On November 5th 1881, a terrible atrocity occurred at Parihaka, an area in Western Taranaki which had become a settlement dedicated to peaceful protest against the appropriation of Maori land. 1600 Pakeha police officers and volunteers stormed the village, arrested the leaders, and dispersed the majority of the inhabitants, leaving a wake of destruction behind as they did so. It can be debated whether the invasion of Parihaka is an example of the colonial genocide of Indigenous Maori in New Zealand, and I think it can be argued that this is indeed accurate, although contrasting beliefs also have to be considered.
Colonial genocide, which is when all attempts are made to eradicate a particular ethnic group, but this is not necessarily through murder, it is also done through cultural and psychological oppression, and the annihilation of the indigenous way of life. This form of mass atrocity results in serious human suffering and threatens the rich diversity in the world. Genocide can occur even without any previous armed conflict. Ethnicity and nationalism have to be considered as these terms play a part in the emergence of crimes such as genocide. Ethnicity is a type of cultural identity that
…show more content…
To them, the destruction of the village was necessary and most definitely not a case of colonial genocide as their main concern was that Parihaka was rebelling against government rules, and not making an effort to compromise and negotiate with the Pakeha which would allow for bonding between the two parties. European settlers also held this same view and were frightened, as they were adamant that the Parihaka community and its leaders were violent, so they feared for their safety. However, this was not true; Te Whiti and Tohu were willing to accept Pakeha settlers and wanted to live in harmony, they were just not willing to accept the idea of land