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.
MG? hotzcatz has an MG? Can't be too many of those on the island! I have owned a bunch of them over the years. Love them, but got tired of electrical repairs, etc. The stories I have about electrical issues.
I have grown up in the Samoan culture for a long time and my kids are also half.
I have learned to cook a lot of foods and some of the language. It’s a grate culture it really is. I live my life in there .
Last edited by 7th generation; 05-11-2009 at 03:20 PM..
Reason: no links to other sites
Aloha everyone! Gaflsc, I think you mean either poi or pupu. Poi is a polynesian food made by mashing up the root of the taro plant into a paste or pudding like consistancy. Pupu is the Hawaiian name for a snack or appetizer. Hope that helps...
Two things to remember while in "Polynesia" One, take off da shoes when you go entah someones house in Hawaii. *No forget!*
Two, never, I repeat, *never" eat standing up when in a Samoan house.
I studied "Fa'a Samoa" (Samoan way of life) at U. of Hawaii many years ago and could go on about Samoan culture, but just start out with this simple mores.
And just in case you don't know, Fiji is part of Polynesia, *not* Melanesia (islands of the black-skinned people) Geographically, Fiji is in Melanesia and although Fijians are of the Melanesian race, their culture is Polynesian (many islands).
btw, poi in Hawaii is a food. Poi in Maori culture is a dance. And Poi is the Tibetan name for Tibet. (betcha didn't know that)
Eddie
this is inertesting. In hawaiian culture, land was to be used, not owned...
western culture is to own possess the land.
who has a better attitude??
lol, I should ask, who posesses the land??
If you read John Locke, etc., you'll see that private ownership of land is important if you want to have a prosperous society, at least in places like Europe, where you have harsh winters, scarcity of resources, etc. Private ownership encourages development, efficient use, industriousness, etc. It also encourages the owner to take care of the land, and ensure it doesn't get despoiled, etc.
If you look at communist nations, without private ownership, you see how poor collective ownership tends to leave societies. No one is motivated to work, no one is motivated to care for the land, etc. They even pollute far worse than capitalist societies, because there is less incentive to care for the land. (After all, it doesn't belong to you.)
I think the only place a more "communal" approach can work are places like Hawaii, where there are abundant natural resources, no harsh winters, a relatively small population, and a shared ethic of caring for shared resources. It does sound nice, though.
I am looking for some comments about Polynesian culture. I would like to know more about the people, their views on different things, food, attitudes, etc.
I know that i look it up on Wikipedia or whatever, but, I would like some comments from real people here....from polynesians on this forum or from some of you all who are in this culture in Hawaii.
Has modern Hawaii held on to this culture or has commericalism, etc. ruined all this?
All I can say is that I'm completely amazed by the sheer balls of those people who would travel thousands of miles over open ocean in relatively small, uncovered vessels, simply to find new places to live and explore. That would really make a cool movie. I think I must have some polynesian blood somewhere, I'm just very drawn to the culture. Aren't the Easter Island inhabitants Polynesian? Did the Polynesians ever get to South America?
If you read John Locke, etc., you'll see that private ownership of land is important if you want to have a prosperous society, at least in places like Europe, where you have harsh winters, scarcity of resources, etc. Private ownership encourages development, efficient use, industriousness, etc. It also encourages the owner to take care of the land, and ensure it doesn't get despoiled, etc.
If you look at communist nations, without private ownership, you see how poor collective ownership tends to leave societies. No one is motivated to work, no one is motivated to care for the land, etc. They even pollute far worse than capitalist societies, because there is less incentive to care for the land. (After all, it doesn't belong to you.)
I think the only place a more "communal" approach can work are places like Hawaii, where there are abundant natural resources, no harsh winters, a relatively small population, and a shared ethic of caring for shared resources. It does sound nice, though.
"Development" [of land], "efficiency", and "industriousness" are Protestant work-ethic standards not shared universally ... and I don't exactly see a Shangri-la world success as a result of such European thinking and tradition dominance where it exists: the world is a mess.
As for "communal ownership" -- it is yet another form of "ownership" ... that is: people believing that land is a commodity that should be -- or at least can be -- "owned" ... furthermore, the realities of pollution and disrespect do not necessarily follow any concept of land ownership ... those are failures of personal ethics that extend to all levels of a person's life.
And finally, with regard to small societies, I would say you are on track to discovering the reality behind all human cultural dysfunction. If you care to understand this more, you can read about the anthropological / anatomical function known as 'Dunbar's Number' Dunbar's number - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
which goes directly and precisely to the heart of the issues you address. Summarily, that: limited by our brains' neo-cortical sizes, homo sapiens are not capable of relating / sharing productively, in any truly concerned manner for each others' welfare, in groups greater in size than about 150 - 200 in number. Beyond hunter-gatherer groups of that size, cooperation begins to break down - rapidly. Since we are living in a reality of far greater social unit sizes, we'll just have to learn to muddle through -- and find our satisfactions in life regardless, on our own ...
Hawaiian culture in Hawaii was almost eradicated. Practicing hula was banned even at Kamehameha schools after Hawaii was forced to become a territory. The revival of Hawaiian culture is very recent.
If you read John Locke, etc., you'll see that private ownership of land is important if you want to have a prosperous society, at least in places like Europe, where you have harsh winters, scarcity of resources, etc. Private ownership encourages development, efficient use, industriousness, etc. It also encourages the owner to take care of the land, and ensure it doesn't get despoiled, etc.
If you look at communist nations, without private ownership, you see how poor collective ownership tends to leave societies. No one is motivated to work, no one is motivated to care for the land, etc. They even pollute far worse than capitalist societies, because there is less incentive to care for the land. (After all, it doesn't belong to you.)
I think the only place a more "communal" approach can work are places like Hawaii, where there are abundant natural resources, no harsh winters, a relatively small population, and a shared ethic of caring for shared resources. It does sound nice, though.
Hawaii doesn't have abundant resources. It can't support the number of people who live here now, which is why we have to import 85% of our food.
As it is, with private ownership, the land isn't well taken care of. You ever notice how much dust gets blown away every time they harvest sugar cane? Not to mention the nutrients wasted by burning instead of composting the all that biomass.
And of course it was the big agricultural families who stole Hawaii from the Hawaiians... The first governor of the territory was Sanford Dole. I don't see a single okina in that name.
As it is, with private ownership, the land isn't well taken care of. You ever notice how much dust gets blown away every time they harvest sugar cane? Not to mention the nutrients wasted by burning instead of composting the all that biomass.
And of course it was the big agricultural families who stole Hawaii from the Hawaiians... The first governor of the territory was Sanford Dole. I don't see a single okina in that name.
My wife and I recently finished reading Unfamiliar Fishes, Sarah Vowell's history of Hawaii from the coming of the missionaries to annexation in 1898, and how the immigrants changed the culture. It's not the greatest book -- Vowell interjects herself too often and is overly fond of witty, ironic observations that sometimes are dead-on hilarious but sometimes are obvious and redundant (repeatedly pointing out how hypocritical the Christian missionaries were is like shooting trout in the proverbial barrel) -- but, for a Mainland author with no ties to Hawaii, she's very sympathetic toward Hawaiians. My wife (who is from Hawaii) and I learned quit a lot. I recommend it, with reservations.
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.
