Really Want?

What Do The Fijians Really Want?

From a Staff Correspondent From the recent Legco discussions on the Burns Report, and from the Budget meetings, there have emerged several facts, some trends of thought, and several conclusions which are clear to a close observer.

IHAVE heard no worth-while comments upon any of them, either verbally or in published articles; and this merely adds weight to my belief that in Fiji there are few sincerely interested in the Colony’s future, except in a strictly narrow economic sense, and that entirely personal.

The task of adjusting Fiji’s future to present-day conditions—a most unenviable one—would appear to belong entirely to the Government whatever its shape may be.

My conclusions lead to the defeat ing thought—that the Fijian race, as a whole, does not want to be brought up to the educational and economic level of its competitors.

This is a bitter concept of an otherwise most estimable race; but no other answer can be deduced from recent statements by its leaders.

Admittedly, with the exception of possibly three, the Fijian leaders, by reason of their education and pre sent environment far from koro (village) life, show that they are, and have been, influenced by Euro

pean colleagues and by Europe ways of life.

This must be accepted as inev able; and, after all, their traini was designed to do just this: It f( lows that, perhaps, they do not ] fleet the exact attitude of the gn majority of Fijians, although it claimed that the Burns Report, particular, was very thoroughly e plained to the villages by the roll and bulls.

Puzzle: Find Public Opinion

On the other hand, any stal ments made by Fijian leaders the recent Legco meetings shoi have had the approval of the Cou cil of Chiefs. So what was sale and also what was left unsaid t implied—must be taken as the co sidered opinion of the Fijian peop Never before have Fijian lead< been so forthright, and so unanii ous.

The Burns Report, insofar as applied to Fijian welfare, thoroughly scorned.

This attitude of denial of co] monsense in the Report leads i evitably to the conclusion that t Fijian is not to be led by the no by either his leaders or by the Gc ernment, into a race for survival the modern world.

In other words, the Fijian at tude is: “I am not going to char: my ways overnight. In fact, I i not sure that I will change the at all. Why should I get all worri about economic survival? I c always get three meals a day an how.

“Meanwhile, leave me alone. I £ not very susceptible to change ove night.”

There is much to be deplored’ this stand, from a European stan point; equally much to back it fre the Polynesian side. For the Fiji way of life has much to commend But if, by his refusal to civic responsibility, education a: coaching in the modern battle t everyday living, and for bett health conditions, the Fijian is I( behind by his better-equipped cor petitors, he will be doing a di service both to himself and to t] Government which has so consis ently shielded him over the yean Now, has his “shielding” pofl paid off?

(Continued on p. 141)

Young Leaders With Rigid Views The drift of the younger Fiiians to the towns, at least in Viti Levu,

makes the problem of Fijian sur vival most urgent.

It has driven a great hole in the Fijian system of koro community life; to a great extent it has under mined the authority of the rokos and bulis; and it has presented to the Fijian leaders the picture of its young men as common labourers, and its young girls as house servants and/or nurses.

Are the Fijians content with such a fate?

It is rather surprising to find the younger Fijian leaders, fresh from a world education, so rigid in then views about any changes in the “Fijian way of life”.

Quoting Rusiate Nayacakalou, who is studying for a doctorate of philosopy at London University: “Outside observers have repeatedly pointed out that the Fijian way of life has a stifling effect on economic progress. Nevertheless it is still very much a value amonq the Fijians to preserve their so-called way of life or culture”

Rusiate then went on to explain this could be interpreted to mean anything from “manners of the land” to a “ceremony of exchange of wealth”.

This well-equipped Fijian then referred to a Burns Commission suggestion as “something like the Highland Games”.

If this is the spirit in which such an educated man takes a well-meant reference, it can only be concluded that the adherence of the Fijian race to outmoded methods of life is likely to be the worst obstacle to be encountered by any Government attempting to “uplift” the Fijians into modern life. Rusiate being the example, how much influence have the older chiefs on the younger ones such as Mara or Ganilau?

Perhaps this reluctance to “com pete” is not so surprising. Life at subsistence level for many years is not the best preparation for a rapid emergence into the harsh com petitive world of today.

Nor is it the treatment which en courages the Fijian to believe the best of the efforts of his would-be helpers.

The induction of the Fijian into competitive economics cannot be accomplished in one year or even 10. In 20 years, with expert help to the younger generation, it is per fectly possible but it will call for an over-all planning capacity which is not at present evident in the Colony.

It would appear that the Fijians react badly to the Government’s appearance of haste; so that a “ca’ canny” policy, carefully admin istered, may be the answer.

The Indian and His Loyalties

Also plain was the Fijian pre occupation—possibly through ill advised “bogey-man” stories in the Press and in certain business circles —with the possibility of Indian domination of Fiji.

This, when referred to in Legco, provoked an interjection: “We are not afraid of domination —we will not allow it.”

A revealing remark to those who have watched the recent deteriora tion of Fijian-Indian relations with some alarm. And perhaps a revela tion also to those misguided per sons who, in recent months, have actively helped in this racial dis harmony by various statements at meetings and at gatherings of servicemen.

This bogey of Indian domination of Fiji, either politically, economic ally or socially, is an empty threat; and could almost be called utter nonsense.

The continual outcry of “land hungry Indians”, “politically-am bitious Indians” is just a political stunt in Fiji. It appears almost ludicrous, when we study the pre sent complete vista of a Colony com pletely ruled, in every way, by Euro peans in Government and “big business”.

To expect the puny efforts of a few demagogues, a few half-baked politicians with no unified support, a few sincere leaders with no fol lowing, and a community split deeply into many jealous sections, to upset this array of strength is completely unrealistic thinking.

Self-Government

Granted that Fiji will soon have some measure of self-government, any experienced observer of present day Fiji must agree that, no matter what happens, while the present business interests hold sway the custody of the purse-strings will determine the destiny of the Colony.

Not in many years, or even in many generations could Indian interests sway this destiny.

And, if force were attempted, it could only be of nuisance value by hooligan elements —since it is cer tain that 99 per cent, of the Indians in Fiji are extremely loyal to the British Crown, in spite of the harsh things said about them.

The small element of Indian mal contents can* and will be, disposed of quickly should such measure be come advisable.

Truly, this Indian bogeyman, when thought is given to him, is a creature only of pallid proportions, a typical fallacy of vision, which needs only the breath of common sense to disperse his pretentious appearance.