I think the 1959 referendum on joining the US where 90+% voted in favor of statehood means we can stop with the occupation rhetoric.
Plus, it’s not like the Hawaiians of 1892 weren’t living on the bones of earlier societies. Which Hawaiian government of the of the past 2000 years is the most legitimate?
[quote=“Chesterfield, post:23, topic:93205”]
I think the 1959 referendum on joining the US where 90+% voted in favor of statehood means we can stop with the occupation rhetoric.[/quote]
Well, you can stop whenever you like.
The 1959 vote does not mean that the overthrow in 1893 was legal or justified (as Public Law 103-150 reaffirmed in 1993), just as the Emancipation Proclamation (or Obama’s election) did not put the issues arising from slavery to rest once and for all. The ramifications of the overthrow - especially the legal implications for land ownership - are still a matter of discussion today, and not just among sovereignty advocates.
I think it’s a misuse of the word that dilutes the proper use. It’s a rich guy trying to get what he wants. If it was non-indigenous white people he would be using the courts the exact same way.
Suing people and tracking them down are two very different options.
Sure, but that doesn’t make his actions this time not racist. He’s been getting pushback from the community ever since he bought the property in 2014, and is certainly well aware by now of the extra significance attached to this kind of thing in Hawaii.
Actually, that’s exactly what it means. If his action doesn’t depend on race, then it isn’t racism.
Oh for sure. I probably don’t understand the process, but I thought the law suits happen when ownership claims are contested. That is, if 50 people come forward with claims that total 200% of the actual land, then the courts have to settle it.
If you don’t understand the importance of context in a discussion of what constitutes racist behavior, then you haven’t been paying attention for the last 50 years.
Meanwhile, in today’s news Zuckerberg is responding to the criticism by claiming he’s doing these families a favor. It reminds me a little of a few years ago, when some LDS leaders were caught retroactively Baptizing deceased Jews without the descendants’ permission or even knowledge, and they not only denied the charge of antisemitism but even claimed they were just trying to help the victims.
Bully? Racist? Both? Perhaps MZ just doesn’t give a fuck up a cat’s ass.
That’s right; it is why I got this news early. And while as a non-Hawaiian transplant (I’ve only been here 25 years) I’m hardly an advocate for sovereignty, I try to be sensitive to the situation of the communities that people like me have displaced over the last century.
Got it. More than anything I was trying to make a point that you know what you’re talking about. 
FWIW I did see this story popping up on my (non-curated) news feeds just a little bit ago so it sounds like this story is starting to get more mainstream attention.
We should all be as sensitive as you. Is there any person on Earth that can claim they aren’t part of a community that displaced an earlier community?
Locals round here were doing fine for about 50,000 years until us whitefellas rocked up.
Where’s that?
Or the LDS providing “fostering” to native children while creating an environment where they were raped by trusted adults.
What a douche. Hawai’ians have been getting screwed for generations. If there’s any state within the union that has justification for secession, it is Hawai’i. And there are many locals that are pushing for just that. This is one more reason that I will never again log on to Facebook ever again. Hanna Pa’a!
Edit: secession - not annexation… (brain farted)
Australia. Invasion Day’s next week, so displaced peoples, land theft and genocide is kinda on my mind right now.
[quote=“Chesterfield, post:35, topic:93205”]
Is there any person on Earth that can claim they aren’t part of a community that displaced an earlier community?[/quote]
I don’t know what that has to do with anything, but, out of curiosity, which earlier community are you asserting that the Polynesians displaced when they first discovered and settled in Hawaii?
Air? I bet @Chesterfield was thinking of air. That is really very kind of you @Chesterfield, but you do realize that technically humans displace air wherever they go! I’m sure the air appreciates your concern.
