Akaka bill Native Hawaiian Definitions
From the Akaka bill: Section 3 Definitions – (10)
. . . the term ”Native Hawaiian” means—
(i) an individual who is 1 of the indigenous, native people of Hawaii and who is a direct lineal descendant of the aboriginal, indigenous, native people who—
(I) resided in the islands that now comprise the State of Hawaii on or before January 1, 1893; and
(II) occupied and exercised sovereignty in the Hawaiian archipelago, including the area that now constitutes the State of Hawaii; or
(ii) an individual who is 1 of the indigenous, native people of Hawaii and who was eligible in 1921 for the programs authorized by the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (42 Stat.108, chapter 42) or a direct lineal descendant of that individual.
~ ~ ~
Now what does (II) really mean? Only the Ali’i? Only those that were part of the monarchy? The monarchy exercised sovereignty not the kanaka maoli. This is a very slippery definition.
How is the rest of this definition not a “racial heritage” definition? What else is a “direct lineal descendent” other that a racial heritage definition? Why should some be treated differently than others because of who their ancestors were on the basis of “one drop” of Hawaiian blood?
Anonymous said,
December 1, 2005 @ 5:50 pm
I recognize the team members. I am going to post a link to this page on Richard Hough’s website: http://www.houghforcongress.org.
We hope that through Richard the people will have a voice/vote in this matter.
Anonymous said,
December 2, 2005 @ 7:27 pm
Stop playing the race card. Really only the ali’i had and exercised sovereignty this lame argument was tried a few years ago and failed badly. All the subjects had the right to a land base, had a fully functioning Government, were a part or a distinct population, and exercised sovereignty through there Government by way of the right to travel and commerce with other Nations and so on.
Mark Kamakea said,
December 4, 2005 @ 6:52 pm
Stop whining about what is not rightfully yours.
Anti-discrimination policy is not intended to be a tool for the powerful to further exploit the disenfranchised.
M. Kesa said,
December 5, 2005 @ 2:11 pm
‘Eo! “Thou shall NOT covet and steal!” Lawa!!!!
M. Kesa said,
December 16, 2005 @ 12:33 pm
The Independence Struggle Of Hawai’i
By Amy Marsh
08 December, 2005
Countercurrents.org
Families forced from their homes…live military ordnance left to explode near schools and homes, maiming or killing the occasional civilian…huge Stryker vehicles rolling relentlessly over a fragile landscape as the United States imposes an alien, imperialist government that brings oppression, genocide and ecological destruction to the local population and environment…
Iraq? A’ole! No! These are current conditions in the so-called “state” of Hawai’i. Visitors to Hawai’i, and those who settle there from the mainland, often remain blissfully unaware of the true history of this place. Or if they begin to hear a bit about it, consider the American occupation as a “done deal” and go about their business.
The worst public health statistics in the region…the lowest education level…the highest incarceration rate…the most poverty…the most children in foster care…the most people without homes…families and communities torn apart by drugs imported by organized crime…
Typical inhabitants of any American inner city? Nope! They are the original inhabitants of “America’s Vacation Paradise:” they are the “kanaka maoli,” the Native Hawaiians.
A small country with a vibrant spiritual culture forcibly overthrown by a superpower bent on conquest for military and economic reasons…the people forced to assimilate foreign ways contrary to their basic values, denied access to their culture, history and even their language…a Diaspora of exiles…a struggle for de-occupation and the re-establishment of their government and sovereign status…
Tibet in 1959? Guess again. It’s the Kingdom of Hawai’i, which was a modern constitutional monarchy and declared neutral nation engaged in treaty relationships with over fifty other countries — violently seized in 1893; illegally annexed by the United States through a domestic resolution; forced into “statehood” in 1959 in violation of United Nations rules… Given an “apology” for all this by the Clinton administration in 1993…
A bit of history: on January 17, 1893, Queen Lili`uokalani was forced from her throne by American businessmen and business-minded missionary sons, with the help of John L. Stevens, the American Minister to the Hawaiian Kingdom, and the American navy. The overthrow was violent, unjustified, insulting, and in complete violation of international law. U.S. President Benjamin Harrison apparently gave unofficial encouragement to the conspirators in 1892 and after the overthrow he presented their annexation petition to the U.S. Senate. But incoming President Grover Cleveland was appalled. He withdrew the petition before the Senate could act, called for an investigation, and issued a powerful statement to reinstate the queen and the rightful government. But the treasonous provisional government refused to comply. President Cleveland was also opposed by powerful interests within the United States who were loathe to part with their juicy prize.
In 1897, approximately 21,000 Hawaiians — more than half the adult Hawaiian population — signed and presented a petition protesting annexation to the United States. Congress ignored them. Despite the petition evidence to the contrary, it was far more lucrative for Congress to accept the assurances of missionary lobbyists who claimed the Hawaiians were eager for annexation.
This “Ku’e Petition” of resistance to annexation — 556 pages long, and possibly one of the most significant documents of protest in American, as well as Hawaiian, history — was buried deeply in the U.S. National Archives until it was found by Noenoe Silva in 1998, over a hundred years later. The discovery of the petition, and the exhibition of this document by the Bishop Museum in Honolulu, had an enormous impact on the kanaka maoli, who searched the pages eagerly for the names of their grandparents and great-grandparents. As Silva puts it, “The petition, inscribed with the names of everyone’s kupuna, gave people permission from their ancestors to participate in the quest for national sovereignty. More important, it affirmed for them that their kupuna had not stood by idly, apathetically, while their nation was taken from them.”
Now, not every Native Hawaiian or part-Hawaiian is a sovereignty activist working toward restoration of the kingdom. Many have adjusted to colonization and consider themselves Americans. At most, they may be supporters of the dangerous Akaka bill, thinking to preserve Hawaiian “entitlements” through a federal recognition process that will turn them into the equivalent of American Indians.
But there are many others who recognize the bill for what it is — a way to finalize the land grab of the Kingdom and take title of contested kanaka maoli lands once and for all — and who are vigorously opposed to the bill. They do not consider themselves “American” and continue to insist upon being recognized as subjects of the Kingdom. As one man put it to me, when I asked him about his livelihood, “I work for the Queen.” In other words, he has devoted the rest of his life to the restoration of his country. He is not alone.
It is easy for people from the mainland to ignore or dismiss the history of Hawai’i, yet the illegal occupation of Hawai’i continues to have a huge detrimental effect on the people, the environment and the culture. The struggle for Hawaiian independence is a long standing, bitterly fought cause which deserves wider recognition and support from the rest of the world. Free Hawai’i, now.
Note: Portions of this article were originally published in Slingshot,
http://www.countercurrents.org/hawai-marsh081205.htm
Anonymous said,
December 22, 2005 @ 12:23 pm
The race card should not have been played in the ‘93 apology resolution - the kingdom of 1893 was multi-racial, with over 50% non-kanaka maoli.
All the subjects of the kingdom had rights, not just the kanaka ones. The akaka bill seems to conveniently ignore that fact.
Anonymous said,
December 22, 2005 @ 12:38 pm
This “Ku’e Petition” of resistance to annexation — 556 pages long, and possibly one of the most significant documents of protest in American, as well as Hawaiian, history — was buried deeply in the U.S. National Archives until it was found by Noenoe Silva in 1998, over a hundred years later.
This petition was rife with fraud:
http://libweb.hawaii.edu/digicoll/annexation/petition/pet820.html
James Mauliola Keaka Stone, Jr. said,
December 22, 2005 @ 5:10 pm
My observation is that many westerners, but Americans in particular, are unable to see “Hawaiian” as anything other than a racial classification. I suppose this is unremarkable in light of American law, history, language, and culture, (even the U.S. Constitution) which contain examples of racial prejudice and injustice universally abhorred by civilized people. Even today, America still struggles with race.
Hawaiians on the other hand have a completely different history, language and culture. Hawaiian language has no word for race and Hawaiian culture is noteworthy for its acceptance and tolerance. At the time the U.S. practiced slavery, Hawaiians welcomed Americans and many became part of the government. Tragically, many of these Americans participated in the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian nation.
Rather than a racial classification, “Hawaiian” is more properly a political classification.
Please, no more lectures regarding the evils of racism. You are merely projecting your history upon us, and frankly, Americans are the least qualified to judge others regarding proper “race” relations.
Iakeo said,
December 23, 2005 @ 9:25 pm
James Mauliola Keaka Stone, Jr. said:
“Rather than a racial classification, “Hawaiian” is more properly a political classification.”
Show me the polis of this “political classification” called Hawai’ian.
“Maoli” means (at it’s base) “REAL/TRUE/GENUINE”.
Who are the “maoli” Hawai’ians? The “real” hawai’ians? And on what basis are they REAL?
Terms like “maoli”, or “pure”, or “brahmin”, or “aryan”, are continually hijacked by racists.
Stating that the present governmental order of Hawai’i is ILLEGAL is simply trumped by those who make the laws stating that it is LEGAL.
If you can get “the people” (America as a country) to give up the territory, do it! Or try to take it by force.
There is no “power” that can force a nation (be it American or “Native Hawai’ian”) to give up it’s sense of itself as a nation, if it HAS a sense of itself as a nation.
There IS, however, a “power” that can enforce it’s self-interest, and that power is law.
Both of you, keep up the good fight to remain a nation,.. both America and “Native Hawai’i”.
..but don’t decapitate yourselves in the process.
Anonymous said,
January 19, 2006 @ 7:52 pm
>>My observation is that many westerners>Rather than a racial classification, “Hawaiian” is more properly a political classification.
jere krischel said,
February 16, 2006 @ 8:39 pm
Hawaiian language has no word for race and Hawaiian culture is noteworthy for its acceptance and tolerance. At the time the U.S. practiced slavery, Hawaiians welcomed Americans and many became part of the government.
Which make it all the more ironic that the descendants of these people who believed that we were all of one blood, and had no concept of different races, would demand special treatment based on their genetic heritage.
Paul Arrighi said,
March 18, 2006 @ 7:20 pm
So what Jere is saying is that is OK for America to practise racial preference but not the Hawaiians.
Anonymous said,
March 19, 2006 @ 11:41 am
It is wrong to practice racial preference in any form. It is was wrong way back then, it is wrong to enshrine it now.
At least you admit it the current “racial preference” advocated by Hawaiians is what it is: bigotry. Pure and simple.
The past cannot be fixed. All you have to look forward to is the future. As a slave or as a freeman. Enshrine some level of “indigenous ancestry” and what you are doing is enslaving some for the benefit of others.
Stop looking back. When you are looking backwards is when you walk into the tree.