HUMANLABOURASACOMMODITY-A MAO RI ETillCAL RESPONSE

The marketplace economics of the 1980s and1990s asks that Miiori be more competitive and focused. This is ironic when it is considered that most of the Miiori means of production-land. capital and the possession ofknowhow- were stripped from or withheld from Miiori. Miiori labour. however. remains a significant potential component in economic activity but it is not in Miiori control. It has become enslaved in economic structures and production that enhances the value of capital and land gained by the Crown and distributed to Piikehii. Miiori are the labourers and servants of a dominant settler culture who control economic activity in Aotearoa. The education and skills training systems have not prepared Miiorifor ownership or for management of resources. Rather Miiori were educated and trained to serve interests other than a Miiori socio-economic agenda. Finally. recent studies point to Miiori commercial organisations being passive suppliers of products. This context and the fact of the Employment Contracts Act 1991. is the basis for a discussion on Miiori understanding of work and labour. and their purpose. Miiori philosophy and ethics reject the mechanistic notion that human labour is a commodity valued solely for its economic purpose. Further the economistic approach that puts capital and resources at the centre of economic activity fails to meet Maori criteria for economic and social advancement. Maori philosophy and ethics, and its ideas oftapu. mana, mauri, hau and kotahitanga, are the basis for this critique of today's economics, science and technology. In an essay on Maori values and work in contemporary society, the psychologist and educationalist J ames Rite hie notes the existence of observable ~ori attitudes and values pertaining to work and employment (Ritchie 1968:290-291). Similar observations have been made by anthropologists and ethnologists such as Te Rangildiheke