A Property Rights View
Are some Hawaiians more “Equal” than others?
The Akaka Bill would allow ethnic Hawaiians to sign up for the tribe and vote for the tribal council, receiving federal recognition. Other native Hawaiians, who decide not to sign up, would not be able to vote about tribal affairs.
Doesn’t this sound like Animal Farm by Orwell?
Some Hawaiians (those that play the game) are more equal than those who disagree in principle.
“Some animals are more equal that others.”
Link.
Hana Johnson said,
February 25, 2006 @ 12:58 pm
The American Indians who chose not to live and raise their children on Reservations ventured out and embraced the Anglo-American tradition of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Who knows how great their numbers are but their success rate is probabely better than the majority of Indians still on Reservations who do not reap the profits of gambling (their main industry) but are dependent on appropriations by the federal government. They have given up their tribe in favor of a better life and no longer count. Hawaiians who do not embrace the “tribe” if the Akaka Bill is passed will undoubtedly cease to count as anything “native” by their definition.
Consider this: Is it the Hawaiians who need the support of the American Indian tribes to achieve self-determination (by the passing of this Bill) which will allow for anyone with a drop of Hawaiian blood to qualify for the benefits stated therein or is it the American Indian tribes who need the Hawaiians in order for this Bill to be enacted, using the Bill as argument, to lift the requirements of blood quantum, whereby increasing their members and allowing for an increase in appropriations?
Hawaiians are in a better position than the American Indians ever were. We don’t need their “help” to take a giant step backwards. The DHHL must be dismantled and the land distributed amongst Hawaiians as private property and not land leased or held in commune.
Hawaiians can continue to live in the world as they know it and enjoy their newfound freedom. It will help to stabalize the housing market, benefiting all who live here, instead of enabling the State to continue this chokehold it has on everyone.
Anonymous said,
February 25, 2006 @ 11:40 pm
All this done by an act of war and usurping the constitution. New found freedom???????
Hana Johnson said,
February 26, 2006 @ 12:40 am
I suggest to read the first chapter of the Memoirs of Henry Obookiah. What would you rather have?
Long before the overthrow of Lili’uokalani there were Hawaiians in support of absolute rule and Hawaiians in powerful positions who wanted the maka’ainana to have private property, thus giving them their freedom. Namely Kamehameha III and the Great Mahele. Plenty has been said of what happened; no need to go there now.
Some Hawaiians have held private property since, enjoyed it to its fullest and passed on estates, some large some small, to their descendents. Others have never had this “luxury” but have been wards of the state under the Territory and later the State of Hawaii leasing Hawaiian Home Lands. In addition, there are those, as in any society, for whatever reason, who simply have nothing.
What of the Hawaiians whose children have been forced from their homes once their parent has died because they could not qualify to succeed the lease? Where’s the freedom there?
All the Hawaiians who have occupied land from the DHHL have never had the freedom to walk into a bank and take out a loan against their equity to purchase a 2nd home, send their children to private schools and college, purchase a car, etc.
Let’s begin here. This would be a new found freedom.
Anonymous said,
February 26, 2006 @ 11:17 pm
There was no “Act of War” because there were no shots fired.
It was the Queen Liliuokalani who wanted to impose a new Constitution that “usurped” the existing one and gave her dictitorial powers that the Cabinet balked at.
This is what spurred the Revolution and there is no evidence that the U.S. forces had any hand in it.
Anonymous said,
February 27, 2006 @ 1:05 pm
Historical pictures, presidential excerpts, even joint resolutions prove that there was an act of war, and americas evolvement was unlawful.
If not there would be no discussion or this blog existence otherwise????
Anonymous said,
February 27, 2006 @ 8:35 pm
Can’t you do better than that? I fail to see your point because there is no argument in your statement.
Anonymous said,
February 27, 2006 @ 8:39 pm
If everyone’s name is anonymous, what comment belongs to whom?
Who’s comment is being responded to if everyone has the same name?
Don’t everyone respond at once then we’ll really be confused as to who said what.
Anonymous said,
February 27, 2006 @ 9:56 pm
>If not there would be no discussion or this blog existence otherwise????
Magnanimous said,
February 27, 2006 @ 10:51 pm
I think you failed to get the point.
Hatred doesn’t solve anything. Look at the Middle East. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict has cost the World too much and there is no end in sight. If emotions are allowed to rule over reason than we no longer live in a civilized place.
There are many Hawaiians who do not support the Akaka Bill nor sovereignty but have kept quiet for fear of rebuttal or downright nastiness from people in this community.
Hawaiians are not an endangered species and many earn more money than the average worker in this state. Nobody owes them a living just because they descend from the inhabitant of these islands prior to the arrival of Capt. Cook. In addition, anyone born here and calls this home is a native. Anyone raised here and knows only these islands and does not identify with any other place is native enough.
It is because of the refusal to recognize that the fundamental right to life has no boundaries nor belongs to an ethnicity that this problem exists. The Hawaiian Homestead Act of 1920 was flawed from the beginning. It has sealed the fate of Hawaiians to live as serfs. The fight should be directed at the DHHL and OHA; not the same old tiresome rhetoric of the overthrow. The Government has a moral obligation to recognize the fundamental right to life. Right the wrong done in 1920 and recognize the right to private property for those entitled; settling this once and for all.
Anonymous said,
February 28, 2006 @ 10:11 am
Here is an interesting article with a universal message well worth contemplating.
“Dangers of the Herd” by Louis Rene Beres
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060227-093416-9462r.htm
Anonymous said,
February 28, 2006 @ 11:17 pm
Dogs and cats are now living together in peace and harmony? Dont worry about the past deal with issue let them live???????????Shut the hell up
Roy Sokolowski said,
May 4, 2006 @ 11:57 am
The Hawaiian monarchy was not overthrown by less than 300 US troops. Not a single shot was fired by any of these troops. The overthrow was accomplished by citizens of the kingdom (former American citizens). Like it or not, at the time of the overthrow the kingdom had become so weak that a bunch of plantation owners could assume control without firing a shot.
Anonymous said,
May 4, 2006 @ 1:47 pm
No, no, no: this is a war between tribal and royalism. Royalism plus missionaries equals Cult of Kamehameha, KSBE is behind Akaka bill. OHA merely dupes of KSBE. Think about it: Sons and daughters of Chinese immigrants run KSBE today. They kept tribal out of Hawaii to keep way clear for Akaka bill. Akaka bill is not tribal. It’s a new category predicated in royalism. It’s a subrogation scheme designed to cement the power of KSBE. Wake up, people. Senator Inouye works for KSBE.