"shouldn't be pandering to minorities"
i can't count the number of times i've heard that phrase, and it still makes me sick. let's deconstruct it. what it actually means is that a party shouldn't devise policy and have messages that appeal to minority groups. because minority groups aren't important. they don't count. if you're going to try to appeal to them at all, do it very quietly. so quietly that everyone else can pretend they don't exist and know that they don't matter. their concerns don't matter. their lived experiences and needs don't matter.
if they have needs, nobody should have to hear about them and no-one should be advocating for them. no policies should be implemented that benefit minority groups, because that is clearly "pandering".
more than that, the phrase is used every single time someone from a minority group is selected for a significant position. they can't possibly be selected for their talents and abilities. they can't have been chosen by a process that is genuinely able to look past minority characteristics at actual ability.
and what if it's true that a person has been selected specifically to appeal to a minority group? i really can't see what's wrong with that. minority groups deserved to be courted and appealed as much as majority group. why don't they? and why should the majority be offended by that? it's not a zero-sum game. it's not like addressing the needs of minority groups is going to lead to less for the majority. it is almost certain that policies benefitting minority groups will benefit the whole, particularly in the long term.
seriously, who is going to suffer if maori life expectancy begins to equal that of pakeha? who is going to miss out if women get paid the same as men? no-one at all. but any moves to iron out inequality is "pandering", even though that inequality is causing unneccessary and unfair distress to a significant number of people.
frankly, i'm sick of it. sick of the phrase and the ideas that underpin it.