Rule Allows Native Hawaiians to Form Their Own Government - Polidicks

[quote]Last week, the Interior Department issued a final ruling allowing the Native inhabitants of Hawaii to conduct a referendum on re-establishing a government for the indigenous community for the first time in 120 years. If ratified, that body, representing 527,000 indigenous Hawaiians, would be able to establish a government-to-government relationship with the U.S. and give native islanders more power over their culture, traditions and other self-government issues, similar to sovereign Native American nations. It’s been a long road to this point. In the 1800s, the U.S. government recognized the Hawaiian Islands as an independent nation ruled over by a native monarchy. Over time, however, American businesses continued to make inroads via trade agreements. By 1891, U.S. sugar plantation owners and companies controlled about four-fifths of the islands and had pushed through a new constitution greatly reducing the power of the native government and restricting the rights of the native population to vote. [url]http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/rule-allows-native-hawaiians-form-their-own-government-180960598[/url] [/quote]

God I hope we don't treat them like the mainland Natives.

Enjoy having you're shit ton amount of casinos Hawaii

i thought native hawiians already had tremendous say in their local government since it is the only minority majority government in the US

[QUOTE=Sableye;51123693]i thought native hawaiians already had tremendous say in their local government since it is the only minority majority government in the US[/QUOTE] Kind of. There is some sway in local government towards native Hawaiians. There's some pretty strong pushes towards preserving land and trying to be self-sufficient but things like appropriate housing are huge issues that have been ongoing for years now. So they do, to an extent, but there's only so much they have a say in. I know one major problem recently has been a telescope being built on Mauna Kea that apparently trespasses on sacred land. Protests are basically shut down immediately so it's not like native Hawaiians have a tremendous say in anything. The only thing about this is that, for the most vocal people, this isn't enough. The whole point of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement is to be recognized as a sovereign nation apart of the US completely. Already, a bunch of people are saying that this isn't enough. Personally I don't really agree with the whole sovereignty movement because I kind of like how my life is rn but to each their own. [editline] edit [/editline] Oh shit I'm a gold member when did that happen

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;51123604]enjoy you're shit ton of casinos[/QUOTE] what does this have to do with anything

[QUOTE=djshox;51125384]what does this have to do with anything[/QUOTE] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_gaming[/url] Because Native land is considered "sovereign", states can't restrict gambling. And since that's a major way to make income on what's otherwise shitty land, Amerindians tend to run a lot of casinos.

This is not going to be pretty. Will be funny if the natives end up making casinos though, they're the same people who have been crying about "keeping the country country" for the past 10+ years.

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;51123604]enjoy you're shit ton of casinos[/QUOTE] I like how the borderline racism is coupled with spelling errors

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;51125809]I like how the borderline racism is coupled with spelling errors[/QUOTE] How is what he said racist?

[QUOTE=ejonkou;51132569]How is what he said racist?[/QUOTE] or misspelled. Spelling's fine!

[QUOTE=Blitzkrieg Zero;51125060]Kind of. There is some sway in local government towards native Hawaiians. There's some pretty strong pushes towards preserving land and trying to be self-sufficient but things like appropriate housing are huge issues that have been ongoing for years now. So they do, to an extent, but there's only so much they have a say in. I know one major problem recently has been a telescope being built on Mauna Kea that apparently trespasses on sacred land. Protests are basically shut down immediately so it's not like native Hawaiians have a tremendous say in anything. The only thing about this is that, for the most vocal people, this isn't enough. The whole point of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement is to be recognized as a sovereign nation apart of the US completely. Already, a bunch of people are saying that this isn't enough. Personally I don't really agree with the whole sovereignty movement because I kind of like how my life is rn but to each their own. [editline] edit [/editline] Oh shit I'm a gold member when did that happen[/QUOTE] i remember following the telescope thing though and the US government agency behind it bent over backwards to accomidate them, including pay them a substantial amount to build the telescope, right next to several other telescopes. it really wasn't about preserving the land

[QUOTE=Sableye;51132976]i remember following the telescope thing though and the US government agency behind it bent over backwards to accommodate them, including pay them a substantial amount to build the telescope, right next to several other telescopes. it really wasn't about preserving the land[/QUOTE] Preserving the land in the sense that it remains untouched. There were protests about the other telescopes as well but just the size of this last one was what provoked that response. Any local person here that is behind the sovereignty movement actually have pretty substantial integrity, since it's usually not really about money or status or whatever. If it's not exactly what they (native Hawaiians) want, it's not good enough, and that's where the problems lie. Not a lot of room for negotiation or compromise on their part. I mean, granted state and county governments try to accommodate native Hawaiian requests but there's a general sense of entitlement because of the bad blood in history between Hawai'i and the US so demands are pretty much thrown around left and right. Whether it's justified or not is all up to each individual. And I know I'm kind of generalizing but trust me when I say that anybody that tries to incorporate traditional Hawaiian culture into their life is like this. Maybe with some differences here and there but in general it's not a huge leap to assume that most locals in the sovereignty movement are like this. Hawaiian teachers, whether they be language, culture or history, are all pretty opinionated and they make that fact very clear.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;51125809]I like how the borderline racism is coupled with spelling errors[/QUOTE] it's not racist if it's true: [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51125432][url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_gaming[/url] Because Native land is considered "sovereign", states can't restrict gambling. And since that's a major way to make income on what's otherwise shitty land, Amerindians tend to run a lot of casinos.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;51133395]it's not racist if it's true:[/QUOTE] Hawaii is over 2000 miles away from California. Toronto is about the same distance from Mexico City. The natives of the two landmasses have nothing to do with each other except having been subjugated by the same power. The assumption that the two peoples are at all alike, culturally speaking, is based on the fact that they, racially, are categorized together. Therefore, it is racist.

I don't think casinos are really a focus of Hawaiians attention seeing as when this was approached with the Akaka bill, they gave up casinos as concession to try and get it passed and no one was upset about it.

[QUOTE=Mining Bill;51133438]Hawaii is over 2000 miles away from California. Toronto is about the same distance from Mexico City. The natives of the two landmasses have nothing to do with each other except having been subjugated by the same power. The assumption that the two peoples are at all alike, culturally speaking, is based on the fact that they, racially, are categorized together. Therefore, it is racist.[/QUOTE] what would you do if you owned land that had a lack of gambling regulations? it's human nature to take advantage of things like that, so in a sense they are exactly alike. how is that racist?

The idea itself isn't, and I didn't mean that in any sort of accusatory way, my dood. I just meant that this: [QUOTE=theevilldeadII;51123604]Enjoy having you're shit ton amount of casinos Hawaii[/QUOTE] kinda has overtones of "all those natives act the same", by my measure.

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;51133524]what would you do if you owned land that had a lack of gambling regulations? it's human nature to take advantage of things like that, so in a sense they are exactly alike. how is that racist?[/QUOTE] Hawaiian's don't have any cultural ties to gambling, the land is actually valuable that their fighting to get. Also Hawaiians wouldn't have to use gambling to attract tourism income, seeing as the state is already known as premier vacation destination. Hell there are factions among the Hawaiians that already calling to give up casinos like in the Akaka bill to help speed this up through the interior department after the vote. Maybe some self serving party's among Hawaiians are interested in it, but as whole the movement couldn't care less about casinos.

[QUOTE=Mining Bill;51133545]The idea itself isn't, and I didn't mean that in any sort of accusatory way, my dood. I just meant that this: kinda has overtones of "all those natives act the same", by my measure.[/QUOTE] Natives don't all act the same But many, many many reservations subsist on the income generated by casinos. If it's racist to state a truth, oh well. [editline]30th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=kaniho;51133570]Hawaiian's don't have any cultural ties to gambling, the land is actually valuable that their fighting to get. Also Hawaiians wouldn't have to use gambling to attract tourism income, seeing as the state is already known as premier vacation destination. Hell there are factions among the Hawaiians that already calling to give up casinos like in the Akaka bill to help speed this up through the state department after the vote. Maybe some self serving party's among Hawaiians are interested in it, but as whole the movement couldn't care less about casinos.[/QUOTE] Native americans don't typically have a history of gambling either from their culture.

[QUOTE=kaniho;51133570]Hawaiian's don't have any cultural ties to gambling, the land is actually valuable that their fighting to get. Also Hawaiians wouldn't have to use gambling to attract tourism income, seeing as the state is already known as premier vacation destination. Hell there are factions among the Hawaiians that already calling to give up casinos like in the Akaka bill to help speed this up through the state department after the vote. Maybe some self serving party's among Hawaiians are interested in it, but as whole the movement couldn't care less about casinos.[/QUOTE] okay that actually makes sense. i forgot that hawaii isn't a semi-arid wasteland and actually has attractions.

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;51133591]okay that actually makes sense. i forgot that hawaii isn't a semi-arid wasteland and actually has attractions.[/QUOTE] Pretty much that in a nutshell, they are on a lush tropical island situated in the middle of both the american and Asian tourism scene, they have more then enough opportunity to make mad money off of both once they have a little organization and recognition that Interior department is helping to give.

Worth noting that there's a decent amount of the population that actively enjoys the gambling scene, to the point it's common to refer to Las Vegas as the "ninth island". Adding the fact that Hawaiis primary source of income is tourism, adding casinos to the list of attractions isn't entirely irrational. But it does make me wonder if adding casinos to the scene will clash with mainlander's "paradise" image of Hawaii.

Yeah, there was no way they were going to get full independence. Hawaii is too valuable as a strategic anchorage for the US government to just let it go.

[QUOTE=Mining Bill;51133438]Hawaii is over 2000 miles away from California. Toronto is about the same distance from Mexico City. The natives of the two landmasses have nothing to do with each other except having been subjugated by the same power. The assumption that the two peoples are at all alike, culturally speaking, is based on the fact that they, racially, are categorized together. Therefore, it is racist.[/QUOTE] It's not racist. It's a stereotype, but it's not a racist remark.

[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51134514]Yeah, there was no way they were going to get full independence. Hawaii is too valuable as a strategic anchorage for the US government to just let it go.[/QUOTE] In the very long run there may be disputes about the ceded lands [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceded_lands[/url] . Not the entire state that'd be silly. Though what this is really about in the words of the interior department "To create a pathway to a Government to Government relationship" with federal recognition and the ability to represent and sue the state on behalf of the native Hawaiians. There are mismanagement's by the state that previously had no way of being challenged. A great example is Hawaiian Home Lands, which is a land specifically in a trust for Hawaiians to homestead. It has an arbitrary blood quantum of 50% decided by the state where other natives get to decide their blood quantum threshold [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_quantum_laws[/url] . and it is underfunded because it takes in 0 dollars from state tax money and it instead collects leases from non Hawaiians which would be fine if the state hadn't plundered that money to be put into the general state fund, and it has a wait list for the land once you have been approved that regularly span's 25-40 years. That's just one program and like 20% of it's inadequacy. The state of Hawaii has manged matters regarding native Hawaiians so poorly since the federal Government handed over responsibility in 1959 that the Interior department is being forced to step in. TLDR: Hawaii as a state is never going any where. This is about the ability for future lawsuits.

Except reservations were the worst thing to happen to mainland native Americans. They are bastions of poverty and crime. They force generation after generation of Native American children to grow up in an environment that doesn't adequately prepare them to work with the rest of the country. as a result of their status, they are not granted constitutional protections. We allow these little dictatorships to exist in the interest of protecting them, but the reality is that it does nothing of the sort. We are all so afraid of integration because of the fucking Indian boarding schools, but the reality is that integration was the only solution from the beginning. Now we make things worse for Hawaiians too. Lovely.

[QUOTE=GunFox;51135991]Except reservations were the worst thing to happen to mainland native Americans. They are bastions of poverty and crime. They force generation after generation of Native American children to grow up in an environment that doesn't adequately prepare them to work with the rest of the country. as a result of their status, they are not granted constitutional protections. We allow these little dictatorships to exist in the interest of protecting them, but the reality is that it does nothing of the sort. We are all so afraid of integration because of the fucking Indian boarding schools, but the reality is that integration was the only solution from the beginning. Now we make things worse for Hawaiians too. Lovely.[/QUOTE] It's like the EU, you have a lot of good shit but you also have to deal with a lot of bad shit too. If they can keep civil rights as a main pillar of their country then it will only be good.

[QUOTE=GunFox;51135991]Except reservations were the worst thing to happen to mainland native Americans. They are bastions of poverty and crime. They force generation after generation of Native American children to grow up in an environment that doesn't adequately prepare them to work with the rest of the country. as a result of their status, they are not granted constitutional protections. We allow these little dictatorships to exist in the interest of protecting them, but the reality is that it does nothing of the sort. [b]We are all so afraid of integration because of the fucking Indian boarding schools, but the reality is that integration was the only solution from the beginning.[/b][/QUOTE] one of the main reasons that these places did so badly in the first place is because they got subjected to stalinist-style population transfers by rulers such as Andrew Jackson, and in addition they had to contend with numerous incursions into their lands by soldiers and state-sponsored militias in addition to forcible land seizures and invasion

[QUOTE=GunFox;51135991]Except reservations were the worst thing to happen to mainland native Americans. They are bastions of poverty and crime. They force generation after generation of Native American children to grow up in an environment that doesn't adequately prepare them to work with the rest of the country. as a result of their status, they are not granted constitutional protections. We allow these little dictatorships to exist in the interest of protecting them, but the reality is that it does nothing of the sort. We are all so afraid of integration because of the fucking Indian boarding schools, but the reality is that integration was the only solution from the beginning. Now we make things worse for Hawaiians too. Lovely.[/QUOTE] I'm a native Hawaiian who's been fighting for this stuff for over a decade. I can tell you that the only people asking for full sovereignty or reservations are an ignorant minority of people who are blind with rage, like the Telescope protesters who I hate with a passion. I don't believe in making an enclave of Hawaiian owned land only for Hawaiians and keeping the general population separate from Hawaiians. That'd be stupid. I wan't Hawaiians to be able to have a say in the ceded lands and how it generates revenue for them, and what the money is spent on, and the line "Betterment of the conditions of native Hawaiians as defined in the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920" in reference to purposes of the ceded lands to not be ignored.