Comments on the Akaka Bill?

[Jewlipino]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

definitely including Israel

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

I don't think ANY "nation" has ANY predetermined right to existence. PERIOD. Nations get their right to exist by being able to protect themselves from the predations of others in any manner (military, diplomatic, etc.). The Hawaiian "nation" clearly did not do so and thus ceased to exist as a global political entity. Regardless of how it ceased to exist doesn't change the fact that it happened and that there are a lot of sour grapes about it from the great-grandchildren of the people who let it happen!

Ah, so sovereignty isn't a human right of existence, but a plum to be rewarded as a result of war. But the fact is that Hawai'i did have a civil war in 1895 (in English papers it was downgraded to a "rebellion", but people with an agenda do do that). Hawaiians fought and died for their sovereignty. Hawaiians signed a massive petition appealing to the President of the US to return its sovereignty, and your belittling them as an offspring's sour grapes while defending the nobility of how your people did it is hypocritical.

I just have to respond to this.... My reasons for citing the examples above lie in my familiarity with the topics, it is no assertion of cultural superiority or otherwise.

Thank you for that. I invite you to reread what you have written again, and look at how clearly your words DO assert superiority, as you define in YOUR WORDS how "nations earn their right to exist".

The use of the term "deserve" was inappropriate on my part, sorry.

I agree. Your apology is a great start. I appreciate it sincerely.

It was a shortcut to typing out the larger statement which is that those nationalities that have proven successful over the long run have maintained relatively tight social networks usually based around culture and religion and have been sufficiently willing to use force to protect their prerogatives whatever they may be.

Hawaiians fit that description. You have posted to the contrary, but it really is true.

I personally don't mind my racial composition in my tag because when people like Pua'i Mana'o run out of good reasons for stuff like sovereignty I want them to have a target to shoot at.

ah, now let's get deeper. Of *all* the millions of ways that you could have I.D.ed yourself here on an internet forum, you stuck to your ethnic makeup. You are no different than me in how you see yourself. No "suzy fancypants", or "Kristy Kreme" or "Pilates of the Caribbean" for you.

I think your accusing me of runnng out of good reasons to shoot at you is you just taking this personally and grasping at straws. You shot from the hip and normally posts like that don't draw my ire. You can look at these 500+ posts of mine and see for yourself that this is the case. Fact is, I am hyper-detailed on this issue, have spent my entire adult life educating myself on it, and consistently have taken a position that is beyond stuff we cannot control, like race-based policies.

The fact is that I do not identify with my filipino side at all and despite a well-reinforced religious education I am in fact an atheist. Sure the PI is barely a country... at least it IS a country unlike Hawai'i.

ethnic and religious self-identification is a private perrogative. I respect and support your right to your self-view. And how lucky you are that no one is accusing you of sucking on sour grapes because your people were wiped out, or your religious identity banned. I would expect a sense of solidarity and understanding from someone whose people faced similar circumstances.

Sure there are Jews who wouldn't consider me Jewish for a second because I am an atheist, non-practicing, half-breed, however I know that the majority (and it is a VAST majority) does not care (as long as I'm not a Christian). But as long as my cultural-ethnic makeup is being attacked (this means you Pua'i) in relation to this topic I think we are dodging the main thrust which is the Akaka Bill and the sovereignty movement ASSUME that they have the RIGHT to exist when history proves that no such right exists at all. Jewlipino

And you think that you are the only one? Chill, it ain't all about you. Jewish divisions span deeper than a single person. I am not attacking you™, I simply faced the same mirror in your direction that you first held up. The point of this exercise is to humble you to the fact that we Hawaiians, who do not enjoy the same blessings of sovereign homeland that you have, deserve the right to do so.

You descend from survivors. So do I. You are lucky that your peoples have sovereign homelands. Do not begrudge those of us who wish the same. Do not belittle us. I invite you to learn more. I invite your questions.

Now, to get this thread onto the positive. I apologize for hurting your feelings. Your information was insensitive and offensive, and that says a lot because I do have a high tolerance level, preferring to jump into threads that look like they are towards new understanding. But you and I are no different. I believe that we both love these islands. We are frustrated at the social and political directions that are facing these isles, although we might arrive at different conclusions on how to fix it. And I would like to be known for who I am and my own accomplishments as a person--but when I look in the mirror, I call myself a Hawaiian, just like you call yourself Jewlipino.

Aren't we both lucky that we know who we are, and how much we can accomplish in life because all that faces us is where we are going.

aloha, P

[zatoichi]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

I have not followed the thread very carefully.

I believe that they should accept the original Akaka bill.

I believe that Native Hawaiians should have as rights what the Native Americans have as rights.

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

I have not followed the thread very carefully.

I believe that they should accept the original Akaka bill.

I believe that Native Hawaiians should have as rights what the Native Americans have as rights.

The current Akaka Bill got watered down a bit, so it would not give the kanaka maoli all the rights that the federally recognized Native American nations received.

Miulang

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Interesting editorial in today's Advertiser about OHA's new plans for Hawaiian sovereignty. As the Advertiser puts it, it does seem a little strange that OHA, as a quasi governmental agency, has as its new goal to put itself out of business, but if that happens, then it means that perhaps the kanaka maoli will get the recognition and rights they deserve.

"...It would make much more sense to have that function performed by a political group actually elected by Hawaiians, not an agency of the multi-ethnic state of Hawai'i. The taxpayer ought to feel delighted that the new entity would be self-sufficient, using its own resources.

Many cynics doubt any state agency would engineer its own termination, but that's OHA's stated intent. Setting aside its somewhat checkered history, OHA's latest enterprise deserves a shot."


Miulang

[islairla]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Up front I have no real opinion on this, but it might be noteworthy to consider something that occured near my hometown. Their were Native Americans living about sixty or seventy miles away, they won federal recognition. Of perhaps 20,000 people claiming to be members of this tribe only about 250 made the cut. This tribe now runs the most successful casino in the world. Whether or not the 250 spread the wealth I don't know.

[Jewlipino]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

The historical circumstances surrounding annexation and statehood throw into doubt Hawaiians' ability to achieve tribal status easily. The Kingdom enjoyed a period in the 19th century when it made treaties with international powers including, but hardly limited to the United States. Conflicts are products of their times, and while the US made numerous treaties with the various Native American tribes in many ways there is more difference than similarity between the relationship the US had with Native American tribes, and the relationship between the US and the Kingdom of Hawaii. For reasons that I haven't divined yet, it seems that if the USA conquered a tribe a state-within-a-state model was followed (which ultimately is proving to be quite profitable for some tribes), but in cases involving colonial acquisitions and places with large populations of American nationals no maintenance of the original power structures was mandated (and in some cases govts were replaced.... Cuba, the Philippines, Hawaii, Texas). The second case seems to happen more often with larger and more complex political entities such as the Kingdom. Add to that Hawaii's brief existence as a Republic (also sort of like Texas...), plus evidence to the effect that the overthrow was not a purely American adventure (nevermind that some of the Americans that instigated the overthrow were in fact subjects of the Kingdom of Hawaii, which raises the question as to whether the overthrow was an insurrection or hostile act by a foreign power) and there is some pretty muddy water in the histories. Do Hawaiians, in fact, constitute a "tribe" that can be treated as a state-within-a-state, or are they a country that lost a king and gained a republic?

Jewlipino

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Bumping this thread up again because in the US House of Representatives today, Rep. Daniel Akaka reintroduced the Akaka Bill (aka "Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007"). With the shift of power in Congress to the Democrats, will that mean the bill has more chance of passing this year? He chose today, Jan. 17 (the anniversary of the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom) as the day to introduce the legislation because of its significance.

Here is a transcript of Rep. Akaka's speech to Congress introducing the bill.

Miulang

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Bumping this thread up again because in the US House of Representatives today, Rep. Daniel Akaka reintroduced the Akaka Bill (aka "Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007"). With the shift of power in Congress to the Democrats, will that mean the bill has more chance of passing this year? He chose today, Jan. 17 (the anniversary of the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom) as the day to introduce the legislation because of its significance.

Here is a transcript of Rep. Akaka's speech to Congress introducing the bill.

Miulang

Without commenting on the Bill itself and all of its other ramifications, I must give Sen Akaka this: where a bill that normally gets killed off rarely faces revival, that the Good Senator repeatedly does so speaks of his conviction to give the best of his ability to the people who will live long after he to reap the benefits (and antonyms ) of his fight. I admire his tenacity, conviction and heart to do what he considers pono. A rare find in politics.

[lavagal]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

I was downtown yesterday and noted the well-designed sheets that were painted with sovereignty messages on the grounds of Iolani Palace. Now don't get me wrong, speak your piece, but, a double negative is a double negative.

So when some well-intentioned person writes in their best penmanship:
"We Don't Want No..." it means that they DO want it.

So there are like six giant, beautifully painted California King sized sheets that have this grammatically incorrect message. Sure, I still got the point, which is their main goal.

[PoiBoy]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

-----hope----

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Nice to see a comment on hope.

What are you hoping for, Poiboy?

[PoiBoy]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Hope that the right decisions are made and that those decisions made will benefit the Hawaiian people. You can find pro's and con's in any bill...you will always see someone stretching and skewing the facts. No one here should pretend to understand the totality of the bill...or it's effects on the Hawaiian people. I have seen bill's in the past that were "good in theory"...but when applied to real life where detrimental to the people. And vice versa.

I hope that the right decisions are made. And I hope that the Hawaiian people will continue to fight for what is rightfully theirs ...and NOT lay down.

[alohabear]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

With logic like this about sovereignty, no wonder the Akaka bill is moving so slow.

[anapuni808]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

(I'll repost later - website I linked to is not working due to site maintenance)