Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I recently read as to how hawaii was removed... arg.
Since Hawai'i was a "territory" of the United States in 1945, it is no surprise that the United Nations in 1946 listed Hawai'i as a Non-Self-Governing Territory under the administration of the United States (Resolution 55(I) of 14th December 1946). Also listed as non-self-governing territories under the jurisdiction of the United States were Alaska, American S...moa, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
From 1946 to 1959 when Statehood was imposed on Hawai'i, the United States had: 1) a "sacred trust" obligation to the "inhabitants" of Hawai'i detailed in sections a. and b. above, and 2) an annual reporting obligation to the General Assembly under e. above.
a. to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;
b. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement...; Hawai'i and the United Nations | Cultural Survival
e. to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for information purposes, subject to such limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social and educational conditions in the territories for which they are respectively responsible other than those territories to which Chapters XII and XIII apply."(1)
Sorry about the links, my html code is off and you have to copy/paste the url.
In terms of who votes, this will be ultimately be determined by either the UN or the ICJ. If through the UN, either through the General Assembly or the Decolonization Committee. There will likely be three positions argued:
1) Arguing for the law of occupation. Voting rights would be applicable to descendents of kingdom subjects. Those who can trace their lineage as Hawaiian Kingdom subjects prior to the 1893 overthrow.
2) Arguing on the process for decolonization would include descendents of the territory. If it is argued that Hawaii's removal from the UN list of Non-Self-Governing territories was fraudulent and needs to be placed back on the list for decolonization, then those eligible to vote would have to prove that they were descendents of residents of the territory.
3) Looking at recent acts of decolonization, I'd suggest that if Hawaii is ever to be placed back on the UN NSGT list, even though we'd like for those eligible to vote to be the first option, the vote will likely include those who were residents for a couple of years.
For more on the routes of independence, I encourage you to watch this discussion between Keanu Sai, Maivan Clech Lam, and Kehaulani Kauanui from 2010. International Routes.
Anyone else find it odd that some people think the UN would get involved in Hawaii statehood when it can't even resolve things in the Middle East territory like Israel/Palestine? Or all the things going on in Africa with boundaries. Or am I the only one?
Anyone else find it odd that some people think the UN would get involved in Hawaii statehood when it can't even resolve things in the Middle East territory like Israel/Palestine? Or all the things going on in Africa with boundaries. Or am I the only one?
Nah, it's not odd considering the UN wants a One World Government.
We are already working towards it - google Agenda 21 for more info.
And if you don't think we are working towards it, google Agenda 21 Hawaii (or your state) and see how it is being used here.
I've been referring to the statehood vote in 1959. Native Hawaiians were US citizens and could vote.
The link you provided was someone writing to the Maui news about annexation in the 1890's and not related to the 1959 vote.
I kinda led you down the wrong but right road... I mean as far as the annexation part. Don't you think the Native Hawaiian (them and only them) people should have the final say as far as their island's destination?
If you allow all the people to vote and decide on whats best for the Hawaiian people is it in there best interest or some greedy business men or a corrupt government? just think.. where is the next Hawaiian going to come from? NOMOA...
I kinda led you down the wrong but right road... I mean as far as the annexation part. Don't you think the Native Hawaiian (them and only them) people should have the final say as far as their island's destination?
If you allow all the people to vote and decide on whats best for the Hawaiian people is it in there best interest or some greedy business men or a corrupt government? just think.. where is the next Hawaiian going to come from? NOMOA...
I'll revisit one of my previous posts - who is "them and only them". Hawaiians from the 1890's annexation? None left. Is it 100% Hawaiians? 51% Hawaiians? Less than 51% Hawaiian? Do they trace their roots to the days of Captain Cook? Or, to annexation?
Why not put a non-binding resolution on the ballot? I have no idea - but I bet a vote would still overwhelmingly be for statehood among Native Hawaiians. What would Native Hawaiians really get if they wern't part of the US? A monarchy where most of land was owned by monarchs? It seems kind of ironic to go back to a system via a vote to a monarchy doesn't it?
Don't you think the Native Hawaiian (them and only them) people should have the final say as far as their island's destination?
So, if it were up to you and there was a vote tomorrow in Hawai'i about leaving the United States, you would only allow to vote a very small percentage of the total population who live, work and pay taxes in Hawai'i? What about all the people of different nationalities that were brought there to work, had and raised their children there over many generations?
Also, what is a Native Hawaiian? From Wikipedia "The early settlement history of Hawaiʻi is still not completely resolved. Some believe that the first Polynesians arrived in Hawaiʻi in the 3rd century from the Marquesas and were followed by Tahitian settlers in AD 1300 who conquered the original inhabitants." Would you only let people vote who could trace their family history back to the settlers from the Marquesas or would you also include those that later came from Tahiti? What about settlers that came from other places like Samoa?
Here is a another question. What would you say if there was a vote held in the United States about something that effected everyone, but only people who could trace themselves back to the original settlers, could vote?
(I won't even go into the question of who were the original settlers! LOL!)
So, IF Hawai'i was to be given back, who would it be given too? Who are the original Hawaiians? Here is another question, IF there was a vote in Hawai'i tomorrow about remaining a state, what do you think the outcome of that vote would be?
The government of Hawaii would be transferred back to the monarchy. Then everybody would have the option to either become a citizen of Hawaii or remain a US citizen and get residency here.
The government of Hawaii would be transferred back to the monarchy. Then everybody would have the option to either become a citizen of Hawaii or remain a US citizen and get residency here.
Actually, that's a really good solution.
Whenever I hear the others...i.e. anyone who doesn't have ancestors who lived on the islands 500years ago, goes. It doesn't sound like a solution whatsoever. You'll also never get everyone on board for that - including the Japanese, Portuguese, Filipinos, Chinese, etc. who came in plantation days. Neither would you get the old Irish, Brits, Russians, Germans or whoever else came 100 years ago and settled more spottingly.
I like the option of 'Citizen of Hawaii' or remaind 'Citizen of the U.S. with residency' choices.
If something like that were seriously proposed...I could see more citizens getting behind it. It also makes people seriously question if they really want to give up being American as well. When it really comes down to giving up your American passport or not, people tend to think about it slightly differently.
There is a real conflict between my Hawaiian heritage and my pride in being an American. I Served in the US Army and was in Germany when there were so many anti-American demonstrations and terrorism. Our PX (Frankfurt) was bombed.
As I was born both Hawaiian and American I do have anger and sorrow for the way my people have been treated and for the overthrow of our Queen and the denigration of our Princess Royal by the American people.
It is not an easy relationship. Oh, I am also Native American, so I am pulled in many directions.
So, if it were up to you and there was a vote tomorrow in Hawai'i about leaving the United States, you would only allow to vote a very small percentage of the total population who live, work and pay taxes in Hawai'i?
The question Is for me only? Wow I could really be selfish if I wanted too but, I am not like that. I believe in "Pono". If I were to answer, I wouldn't ask the US to leave. Its all about sovereignty. the US can do what ever they want upon negotiations with the Kingdom of Hawaii.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McFrostyJ
What about all the people of different nationalities that were brought there to work, had and raised their children there over many generations?
Can a US citizen vote IN China? Does one have the same liberties in China as in the US? they can have all he right the US affords them. As to Voting on something that is of the interest to the Nation of Hawaii. I would say no. thats my take on it.......
Quote:
Originally Posted by McFrostyJ
Also, what is a Native Hawaiian?
My birth certificate says hawaiian.... According to the US Gov. to be part of their "Hawaiian" tribal status, you need to be 51%
Quote:
Originally Posted by McFrostyJ
From Wikipedia "The early settlement history of Hawaiʻi is still not completely resolved. Some believe that the first Polynesians arrived in Hawaiʻi in the 3rd century from the Marquesas and were followed by Tahitian settlers in AD 1300 who conquered the original inhabitants." Would you only let people vote who could trace their family history back to the settlers from the Marquesas or would you also include those that later came from Tahiti?
What about settlers that came from other places like Samoa?
Do the Hawaiians Have any claim to their lands? I do believe they have their own issues with, oh, Ummm let me think.... the US. Are they Samoan or Hawaiian? Just thinking... this is about Hawaii or Samoa?
Quote:
Originally Posted by McFrostyJ
Here is a another question. What would you say if there was a vote held in the United States about something that effected everyone, but only people who could trace themselves back to the original settlers, could vote?
(I won't even go into the question of who were the original settlers! LOL!)
To many variables for the question. Was something done wrong to these peoples by the US? If by having this vote means setting the record right, "Pono" I say yes.. remember the apology? that was done because?
Was the US wrong in overthrowing the Hawaiian kingdom? Do you feel the US should do....... something to make it right?? Who has the power to make the US accountable for the things that they do?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
