Hawaii a sovereign nation?

[Gunslinger]

Isn't it a little late for this?  How long does our govt have to be responsible for our past?  I saw this and it disturbed me.  Lets say I'm a white guy living on Oahu and this passes.  Because of this I may have to give up my home and possible livelyhood to a "native" because a minority group wants self govt based on guilt?   Reparations?  How long is this kind of stuff going to go on for?  

I have a fair Idea why not have ONLY the people that were alive at the time  get the land and ONLY the people that were alive at the time of colonization pay for it.

Hawaiians Grapple With Self-Government Bill

Wednesday, July 20, 2005


A move to give native Hawaiians the same rights of self-government and home rule currently given to American Indians and native Alaskans may have a shot at passing the U.S. Senate, but it isn't being embraced at home.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Daniel Akaka (search), is scheduled for a vote Wednesday. Akaka and Hawaii's other Democratic senator, Daniel Inouye (search), said they believe it has enough votes to pass.

But in Hawaii — where some residents say the measure is long overdue but others say it could damage property rights and divide the islands' population along racial lines — a majority oppose it. A new poll shows around 56 percent in Hawaii are against the bill, which would set up the largest sovereign nation in the United States.

The bill would also preserve race-based programs — from health care to education — that serve native Hawaiians only.

The controversy over the sovereignty of native Hawaiian lands dates back to 1893, when businessmen overthrew the monarchy after Lili'uokalani, the Hawaiian queen, surrendered to U.S. Marines. It was a bloodless coup but Hawaiians claim the overthrow was illegal.

Ten years ago, Congress issued an apology to native Hawaiians and agreed to reconciliation. Even though the apology was not necessarily meant to justify claims against the United States, today some native Hawaiians want reparations. Others say the bill is divisive and, because the islands overwhelmingly approved statehood in 1959, obsolete.

"This is a declaration by the U.S. Congress and the administration — and it lays the foundation for the reconciliation process — which must be an engagement of native Hawaiians with the United States," said Haunani Apoliona of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (search).

But Hawaii resident William Burgess said he thought the bill was a "land grab" that would hurt the state. "The bill would have the state of Hawaii surrender its sovereignty over lands, surrender sovereignty over part of population and give away one third to one half of its public lands," Burgess said.

The bill would create a new independent native Hawaiian government that will negotiate with the federal and state governments to transfer native lands and resources. Critics say that up to 40 percent of the island state could be up for grabs and native Hawaiians could sue private landowners for aboriginal homeland rights.

"Instead of them bringing about these issues all individually, there is one governing entity now to represent the native Hawaiian people and we feel that is critically important, it's fair, and it's the right thing to do," said Gov. Linda Lingle (search), a Republican who supports the legislation.

But others disagree.

"When does it stop?" asks Hawaiian historian Rubellite Kawene Johnson. "When do you stop charging people for what was wrong ages ago?"

Click in the box near the top of the story to watch a report by FOX News' William La Jeunesse.

[Hangtime]

Henh..

From what i recall of my early hawaiian history.. the hawaiians were kinda spotty about 'property'.. Cook called 'em the most industrious theives he'd ever seen.

Admittedly, we stole from them.. playing by their rules, it's 'finders keepers'.

[Mustaine]

i am 1/8 native american "injun" to be easier....

that is enough for all legal considerations.

if this happens i say all us american indians should sue the gov. for "reperations" and demand all our land in the whole midwest back.

[eskimo2]

I lived in Hawaii for a year.  If I recall correctly, a very small percentage of Hawaiians are pure blood (like less than 1%).  The “natives” are typically at best ¼ Hawaiian. This brings up a question in my mind; how much “rights” does one have who is less than half native?

[Gunslinger]

exactly eskimo, mustaine this opens up a huge bag of worms and what ifs.

[indy007]

Are they going to open casions? That'd be neat.

[Chairboy]

It seems that Samuel Dole, a private entity at the time, took care of all this when he deposed Queen Liliuokalani.  He took control of the government as a private citizen, not as a representative of the US government.  

Later, the US annexed Hawaii and made him governor.  So the US didn't just 'annex' the state without the government's permission, it technically dotted the i's and crossed the t's because a friendly government invited it in.

As such, I don't see a credible legal issue here, instead it's a moral one.

[lasersailor184]

if this happens i say all us american indians should sue the gov. for "reperations" and demand all our land in the whole midwest back.

Stole?  We conquered man.

It's like one of my favorite quotes.


"Caeser didn't say, 'I came, I saw, I felt really bad.'"

[StarOfAfrica2]

Did any of you even bother to read the Akaka bill?  And while the issues of reparations and such might be a bit overdone, its just like any negotiation.  You start higher than you expect to get, to leave yourself wiggle room.  The White House has already told Akaka that if he wants it passed, the military bases have to be protected, reparations have to have a much shorter statute of limitations, etc.  Changes to the text are already being made, to get a passable version to the floor.  This isnt about giving Hawaii back to the Hawai'ian people, its about giving them back some control of their lives and their heritage.

I happen to be a white male living on Oahu, and I support a realistic version of the bill 100%.  So does almost everyone living here.  The Governor is white.  She supports it.  No one expects that the current version is going to pass, but realistically a version WILL eventually pass.  Esp. given the wording of the Apology in 1993, this is the next logical step.

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Stole?  We conquered man.

It's like one of my favorite quotes.


"Caeser didn't say, 'I came, I saw, I felt really bad.'"

even so, I could be wrong about this, but I don't think the reservation land givin to Native Americans belonged to anyone at the time.  It was all still territories.  

This to me sounds like iminent domain but worse.

Can you imagine if you and your wife retired and bought a beautiful home on the beach.  Then one day you are told to move out while some poor schlub gets to move in because he's more that 1/2 Hawaiian and the area was deemed for natives only?

[Chairboy]

Since I've already stated my opinion earlier, I can safely play devils advocate on this.

Gunslinger, speaking hypothetically, apply the concept of receiving stolen property to this.  If a car is stolen, then sold to an innocent third party, when the auto is identified, who gets to keep it?  The original owner?  Or the third party?  In the US, the law has established that the innocent 3rd party has no property rights.  Possibly, they might be able to pursue legal reparation from the party that sold the hot car to them, but that's a separate matter.  If we applied that same model to this, then the couple that bought the land on the beach would need to take up that conversation with the US Government or Dole corporation, right?

[vorticon]

I DEMAND REPARATIONS!!!


i still suffer aftershocks from nilsens viking ancestors invading my ancestors england.

I WANT BLOOOOD!!!!

[StarOfAfrica2]

Originally posted by Chairboy
It seems that Samuel Dole, a private entity at the time, took care of all this when he deposed Queen Liliuokalani.  He took control of the government as a private citizen, not as a representative of the US government.  

Later, the US annexed Hawaii and made him governor.  So the US didn't just 'annex' the state without the government's permission, it technically dotted the i's and crossed the t's because a friendly government invited it in.

As such, I don't see a credible legal issue here, instead it's a moral one.

Chairboy, if you bother to read the rest of the history, it clearly states the US marines helped the private citizens overthrow the Hawai'ian monarchy.  Also, there are preserved documents from the US Ambassador at the time and letters showing correspondence with the US Gov. in Washington that show they approved of the plans even if they didnt back them openly.

[lasersailor184]

How many times do you think that the word "Stole" is going to get thrown around on this post alone?

[Yeager]

Everyone should repay everyone else for everything ever.