39 Human Rights Commission Cultural imperialism and inferiorisation Cultural imperialism and treating ‘others’ as inferior are key tenets of internalised racism. The attribution of inferior race-based characteristics and traits to tangata whenua was immediate, ongoing and consistent. From their earliest interactions, Europeans saw Māori as ‘inferior’ (Nairn, Pega, McCreanor, Rankine & Barnes, 2006, p. 188; Salmond, 1991). Angela Ballara, in her work, Proud to be White? A Survey of Pākehā Prejudice in New Zealand (1986), traced the racialisation of Māori across the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (see also Barnes, Borell, Taiapa, Rankine, Nairn & McCreanor, 2012). For example, in 1817, John Nicholas wrote: The inhabitants of these islands … appear to me to be descended from a once powerful people, who … gradually degenerated into barbarism, from a high state of civilization … The spirit of enterprise-led them in successive migrations to … the southern ocean, where they ultimately passed the last stage of moral degradation (Ballara, 1986, p. 9). In 1863 the geologist Ferdinand von Hochstetter celebrated Māori ‘progress in civilization’ but predicted their inevitable extinction: Richly endowed by nature with intellectual and physical powers, of a lively temper, energetic and open-minded, and with a natural wit, the Māori is fully aware of his progress in moral improvement and culture; yet he is not capable of attaining the full height of a Christian civilized life; and it is from this very incompleteness, that his race is doomed to gradual extinction. Compared with the fresh and full vigour, with which the Anglo-Saxon race is spreading and increasing, the Māori is the weaker party, and thus he is the loser in the endless struggle for existence (Te Ara Encyclopaedia, European ideas about Māori, 1910). In 1881, Dr Alfred Newman, attempting to explain the decline of the Māori population, wrote: Taking all things into consideration, the disappearance of the race is scarcely a subject for much regret. They are dying out in a quick easy way and are being supplanted by a superior race” (Newman, 1881, p. 477). The ethnographer, Elsdon Best, saw the “‘human’ mind as a civilised European mind while Māori lived in a state of barbaric simplicity” (Best, 1897, p. 5). In 1939, Attorney General Sir John Findlay wrote: As a rule, civilised nations do not recognise the right of scattered handfuls of barbarians to the ownership of immense tracts of soil, only a fraction of which they cultivate or use (Ballara, 1986, p. 39). These attitudes continued well into contemporary times. The infamous 1961 Hunn Report, which highlighted the difficulties Māori faced in urban centres, classified three kinds of Māori: half-castes, who were more European-like, lived in cities, spoke no Māori and were advanced; those who lived in the cities who were still ‘Māori’ but were making progress; and those who lived in rural areas, spoke Māori, and remained backward and retarded (Taonui, 2008). Assimilated racism Assimilated racism derives from internalised racism. When Māori internalise negative stereotypes about themselves this creates the potential for prejudice by Māori, against Māori, or by Māori toward other similarly marginalised peoples, such as Pacific, Asian and Islamic communities. This can take many forms, such as Māori stereotyping and immigrant communities being blamed for societal problems in Aotearoa. These are instances of racial prejudice, however, they lack the power differential racist action requires. White supremacy encourages ‘divide and conquer’ tactics to maintain that supremacy because “two oppressed peoples are stronger allied, but much weaker apart” (Aikman and Fu, 2021).