The question for ALL “natives” is this: Is your “culture” really shared by all those who you claim as your “brothers/sisters”, and what is stopping you from creating a politico/economic bloc from the REAL population that actually does share your “culture”?

In a sane nation, politico/economic blocs are “culture” based, and not genetically based.

I would beg all “natives” to demonstrate, concretely, the beauty and power of their “culture” within the piece of land that they call “theirs” to such an extent, and with such humanity and graciousness that ALL human-beings within that land YURN to belong to your culture.

And if a particular genetic makeup is a requirment for inclusion in your culture, then your quest refutes and defeats itself as the vain wish of a minority population to vent it’s juvenile anger by evil-doing, and not become a cultural force for good.

In other words, give up the racial hatred or your cause will forever be lost, as it is in reality an expression of the desire for the superiority of one race (yours) over others (all others).

Does a “race” have a way to guarantee that they will remain a “race”? YES. They may choose to marry whom they like.

Does a “race” have a way to guarantee that they will be a politico/economic power? YES. They may choose whom they would like to trade with.

Is a “race” guaranteed any power not “guaranteed” by the two above behaviors? NO.

Time, history, and evolution do not agree with racist “time stopping”.

Don’t fall into that trap. Become a people whos culture everyone on the planet would YURN to be included in.

Leave the eugenics to the psychopaths.

When the Kamehameha dynasty ended, the monarchy in Hawaii was doomed to a necessary dissolution. The five kings of that family, assisted by their premiers, who were Kanaka women, and by such missionaries as Judd, Bingham, Chamberlain, Coan, Goodrich, and Damonmaintained the progress of civilization and prosperity, but when Kalakaua was elected king, the most surprising and disgraceful corruptions infected the Government. Without detailing in this report the constant decline from bad to worse, which the evidence discloses, without contradiction or explanation, when Liliuokalani was enthroned the monarchy was a mere shell and was in condition to crumble on the slightest touch of firm opposition. Under her brief rule, it was kept alive by the care and forbearing tolerance of the conservative white people, who owned $50,000,000 of the property in Hawaii, until they saw that the Queen and her party had determined to grasp absolute power and destroy the constitution and the rights of the white people. When they were compelled to act in self-defense the monarchy disappeared. It required nothing but the determined action of what was called the missionary party to prostrate the monarchy, and that action had been taken before the troops from the Boston landed.

The committee agree that such was the condition of the Hawaiian Government at the time that the troops were landed in Honolulu from the steam warship Boston; that there was then an interregnum in Hawaii as respects the executive office; that there was no executive power to enforce the laws of Hawaii, and that it was the right of the United States to land troops upon those islands at any place where it was necessary in the opinion of our minister to protect our citizens.

Because you have no plight. You have the right to participate in the government of your homeland, just like everyone else there does.

The UN spoke volumes when it took hawaii off the non-self-governing territories list after the vote for statehood in 1959…

This is a lie.

http://libweb.hawaii.edu/digicoll/annexation/petition/pet820.html

The anti-annexation petitions were rife with fraud, and had a total # of signatures of 21,269, of which 23 percent were from minors.

It goes back to the Great Mahele where “half-castes” were not allowed to participate and acquire land. There were many Hawaiians who opposed selling any land to non-Hawaiians from the beginning (or permitting them to participate in the government, blame the King.)

“Yet, did my kupuna not forsee the future when a majority of the Hawaiian population would be of less-than half blood?”

Yes, in fact the memoires of King K’s wife Keopulani predicted it.

“Just because I am not 50% Hawaiian as my mother is, does that make me less of a Hawaiian?
”
Does it make you any less American?

“I think 1976 was the year when native peoples were finally realizing that the concept of blood quantum was flawed and some other countries with native peoples began to abolish the blood quantum regulations.”

Ahh, so racial preferences are based upon whatever part of one’s heritage that one chooses to identify with, not fact. Suppose a person is 63/64ths Japanese and 1/64 Hawaiian and was born in Oregon. By the Akaka definition this person is Hawaiian and qualifies for special treatment under the law. Is this right?

“So how do you propose that we gain a seat at the table?”

Well, first I was under the impression you wanted to own the table.

Second, the only way to a seat at the table is education, and if you have to do that yourself, then that is what you have to do.

The rest is just demogoguery and pandering and you will be sorry in the end if you buy into it.

I think 1976 was the year when native peoples were finally realizing that the concept of blood quantum was flawed and some other countries with native peoples began to abolish the blood quantum regulations. If I’m not mistaken, the Maori in Aotearoa (a.k.a. New Zealand) was one of the native peoples to do so along with a few Native American nations. We are one of the few, if not the only one, that still adheres to this policy.

I, for one, am against gambling no matter how much revenue it could bring in–the whole concept is gaming is destructive.

So how do you propose that we gain a seat at the table?

AND, YES, THE AKAKA BILL IS IN DEED STEALTH LEGISLATION FOR ALL THOSE WHO DESIRE INDEPENDENCE!

The next resolutions introduced by Delegate J. Kuhio Kalaianaole raised the blood quantum level to 1/32. This still wasn’t good enough for the Hawaiian population who was trying to preserve their bloodline.

The situation was described by then Hawaii Attorney General Harry Irwin:

“In the bill as it passed the House last year that read: ‘Not less than on-thirty-second part.’ That particular provision was the cause of a good deal of opposition on the part of the opponents of the bill, and in order to meet that opposition, and perhaps do away with some of the opposition, the legislature decided to amend that to read ‘not less than one-half part of the blood of the races inhabiting the Hawaiian Islands previous to 1778,’ so as to make the proposition more distinctly a Hawaiian rehabilitation scheme. It was said by opponents of the bill that a person of one-thirty-second Hawaiian blood was to all intents and purposes a white person; that as a matter of fact you could not tell the difference between a person having one-thirty-second part of Hawaiian blood from a white person. So in order to meet that objection this change is suggested and the provisions of the bill are confined to those with not less than one-half Hawaiian blood.”

(The above quotes are from Senate Testimony on the Native Hawaiian Study Commission committee hearings.)

The intention was to preserve the Hawaiian bloodline, not water it down. The blood quantum was gradually increased to satisfy native Hawaiian interests. Not the other way around. The intent was to create Hawaiian communities on Hawaiian Homelands that were predominately majority blood Hawaiians and restore the bloodline and culture, the “rehabilitation scheme” which would get them out of poverty in the cities. That the program has never been properly implemented is another issue.

The attempt to redefine Hawaiian as “one drop” of Hawaiian blood raged from about 1976 forward. There are still many groups that oppose that redefinition and want the one-half definition kept for HHL leases. The main group that has pushed for the redefinition is, can you guess? OHA. It would expand their base and increase their power.

As for the 80% of Native Americans that move off the reservation, I have some experience with that. If one isn’t a member of the families of the ruling tribal councils then one gets bupkis. All that casino money and money from natural resources and the like go to four or five families controlling the tribal councils and everyone else starves. Same thing would happen here. If you aren’t a member of OHA or one of the other ruling councils you still wouldn’t have a seat at the table.

You think that 80% of Native Americans move away from the reservation to embrace what the U.S. has to offer? Could it be that there are no jobs on the rez!? Could it be that they are forced to leave!? It sounds like you listened to the “Historical Trauma show, which I thank you for. Unfortunately, you did not get the point. You’d better attend the next Powwow in your area and do a survey. I’m sure you’ll have a rude awakening… The next you know, you’ll tell that a large percentage of U.S. armed forces are made up of Native Americans because they love the U.S.!?

Excuse me, but The Big Five (A&B, C&C, C.B. T.D. and Amfac) were the ones who did not agree with the 1/32nd blood quantum…they did not want anyone and everyone with Hawaiian blood to own land. That would have been counter-productive to their lust for land and profit. I don’t know where you got your “revisionist” version of history from, but I have a hunch that you got it from Twiggy’s so-called book.

Primitive (yet succesful) agricultural communism = Yes, but for only those who want to. Personally, I want to live in modern times yet be grounded in the wisdom of my kupuna and finally have a seat at the table when it comes to having pairity with the dominant non-native cultures that run my occupied homeland.

Is that too much to ask?