Sovereignty - help me understand

[cabanalane]

30+ years ago when I was little, everyone just seem to live life in Hawaii, like it always been. Maybe 10-15 years ago, the soveriegnty issue seems to be the front page.

I know there are different groups with different opinions.

Help me understand, is soveriegnty about:

- Is it about power and control?
- Having own nation so one can have their own rules and laws?
- Is it about the money, like the airport tax?
- Is it to redistribute income?
- What is the place of non-Hawaiian blood residence?
- What about part-Hawaiians?
- Is Hawaii suppose to be "two countries?"

TIA

[timkona]

Great Thread ! So many questions I have about the SovMov.

Who are the principal players/factions in the game?
Is there a giant book full of detailed plans that would guide them if they succeed?
What about laws, police, beauracratic infrastructure, etc etc??

Can't wait for responses here.

[Miulang]

If you truly want to learn, then you will have to do the work yourself. Start by reading through the links here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_sovereignty_movement), and here (http://hawaii-nation.org/) and here (http://www.freehawaii.org/) and here (http://www.hawaiiankingdom.info/C1126750129/E20050922123842/index.html) and go on from there.

Miulang

[timkona]

Shucks.....I found nothing that looked remotely like a plan.

When you have a goal, and if you achieve that goal, but have nothing planned for what happens AFTER you achieve the goal, then you are just like President Bush.

[Pua'i Mana'o]

The best thread on HT that discusses the issue is the "Statehood holiday" thread. The first 10 pages is a lot of emotional stuff. But from 11 on, it is worth the read (or at least saves me the trouble of typing that stuff out alllll over again). :rolleyes:

[Miulang]

Shucks.....I found nothing that looked remotely like a plan.

When you have a goal, and if you achieve that goal, but have nothing planned for what happens AFTER you achieve the goal, then you are just like President Bush.

That's not quite true, Tim. You didn't look hard and long enough, Tim.;)

The government of the Kingdom of Hawai'i (http://www.kingdomofhawaii.org/kings_messages.htm)

Miulang

[Pua'i Mana'o]

seriously Miulang, why are you doing their homework for them?

[Miulang]

seriously Miulang, why are you doing their homework for them?
Pua'i, I gave them a nudge...it's up to them to do the learning. ;)

Miulang

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Shucks.....I found nothing that looked remotely like a plan.

When you have a goal, and if you achieve that goal, but have nothing planned for what happens AFTER you achieve the goal, then you are just like President Bush.

we talk about referendums on the "nationalism vs ethnicity" thread. The plan is to vote on the issues and determine the agenda (ergo, your "plan").

[cabanalane]

I started to read the links. Maybe there needs to be a FAQ section.

In the Declaration of Independence

"We, the indigenous people of Hawai'i, empathically reject incorporation into the United States of America, and hereby announce secession. We do this with clarity of mind, good conscience, and a determined will. we are ready to sacrifice our worldly assets and our very lives to see the kingdom of Hawai'i restored."

So what about my fee simple property on Honolulu? Do I need to sell and move? So, once it is set up, people will vote on whether or not I get to keep my house?

"I am Edmund Kelii Silva, Jr., Ali'i Nui (Sovereign) of the kingdom of Hawaii. On my mother's side I am the direct lineal descendent of King Kamehameha the Great, and heir to the throne. And, on my father's side I am the direct lineal heir to King Kamehameha Nui of the kingdom of Maui before King Kamehameha the Great unified the lands. On November 22, 2002, the prime minister of the Hawaiian kingdom, along with the Council of Regency, Na Kupuna Council O' Hawai'i Nei, the Na Kupuna Council Hawai'i Moku of the legislative body of government, and the Royal Kupunas of the House of Nobles, proclaimed that I am the lawful successor to Ali'i Nuis (High Chiefs) of ancient Hawai'i."

Why should Kamehameha's decendents be the heir to Hawaii? Lunalilo was appointed. And Kalalaua was elected. So why would someone with certain lineal connection be Prime Minister compare to someone else who is also Hawaiian, with other connections, or "no connections" at all?

[Miulang]

If you own fee simple property, I seriously doubt it would ever be taken away from you or your heirs, except as in recent cases of eminent domain on CONUS. But if your land was condemned or confiscated, you deserve fair market value for giving up your land.


Miulang

[Pua'i Mana'o]

I started to read the links. Maybe there needs to be a FAQ section.

In the Declaration of Independence

"We, the indigenous people of Hawai'i, empathically reject incorporation into the United States of America, and hereby announce secession. We do this with clarity of mind, good conscience, and a determined will. we are ready to sacrifice our worldly assets and our very lives to see the kingdom of Hawai'i restored."

So what about my fee simple property on Honolulu? Do I need to sell and move? So, once it is set up, people will vote on whether or not I get to keep my house?

"I am Edmund Kelii Silva, Jr., Ali'i Nui (Sovereign) of the kingdom of Hawaii. On my mother's side I am the direct lineal descendent of King Kamehameha the Great, and heir to the throne. And, on my father's side I am the direct lineal heir to King Kamehameha Nui of the kingdom of Maui before King Kamehameha the Great unified the lands. On November 22, 2002, the prime minister of the Hawaiian kingdom, along with the Council of Regency, Na Kupuna Council O' Hawai'i Nei, the Na Kupuna Council Hawai'i Moku of the legislative body of government, and the Royal Kupunas of the House of Nobles, proclaimed that I am the lawful successor to Ali'i Nuis (High Chiefs) of ancient Hawai'i."

Why should Kamehameha's decendents be the heir to Hawaii? Lunalilo was appointed. And Kalalaua was elected. So why would someone with certain lineal connection be Prime Minister compare to someone else who is also Hawaiian, with other connections, or "no connections" at all?


Dude, go look. And not on that website, for goodness' sake.

[Jonah K]

Dude, go look. And not on that website, for goodness' sake.
I agree. :cool:

Although it's a little dated, Tony Castanha's UH Political Science M.A. thesis entitled "The Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement: Roles of and Impacts on Non-Hawaiians (http://www.hookele.com/non-hawaiians/index.html)" might prove more educational.

[Mililani]

So what about my fee simple property on Honolulu? Do I need to sell and move? So, once it is set up, people will vote on whether or not I get to keep my house?

Scary to not know, huh? A lot of homeowners worry about this. I think one of the reasons so many people are against the sovereign movement is because they have no clue what they could lose.

Was the seller of your home the legal owner?

[Pua'i Mana'o]

we vote by referendum.

All the way.

-Want to keep dual citizenship? (US/Hawaiian). Let's vote on that.
-Want to do away with "native" issues? Let's put "a Hawaiian citizen is a Hawaiian" and vote on that.

We fill up the ballots and take it democratically. Hawaii was becoming a socialist monarchy anyway, and with our leaders all elected in the last four governments it is a natural fit.**

**yes, nobody voted for Sanford Dole and the Republic of Hawai'i, but from Lunalilo until Lingle, outside of whats-his-face, we've been doing the voting thang.

[timkona]

I enjoyed the Constitution link. Lots of similarities to the major themes of most civilized countries. I skimmed it over and noticed that free speech isnt mentioned until 1/2 way down. No big deal really. I also noticed that non-Hawaiian children born in Hawaii would not be citizens until 7 years of residence. Imagine a child without a country?

Why is their no message or update from the King since 2005?

Is there any references where the nitty-gritty of day to day society are addressed? Most of what is in the Constitution is fairly broad in scope. Lot of stuff being put off for the legislature to decide. I guess you can't answer all the questions in one fell swoop.

Those links were good reading.

[cabanalane]

Was the seller of your home the legal owner?

A lot of reading about "legal owner." Maybe in Hawaii's case, it's easier to figure out. But take a piece of land, France for example, who is the "legal" owners? How far back in history do we have to go?

[Leo Lakio]

-Want to keep dual citizenship? (US/Hawaiian). Let's vote on that.What if the US government disagrees? The same dilemma has been one of the major sticking points for the Quebec sovereignty movement for decades. It's not a unilateral issue, but of course, open to negotiation.

Please keep the discussion going; for such a hot topic, the level of civility here is appreciated.

[Pua'i Mana'o]

What if the US government disagrees? The same dilemma has been one of the major sticking points for the Quebec sovereignty movement for decades. It's not a unilateral issue, but of course, open to negotiation.

Please keep the discussion going; for such a hot topic, the level of civility here is appreciated.

yeah, what if the US disagrees? That would be an interesting debate on the U.N. level, wouldn't it? How often has the US rescinded citizenship from its citizenry, and how often has that happened when said citizens gained new citizenship?

In order for the discussion to keep going, it would be realllly helpful if people 1)read up Jonah's links, or at the very least 2)read up what we have said about it here at HT. I don't want to repeat myself.

[acousticlady]

As an outside observer, I like to think I am reasonably well read on the subject of sovereignty, as are others here on the CONUS. My son is actually studying this at UH. With this thread going on, it became a big topic of conversation the other night at dinner. I was asked to convey this from a Candian citizen - along the lines of Hawaiian sovereignty is that of the Aloquin tribe (not 100% sure on the name of the tribe). They too had been trying for sovereignty for many years. The Candain government refused to recognize them. They went to the UN and pled their case. The UN granted them sovereignty regardless of the official Canadian position. This in turn forced the Canadian government to recognize them.

[joshuatree]

I agree. :cool:

Although it's a little dated, Tony Castanha's UH Political Science M.A. thesis entitled "The Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement: Roles of and Impacts on Non-Hawaiians (http://www.hookele.com/non-hawaiians/index.html)" might prove more educational.

Thanks for the link. I looked it over, haven't had the time to read through the whole thing yet. But I think many Non-Hawaiians are against sovereignty because of Chapter 8. The table might be unsettling to them. No matter what form of sovereignty, the transition phase looks ok but as soon as we hit the final phase, it doesn't bode well. Words like "treason" are in that column? I can't see why anyone would go along with a plan that may eventually brand them with "treason". Plus, the viewpoint is to drastically curtail tourism. Good in one sense but bad in another, what will be the main economic engine then?

[Leo Lakio]

The status of First Nations in Canada, especially what rights for secession they may have in Quebec were the province to separate from Canada, are another of the complex facets of such discussions. This article (http://www.ubyssey.bc.ca/2007/03/27/quebec-parties-debate-first-nations%E2%80%99-rights-under-sovereignty/) (from the University of British Columbia paper) reported on what the different political parties in Quebec might do (part of coverage of their recent election.)
As noted before, study of the Quebec question provides some perspectives that are relevant to the concern of Hawaiian sovereignty, particularly in the wide range of issues related to secession in the modern world.

[Glen Miyashiro]

Thanks for the link. I looked it over, haven't had the time to read through the whole thing yet. But I think many Non-Hawaiians are against sovereignty because of Chapter 8. The table might be unsettling to them. No matter what form of sovereignty, the transition phase looks ok but as soon as we hit the final phase, it doesn't bode well. Words like "treason" are in that column? I can't see why anyone would go along with a plan that may eventually brand them with "treason". I suspect the Tories in the American colonies probably thought the same thing. :rolleyes:

Plus, the viewpoint is to drastically curtail tourism. Good in one sense but bad in another, what will be the main economic engine then?Something more sustainable than tourism.

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Please explain how one could draw parallels between the Algonquins and the nation of Hawaii. One is a tribe of people, the other is a recognized nation which had over 30 standing trade treaties with other nations worldwide, a constitutional monarchy, an extensive naturalized citizenry base, minted money, public education system, public health system, tax system, etc.

[Leo Lakio]

PM, I am surprised that you would so quickly dismiss the Algonquins as simply just "a tribe of people." I would suggest that you do further research into the status of American Indian and Canadian First Nations "tribes" prior to European settlement of the North American continent. Many of them had established governmental and social structures comparable to those of the Kingdom of Hawai`i for several centuries.

[PoiBoy]

PM-I don't see how a tribe not recognized by "whoeva" is different than a "nation" recognized by "whoeva". As if tribal people have any less rights on this planet than "nations".

[Miulang]

I found this glossary of terminology (http://www.geocities.com/chapleaucree/educational/FNglossary.html)that pertains to First Nation peoples of Canada, but I think also accurately describes most aboriginal groups all over the world, including the first people of Hawai'i, the kanaka maoli. And the Aboriginal people of Australia (http://www.kooriweb.org/apg/papers4.htm)are trying to do the same thing that the kanaka maoli are doing. Here's another perspective on the sovereignty issue from the Native American viewpoint (http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096413114).

Miulang

[joshuatree]

Something more sustainable than tourism.

Agreed but what will it be? It's easy to say "something" but without anything tangible, people will be against sovereignty for practical reasons. It's hard for an average joe to just take a leap of faith when there is a mortgage to worry about. ;)

[acousticlady]

Please explain how one could draw parallels between the Algonquins and the nation of Hawaii. One is a tribe of people, the other is a recognized nation which had over 30 standing trade treaties with other nations worldwide, a constitutional monarchy, an extensive naturalized citizenry base, minted money, public education system, public health system, tax system, etc.

I think the point is, that if this "tribe" could take their case to the UN, then an established (modern) nation would have an even stronger case to take to the UN.

[Pua'i Mana'o]

why are you talking about tribes when the focus of this discussion is national sovereignty.

Our issue isn't about the Hawaiians™. It is about Hawai'i®.

[acousticlady]

why are you talking about tribes when the focus of this discussion is national sovereignty.

Our issue isn't about the Hawaiians™. It is about Hawai'i®.

OK - maybe I'm not being clear. Or maybe I do not understand. But if the nation of Hawaii cannot get recoginition as an indigenious people or as a nation, why not take the case to the UN and force the US's hand? That's all I'm saying. And please don't take this negatively - I'm on your side.

[Leo Lakio]

why are you talking about tribes when the focus of this discussion is national sovereignty.Because Kanaka are not the only entity that has an ongoing fight for national sovereignty? Many of the "tribes" we keep making reference to were once independent nations, with treaties and international commerce, and they lost their nations to European settlers. Some have been battling for restoration of their nations longer than the indigenous people of Hawai`i, and have experiences and stories to tell that could be of use to those who wish to restore Hawai`i's status as an independent nation in the 21st Century. Isolation will not assist the sovereignty movement.

[Leo Lakio]

why not take the case to the UN and force the US's hand?Because the U.S. government only accepts the rulings of the U.N. when it is expedient for them to do so, and rejects others with which it does not agree. The chances that people representing an independent Hawaiian Nation would even be able to get a hearing at the U.N. are slim.

[Keanu]

Because the U.S. government only accepts the rulings of the U.N. when it is expedient for them to do so, and rejects others with which it does not agree. The chances that people representing an independent Hawaiian Nation would even be able to get a hearing at the U.N. are slim.

Ah yes, I concur.

[Glen Miyashiro]

Something more sustainable than tourism.

Agreed but what will it be? I wish I knew!

It's easy to say "something" but without anything tangible, people will be against sovereignty for practical reasons. It's hard for an average joe to just take a leap of faith when there is a mortgage to worry about. ;)I agree that it's hard to muster enthusiasm for the New Economy if you have no idea what it'll look like.

[Glen Miyashiro]

Because the U.S. government only accepts the rulings of the U.N. when it is expedient for them to do so, and rejects others with which it does not agree. The chances that people representing an independent Hawaiian Nation would even be able to get a hearing at the U.N. are slim.That's assuming that America will always remain as powerful as it is today. Who knows. It took a thousand years before Rome fell and fragmented. We've only had two hundred years, so far.

[Leo Lakio]

That's assuming that America will always remain as powerful as it is today. Who knows. It took a thousand years before Rome fell and fragmented. We've only had two hundred years, so far.I can't imagine that proponents of Hawaiian sovereignty are willing to wait another 800 years to be heard by the international community, however. But I could be wrong.

[Miulang]

Possible economics: Microalgae farming (http://www.mic.hawaii.edu/dev_tech/agriculture/chaeto.html), sea salt harvesting (http://www.hawaiikaico.com/), deep salt water desalinization (http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2003/tc2003051_7708_tc108.htm)...all would utilize resources that are fairly easy to come by and don't require super complex mechanisms to work. And the products could either be used in Hawai'i or sold abroad. In fact, the new government wouldn't even have to do the work: sell leases to the rights to grow the microalgae, harvest the salt and the water and share the profits with the people.

Miulang

[Glen Miyashiro]

I can't imagine that proponents of Hawaiian sovereignty are willing to wait another 800 years to be heard by the international community, however. But I could be wrong.Ha! I'm not saying anyone's willing to wait that long. But if that's what they really want, they may need to. Or, who knows, maybe America's overseas possessions will go the way of the British Commonwealth, slipping away one by one.

[sinjin]

I wish I knew!

I agree that it's hard to muster enthusiasm for the New Economy if you have no idea what it'll look like.How about assisted care living for retiring baby boomers from CONUS?

[Leo Lakio]

My nominee for "post of the day":How about assisted care living for retiring baby boomers from CONUS?

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Because Kanaka are not the only entity that has an ongoing fight for national sovereignty? Many of the "tribes" we keep making reference to were once independent nations, with treaties and international commerce, and they lost their nations to European settlers. Some have been battling for restoration of their nations longer than the indigenous people of Hawai`i, and have experiences and stories to tell that could be of use to those who wish to restore Hawai`i's status as an independent nation in the 21st Century. Isolation will not assist the sovereignty movement.

Read at least this (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?t=9878&page=12) page of that long thread before we rehash.

[Leo Lakio]

Read at least this (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?t=9878&page=12) page of that long thread before we rehash.Okay, I've re-read several pages (including many, many insults, of which this thread has been blessedly free to date), but I still have trouble understanding exactly what point it is you want me to see. I'll just grab this one point, hoping that's what you were steering me to:I would rather envy the freedom of the maori model than that of the deficit model which is the American Native™ way. Screw that cycle.Please note that I am NOT recommending Kanaka follow the flawed American Indian model, the "nation-within-a-nation" concepts. There are Indian nations in both the US and Canada that have been fighting for total, separate independence for generations. Do you have a specific problem with learning from their successes and failures to date?

[cynsaligia]

How about assisted care living for retiring baby boomers from CONUS?


bleh. too much NIMBY around here for that to happen, or don't you realize that many sole proprietorship adult care homes are in neighborhoods like kalihi and waipahu (where my best friend's mom runs one) and that honolulu/hawaii is far lacking in comparison to portland/oregon when it comes to administering to such businesses? there are many, many, many reasons why my mother moved to portland to open her own adult care home instead of to try to do it here. just one of many reasons is that the support from the county/state is developed to a level that it's not here (which is important when you find yourself with a resident whose needs suddenly deteriorate past a point where you can care for them properly and you need either more help or to transfer to another care home/facility better suited to that patient's needs). you'd need, at the very least, more case managers and social workers and dept of health surveyors....

oh, and as for the NIMBY part? how many neighborhoods would be willing to take the increased handivan traffic or delivery of adult diaper/medical supply traffic through their streets?

which is a shame, because it's a lucrative industry and i think adult care homes are actually an asset to their neighborhoods. the owners/managers of such businesses are home all the time and have a vested interest in keeping the neighborhood safe.

[Miulang]

One more way for the new government to make money: sell URLs under the domain name ".HI" (like Tuvalu has made money selling domain names with .TV at the end).

It's probably also useful to learn some lessons from other Pacific Island (http://www.wider.unu.edu/publications/dps/dp2001-41.pdf)economies (i.e., no sense reinventing the wheel or getting burned twice). Hawai'i could also become an offshore tax haven (http://www.eastwestcenter.org/stored/pdfs/Maoate20010130.pdf)for Americans.

Miulang

[joshuatree]

One more way for the new government to make money: sell URLs under the domain name ".HI" (like Tuvalu has made money selling domain names with .TV at the end).

It's probably also useful to learn some lessons from other Pacific Island (http://www.wider.unu.edu/publications/dps/dp2001-41.pdf)economies (i.e., no sense reinventing the wheel or getting burned twice). Hawai'i could also become an offshore tax haven (http://www.eastwestcenter.org/stored/pdfs/Maoate20010130.pdf)for Americans.

Miulang

That could be good or bad depending on how well a new government operates without corruption. Selling domain names and being a tax haven can invite organized crime and rogue nation agents.

[Miulang]

That could be good or bad depending on how well a new government operates without corruption. Selling domain names and being a tax haven can invite organized crime and rogue nation agents.

heheheheh. I didn't say they were necessarily good ideas, only that they were ideas because everyone is wringing their hands that they don't have a clue how an independent Hawai'i could survive economically.;)

Miulang

[greentara]

Possible economics: Microalgae farming (http://www.mic.hawaii.edu/dev_tech/agriculture/chaeto.html), sea salt harvesting (http://www.hawaiikaico.com/), deep salt water desalinization (http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2003/tc2003051_7708_tc108.htm)...all would utilize resources that are fairly easy to come by and don't require super complex mechanisms to work. And the products could either be used in Hawai'i or sold abroad. In fact, the new government wouldn't even have to do the work: sell leases to the rights to grow the microalgae, harvest the salt and the water and share the profits with the people.

Miulang

Just finished reading Native Daughter because of a discussion on this form. Ms. Trask comes across militant but quite frankly I agreed with almost everything she said. And btw I didn’t get the impressions that she was against ALL “holes”, what I did come away with is the notion that she is fully aware of the rape of her native land and her people by imperialist domination of her precious culture and she is angry. And yes, tourism is not the only economic answer for Hawaii to survive as a nation as mentioned above. Natural resources are there, but people are so conditioned to think they need more than they do to be happy. Once they become part of a consumer driven culture it’s all down hill because they can never get enough to make them happy. The economic suggestions made by Miulang are extremely do able.

This subject is enormously sensitive to me due to my compassion for Tibet and her people. There are many similarities between Tibet and Hawaii. I also got the impression that Ms. Trask feels that Haole is a state of mind more than an ethnic representation. Still trying to really understand the Sovereignty Movement however, the more I read and research the more inclined I am to side with the Nationalist Movement.

[Jonah K]

Just finished reading Native Daughter because of a discussion on this form. Ms. Trask comes across militant but quite frankly I agreed with almost everything she said. And btw I didn’t get the impressions that she was against ALL “holes”, what I did come away with is the notion that she is fully aware of the rape of her native land and her people by imperialist domination of her precious culture and she is angry. And yes, tourism is not the only economic answer for Hawaii to survive as a nation as mentioned above. Natural resources are there, but people are so conditioned to think they need more than they do to be happy. Once they become part of a consumer driven culture it’s all down hill because they can never get enough to make them happy. The economic suggestions made by Miulang are extremely do able.

This subject is enormously sensitive to me due to my compassion for Tibet and her people. There are many similarities between Tibet and Hawaii. I also got the impression that Ms. Trask feels that Haole is a state of mind more than an ethnic representation. Still trying to really understand the Sovereignty Movement however, the more I read and research the more inclined I am to side with the Nationalist Movement.
The mention of Haunani-Kay Trask reminds me of a certain Wai'anae-based, kanaka maoli attorney who's been somewhat overshadowed. Here's a another link that might prove educational...;)
http://www.opihi.com/sovereignty/

[Miulang]

The mention of Haunani-Kay Trask reminds me of a certain Wai'anae-based, kanaka maoli attorney who's been somewhat overshadowed. Here's a another link that might prove educational...;)
http://www.opihi.com/sovereignty/

Unless he has changed his mind recently, Poka Laenui (http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/AkakaPoka.html)thinks the Akaka Bill is still a way to preserve current kanaka maoli entitlements while continuing the fight for eventual sovereignty. Many pro-sovereignty advocates reject this path entirely, claiming the Akaka Bill does not guarantee the current entitlement programs and totally ends the promise of sovereignty because of the clause that states that passage of the Akaka Bill ends all future claims against the US.:confused:

Miulang

[timkona]

Has the SovMov lost momentum?

Seems like many of the websites I see have very little, recent, updates. Most of the data or articles is from 2004 or before.

[Miulang]

Has the SovMov lost momentum?

Seems like many of the websites I see have very little, recent, updates. Most of the data or articles is from 2004 or before.
No, it hasn't lost momentum. It's just regrouping right now. There was criticism in the past that there were too many disparate voices speaking about sovereignty, and too much confusion because too many of the ideas were so different. So now, many of the groups are talking to each other (Hui Pu is a great example). You don't hear about it in the general press, but the kanaka maoli activists know about it via the coconut wireless. One of these days, when they're ready, the rest of us will hear about them, though.;)

Miulang

[greentara]

You don't hear about it in the general press, but the kanaka maoli activists know about it via the coconut wireless.

LOL the Rastas in Jamaica call it the "bush phone" :D

JONAH: Thanks for the link...

[mapen]

I'm inclined to believe that the sovereignty movement doesn't really have much of a plan, direction, or momentum. They occasionaly make some noise and get on the news, but not much more.

Kau Inoa is very visible. Their current mission seems to be to create a list of Hawaiians, so that in the future they may come together and decide what to do next. They are treading very lightly and very slowly.

To me, the whole thing seems very racist. I think that for society to move forward, we should dispense with any effort to dilineate on the basis of race. The sovereignty movement is about empowering those of a single race. Such an effort represents, to me, a backwards step for society.

Democracy and equality for all races and all peoples are higher ideals for a society to pursue, and any movement that seeks to empower only those of a certain race is just backwards and wrong.

[sinjin]

To me, the whole thing seems very racist. I think that for society to move forward, we should dispense with any effort to dilineate on the basis of race. The sovereignty movement is about empowering those of a single race. Such an effort represents, to me, a backwards step for society.Is there only one "society" moving forwards? Self-determination is a basic right IMO. The "self" in this case applies to an ethnic group firstly and a nation secondly.
Democracy and equality for all races and all peoples are higher ideals for a society to pursue, and any movement that seeks to empower only those of a certain race is just backwards and wrong. What defines a culture if its representatives cannot set the ground rules and tone in their own homeland?

[Leo Lakio]

In discussions of this sort, I can grasp on an intellectual level, and to some extent agree with the point that timkona and others make - that there should not be any programs, systems or structures that give preference to any one racially-distinct group over another.

But those arguments consistently fail to take into account the reality of today's world, and can only be accepted in a (presently non-existent) utopian ideal of a world where all races are on an equal playing field.

As much as I would like to accept that I (as a male descendant of primarily European ancestry) bear no burden or responsibility for actions of past generations, I cannot ignore said past trangressions, and accept that, at this point in time, programs that provide additional opportunities to certain racial classes are right and proper, in order to work towards a level of balance.

Would I like a world where these programs are not necessary? Of course. But it does not exist at present, and a blanket rejection of those programs would, in my opinion, take us further away from a goal of equality, rather than bringing us closer to it.

That is how I can personally justify acceptance of the various structures that we so often discuss here, ones designed to rectify a few of the injustices done to kanaka since the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai`i barely more than a century ago.

Sovereignty for Hawai`i? I am neither sold on the idea nor willing to reject it out of hand - I will continue to listen and learn more.

[Miulang]

Kau Inoa is very visible. Their current mission seems to be to create a list of Hawaiians, so that in the future they may come together and decide what to do next. They are treading very lightly and very slowly.

To me, the whole thing seems very racist. I think that for society to move forward, we should dispense with any effort to dilineate on the basis of race. The sovereignty movement is about empowering those of a single race. Such an effort represents, to me, a backwards step for society.

Democracy and equality for all races and all peoples are higher ideals for a society to pursue, and any movement that seeks to empower only those of a certain race is just backwards and wrong.
Remember that Kau Inoa is a child of OHA, and many kanaka maoli regard Kau Inoa as a hinderance and not a help.

Miulang

[timkona]

a goal of equality,

Love, and it's usual consequence, children, is what will foster equality. I must admit that there are as many 'mixed-race marriages' in Hawaii as there are in the SF Bay Area. This dilution will only take 2-3 more generations before the notion of racial separatism becomes OBVIOUSLY idiotic. It is already idiotic, just not obvious to some. If you truly want to preserve racial identity, then history has shown that it is MANDATORY to control reproduction. Therefore, racists are often the people who favor eugenics. Hitler is the poster child of this type of warped thinking.

South Africans typically refer to Americans as "The Mud Race".

As an aside, I would say that my thoughts on race and racism were radically changed when I came to Hawaii. For 12 years I chewed on this. Hawaii Threads has been the resource, for me, that has helped to crystallize my views on the subject. I was never a racist. I just didn't know why.

And now, I am starting to see the SovMov in a more clear light. I agree with Leo....when you remove the question of race or ethnicity, you are likely to convince me of the merits of such a Mov. :)

[Miulang]

For me, it's never been about race or ethnicity. It's about giving the first people who settled Hawai'i the same economic and educational opportunities that all who came after them have access to and enjoy. So if it wasn't the kanaka maoli, it would have been some other group who came first.

Race is a convenient label to help us define who we are/are not. But underneath the skin, we all evolved from the same common ancestors. Even when we do dilute our species back to the point where we all have bits and pieces of each others' gene pools, though, I think we would still want to preserve the rich cultural heritages of the people from who we are descended.

In order to get where we're going, we need to know where we came from.

Miulang

[GnosticWarrior]

Hey Tim,

I agree with you that in general people should not discriminate based on race. That would be the ideal moving forward tho. However, America/Hawaii's has a history that is chock full of discrimination based on race. Until we all as human beings can heal the hurts of the past, all of us in our diversity can not move forward. Our strength as a nation/state is only as strong as our weakest link. We must heal the hurts of injustice in order to move forward with the unity of brotherhood. So bcs of this past, the act of this healing is directed toward a particular race.

Now what are you and I as non-kanaka maoli, doing to help heal this hurt? We can't just go on thinking its the govt.'s job, for we help elect, those in govt. And the govt. does not have a good track record in trying to heal the wounds that it inflicted. So you and I as voters must pressure the govt. to make amends. Pay the right and full compensations and what not, even if that means an increase in taxes or less services for non-kanaka maoli. If we don't do this can you blame the kanaka maoli for believing that govt. is corrupt and have disrespect for its laws? But, let's be reasonable. All legal residents believe they have the right and are a part of Hawaii just as the kanaka maoli are.

Let's work towards a solution. And, I think those who think they are trying to fight for so called equality by challenging the constitutionality of KSBE are full of shit. That's like trying to rub salt in the wound and not working towards healing the hurts to move forward in brotherhood. Those actions and many not even dealing with the illegal overthrow and annexation are preventing the healing. What about at least paying OHA the what they are owed for the use of the Airport on ceded land? C'mon, there is a difference between what you can get away with legally and what you know is right in your heart. Let's correct the wrong, with what we know is right.

So until all of us non-kanaka maoli, beneficiaries of their demise, can work towards healing the hurts of injustice, I could never expect the kanaka maoli to see me as his/her brother even if I see him/her as my brother/sister. I would also hope that they don't hold their breath about it tho, and know that seeing things by race instead of character and spirit will only burden themselves. The power of forgiveness only lies with them and for their own benefit only. They have to want to move forward too.

[mapen]

Is there only one "society" moving forwards? Self-determination is a basic right IMO. The "self" in this case applies to an ethnic group firstly and a nation secondly.
What defines a culture if its representatives cannot set the ground rules and tone in their own homeland?Yes, all races and peoples of Hawaii are one society. It is not progress to move towards a government that fragments society according to one race being superior to any other.

The current government, as messed up and dysfunctional as it is, gives active representatives the ability to set "ground rules" in their homeland in a manner equal to all. I can't imagine that a Kingdom of Hawaii, if it existed today, would be fair, just, and impartial to all its people, even to members of the Hawaiian race. It would probably be a an elitist society benefiting those (Hawaiian or not) that are allies of the ruling families of Hawaii.

[mapen]

sorry, duplicate post

[Miulang]

Interesting new scholarly article that was just published called "A Slippery Path Towards Hawaiian Indigeneity (http://www2.hawaii.edu/~anu/pdf/Indigeneity.pdf)". It questions the assumptions made about the history and laws of Hawai'i by comparing the differences between Hawaiian sovereignty and Hawaiian indigeneity.

Miulang