Hawaiian Kingdom Government It's interesting how many Americans are happy to stand up and protest the treatment of the Tibetans while either willfully ignoring or plain ignorant of problems of the same sort right here at home. I'm not taking anything away from the plight of the Tibetans but I think native Hawaiians should have their voice heard as well. Perhaps Hawaii should be an autonomous region like Tibet? Michael
They couldn't afford it. There are entire nations of native Americans that will rise behind them. Why do you think the US, Australia and New Zealand refused to sign the UN resolution on the right of natives? http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=35103 http://kinchendavid.wordpress.com/2...f-indigenous-peoples-a-sad-day-at-turtle-bay/
Who mistreats the Hawaiians? They have it really good. Anyway, there are more than Hawaiians there now, so it wouldn't be fair to take the islands away from the USA.
You're taking them wayyyy too seriously. Ask your average Hawaiian what they think about the various groups with that agenda (you need both hands to count them). Those guys are regarded a lot like the old, bitter southerners grumbling about the south rising again.
I love this notion that every ethnic group that ever roamed the earth is entitled to some piece of land from way back when. At what point, do such people, want to reset the world's political map to? 1800? 1700? 200 B.C.?
The American people have a memory of history that goes back about two generations and no farther. This is why we can get worked up over the Jewish Holocaust but not the Armenian one. Most Americans don't care about--and for the most part don't even know about--anything that happened before their grandparents were alive, people who could tell them about it from personal observation. This is essential to our sense of nationhood. If we actually had a sense of history we'd be arguing over whether we should give Arizona back to Mexico or back to the Navajos, not over whether all politicians should wear American flag lapel pins that were manufactured in China. The Hawaiians are just one more native population that got fucked over in the making of America. As fuckovers go, they didn't get it as bad as most of the Indian tribes, which for all practical purposes have ceased to exist. Besides, in 1993 President Clinton and Congress issued a joint apology to the Hawaiian people for overthrowing their government. Wasn't that sweet?
LOL. No, we wouldn't. Or maybe you would, but I'm willing to bet that most Americans aren't terribly keen on the idea of ceding territory back to Mexico all in the name of some theoretical piece of historical justice. And let's not forget, Mexico is a nation of immigrants, too. The majority of the people there are not of Indian descent. Rather, they are people of Spanish decent, who benefited from Spanish colonialism and then cast it away much like the Americans did with the British. So perhaps the US gives Arizona back to the Navajos and the Mexicans try to facilitate the reconstitution of the Aztec Empire, a primitive group of bloodthirsty savages who weren't terribly nice to their neighbors, either? Or maybe they pick the Mayan? They were a little nicer to folks. Hey, have we reached absurdity yet? Yes, the Hawaiians, warring bunch that they were, got "fucked over." Meanwhile, their offspring, a singular December bombing aside, have reaped untold benefits from being a state in the most powerful nation on Earth. Compare Hawaii's standard of living, its economy and infrastructure with, oh I don't know ... Fiji or Tonga.
For all its iniquities, I'm glad we got India back. I feel for all those who have become minorities in their own land.
At the very absolute least, it seems that the native Hawaiians that are left, still claim Hawaiian ancestry, still try to preserve their language and culture - well I think those people should be consulted and they should have a vote on any questions and issues that they have. What wrong with at the very least knowing the will of the people? Perhaps most Hawaiians are happy. But what better way than a Democratic one? THIS is the USA right?!? Michael I once read Hawaii, Tonga and Japan share some linguistic similarities? Where did I read that?
Headlines USA discovers oil deposits near Hawaiian sanctuary US Air Force pounds Hawaiian Terrorists Military protects US Civilians from Hawaiian Militants AlQuada linked to militant-Lono-i-ka-makahikism GW Bush VII elected President and Savior - The Populous Rejoice
That's not true. Yes, as you say, the majority is of Spanish descent, but also indian. Mestizos. Spain used a completely different form of colonization in regards to its colonies than England did. England pushed the natives aside, Spain didn't. Think about it, Cortez conquered Mexico with something like 500 Spaniards. How? Because it was actually natives attacking natives. And then the Spanish crown set up a colonial government that basically usurped the preexisting civilization. They didn't want to push the indians aside, they wanted to utilize them for a work force and to tax them. Of course, Mexican natives were, for the most part, civilized and thus able to be exploited in this manner whereas American natives were not. Anyway. Yeah. Hawaii got a pretty shitty deal. But, I doubt they could survive on their own. There's only a 7 day supply (I think) of food on the island at a time. Hardly self-sufficient. If they got autonomy, Japan would take them over in a week.
I heard a class presentation by a Hawaiin student. The presentation was on dietary changes in Hawaiin culture and a quarter of her presentation was devoted to how the advent of the white man destroyed their culture through humiliation and subjugation.
Mestizos have Spanish blood in them, so obviously they cannot be part of my newly reconstituted Mayan/Aztec Empire. They will have to go back to the Old World. Or prepare themselves to be blood sacrifices/slaves in the Empire. No, they just killed them. Ever heard of Cortes? Pizarro? Actually, the English bought most of their land from the Indians in the early Colonial days (see the book Mayflower). It wasn't until later, after King Phillip's War and such, that resettlement — largely an American practice — started. Oh, so you have heard of him? You obviously haven't read any accounts of Cortes then. Try Victor Davis Hanson's Carnage and Culture. Sure, the Indians internecine warfare made it easier for the Spanish, but let's give those old worlders their due, they slaughtered vast amounts of people. And then, of course, diseases rampaged many of the survivors. Nice. Anyway, how the conquering occured really doesn't matter. My point is that if we're going to give land back to people who stole that same land from other people hundreds of years ago, we have to make sure we give it back to the right people. No stinking half-bloods will be allowed!
You know, that doesn't seem at all unreasonable. Echo's implied idea of a plebiscite seems good. Has one ever been done?
Now wait a minute, I thought the United States is the only country interested in creating/extending its hegemony?
The threat seems unlikely because the US Navy owns the oceans, though China has been modernizing its fleet for years, with an eye on pushing into the Indian Ocean and Pacific.
My understanding of the Hawaiian takeover is that the government welcomed whote settlers in with open arms, largely because they were wealthy and keen to spend money settling up local industries. At some point, the white population got to be so large (and being affluent, powerful) that they asked for the U.S. to come in. To me, the more obvious lesson to learn from the incident is not "Americans are hypocrites on the issue of Tibet," but "immigration can be a threat to political stability." Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
And again, unlike the American Indian. Colonization has been extremely beneficial to the Hawaiians. After all, they voted to become a state...
