noted above, New Zealand would look increasingly like, for example, the ethnostates of Malaysia (primacy for Islamic Bumiputra Malays)  and Sri Lanka (Sinhala-Buddhist primacy). (Let’s not even think about South Africa.)

Those countries confine to the privileged class access to higher education, public sector employment, and consequential economic advantage. The people are subject to broad coercive laws that suppress minority expression and political participation. Such states are more vulnerable to corruption as the institutional structure of ethnocracies creates conditions that weaken accountability. Politicisation of the judiciary, public service, police, and military is also more likely in an ethnostate, increasing the risk of corruption.

New Zealand has not drifted this far, but we see the beginnings of such problems already in our country, mainly around the imposition of Te Ao Māori across the public service, education and the research system, land and water rights, unelected iwi with committee voting rights in some local government Councils, preferred admission to higher education and some areas of employment, activist members of the judiciary, and a focusing of some government expenditure towards Māori rather than New Zealand’s wider cultural base. 

Never in our history has there been a more urgent need to re-establish a unity of purpose and a calming of our cultural trajectory, so that Te Ao Māori can be respected, likely with a special position, alongside the many other cultures that have been brought to New Zealand, but where it does not seek to dominate.

Preserving our Democracy

Could New Zealand become a socialist ethnostate? An ethnostate may implement some socialist-style economic policies.  However, it cannot fully satisfy socialism’s core principles, because privileging one ethnic group creates structural inequality, which contradicts socialism’s foundational commitment to equal ownership, equal participation, and class abolition.

If New Zealanders care enough about the future of our democracy, and if we have a government that is prepared to stand firm on equal rights, we should over the long haul avoid becoming an ethnostate, whether socialist or not. However, the ongoing emergence of rights by race, rather than equal rights for all under the law, take us in a destabilising direction. It is important that all understand the consequences that follow such a cultural reshaping of our country.

In the end, this is simply about preserving democracy in New Zealand. This is a pivotal issue in the November 2026 election but one that has been buried by the mainstream media, and the National Party has been unwilling to openly grapple with it. Despite their unkept 2023 election promises, I conclude as previously that our democracy has a better chance of surviving intact if the present coalition government is re-elected.

******************************************************

John Raine is an Emeritus Professor of Engineering and formerly held positions as Pro Vice Chancellor or Deputy Vice Chancellor in three universities in New Zealand.