15 ms·
Hawaiians call Mark Zuckerberg 'the face of neocolonialism' over land lawsuits
- bruceb 10y agoI can understand him wanting to make sure land ownership claims are settled. On the otherhand him taking about how he is against walls then litterly building one in Hawaii that blocks people's view of the water is the height of hypocrisy.
- iaw 10y agoNot wanting the potential for easements on your property in the future : perfectly sensible. Denying access to formerly communal areas when you aren't going to be there : kinda crappy.
- yunolisten 10y ago> how he is against walls then litterly building one 1 mile, long, 6 feet tall?
- general_ai 10y agoDo as I say, not as I do. I bet he doesn't even see the irony -- too many sycophants around telling him how awesome he is.
- debt 10y agoIt is odd that he would even put himself in this situation. I guess his PR people have deemed this subject to fly mostly under the radar of most people.
- CaptSpify 10y agoWhat do you mean by "he is against walls"?
- bruceb 10y agohttp://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/mark-zuckerberg-wall-hawaii http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/mark-zuckerberg-wall-...
- fallingfrog 10y ago"Neo"?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dilap 10y agoNot very good optics if he really is planning on running for public office.
- huac 10y agoI mean, Donald Trump (and his father Fred) did some pretty nasty real estate things too, and it seemed to have worked out for them.
- HillaryBriss 10y agoi agree especially in the area of racial discrimination in NYC housing in decades past. bad stuff. maybe i'm wrong here, but i don't think that information worked in Trump's favor during the election. it seems to me that somehow Trump won in spite of those things.
- visakanv 10y ago"Mr. Zuckerberg, is it true that you screwed a bunch of Hawaiians out of their property?" "That means I'm smart. When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by their huge tracts of land. You can do anything."
- jbmorgado 10y ago"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and rip somebody of their lands and I wouldn't lose voters"
- corysama 10y agoThe article is much less aggressive than the title.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- tabeth 10y agoThe idea of someone living in multiple places is just hilarious. The epitome of privilege. That being said, didn't Z just buy the land from other people? How was he able to even "buy" the land without full agreement of all of the owners to begin with? Shouldn't the land not belong to him until the transaction is complete? In any case, the regular people always get screwed in these cases and always will until things are completely communal. Land shouldn't be owned by anyone. Rather, it should be able to be used freely. There are obviously logistical issues, but perhaps that should be and place and we'll figure out the rest? > Makaala Kaaumoana, the executive director of an environmental group in Hanalei, Kauai, said that the lawsuits would help identify and inform descendants of links to the land they may not know about, which is “a good thing”. > “It is always a sad thing when families lose their land, for any reason, but at least this way they are compensated,” she said. The rationalization afterwards is also interesting. > And Matt Goodale, a neighbor whose 10 acres of breadfruit, banana, mango, lychee and longan trees lie about one and a half miles from Zuckerberg’s property, said that the CEO’s purchase of the land was much better than the alternative: an 80-home development. Good to know the rich look after each other.
- falcolas 10y agoHe's trying to, not everyone wants to sell (or more accurately, they don't want to sell for the amount Z is offering). [EDIT] Source: http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/01/18/business/facebooks-zuckerberg-sues-to-force-land-sales/?HSA=74dae150a1d9f99e2592d0eac31ea430d01f35d5 http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/01/18/business/facebooks-... "For someone to use the law to not only establish title, but to also force a sale requires that they have an ownership claim. For some of the Kauai land, Zuckerberg has done this by purchasing interests from several part-owners."
- aaron-lebo 10y agoHow is he trying to when he won't even talk to his neighbors and his lawyers won't respond to them or journalists? That doesn't sound like caring about the community or acting in good faith.
- 10y ago
- harryh 10y agoTBH this doesn't seem like a Mark Zuckerberg problem as much as a Hawaii laws problem. How is it that there is land with no clear ownership? And how is it that the law (the quiet title process) is written such that if the ownership of that land is determined those people can be forced to sell? It seems like a very strange system of rules.
- visakanv 10y agoThe rules were probably designed by and for a group of people with a specific culture and worldview, who didn't plan or design for wealthy entrants (even pre-Zuckerberg).
- HillaryBriss 10y agointeresting. i wonder if maybe we should look at it in the opposite way. i mean, it kind of seems like the rules were designed by people who did plan and design for wealthy entrants. Zuckerberg is going to have to track down all of these unknown people and cut a deal with them individually. and they know he's a zillionaire. what a lousy bargaining position. i would think it makes the task of transferring ownership a whole lot harder, slower and more expensive than buying a piece of land, in say, Columbus, Ohio or Fresno, California.
- local_kauai 10y ago^^^this
- eplanit 10y ago[dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13468767 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13468767
- yummyfajitas 10y agoThis article describes the process in significantly more detail: http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/01/18/business/facebooks-zuckerberg-sues-to-force-land-sales/?HSA=74dae150a1d9f99e2592d0eac31ea430d01f35d5 http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/01/18/business/facebooks-... The wikipedia article on quiet title is also clarifying: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_title https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_title So is this article on quiet title: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/who-can-claim-property-based-adverse-possession-hawaii.html http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/who-can-claim-propert... If I understand it right, the issue here is situations like the following. You've got a parcel of land which was 1/2 owned by brother A and 1/2 owned by brother B (due to, e.g., inheritance). Brother A occupied the parcel for 20+ years and eventually sold it to someone else. At this point, according to Hawaii's adverse posession law, brother A owns it but owes compensation to brother B. Now many years later, brother A or his descendents sold to Zuckerberg (or some similar chain of title), and brother B's descendents may not even know they had some right to the land. There's a theoretical possibility that some descendent of brother B may show up and claim the land. These quiet title lawsuits are a way for Zuckerberg to pre-emptively settle all such issues. It's also apparently a very common and accepted way to handle such issues in Hawaii. This is basically just a horrible legal hack around the fact that Hawaii (like many places) has a totally broken title registration system. Without this hack it might be difficult/impossible for a land owner to know with any certainty that they actually own the land they just purchased. If someone knows more about this, or if my understanding is incorrect, please correct me. I know little beyond what I learned via google.
- flippyhead 10y agoI once heard someone describe law as simply software for people. I love how you describe these maneuvers as hacks.
- inopinatus 10y agoThat is a common misconception, especially amongst engineers. There's a large cohort of smart people who've read a contract and think this means they grasp the law; but without understanding jurisprudence or equity, common/case law, the myriad forms of legislation, actual legal proceedings &c &c. In reality the law is not a programming language, and trying to treat it as such is a common cause of disappointment, frustration, anger, needless bickering, extended conflict, and vexatiously long and mostly unenforceable contracts.
- marcoperaza 10y agoIf my understanding is correct, the media is treating Zuckerberg very unfairly. My understanding is: 1. The land ownership has been diluted over time such that there are many people who own small shares. 2. Zuckerberg is working with the majority owners of each parcel to trigger a forced-sale of the full ownership, which he intends to purchase. This is no different than a majority shareholder forcing the sale of a business. It's a total non-story.
- xiaoma 10y ago>"It's a total non-story." If he were Hawaiian, that would be true. But he's an outsider and he's world famous. It's a story.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- marcoperaza 10y agoAn outsider? He's an American and he has the same right to buy property in Hawaii as anyone else in our country.
- vkou 10y agoDo you know how Hawaii came under American control? He is absolutely an outsider in Hawaii.
- drakonandor 10y agoLess than 25% of Hawaii is ethnically native.
- vkou 10y agoThat has nothing to do with the culture of the place. If I invite you into my home, and ask you to take off your shoes, it doesn't matter whether or not I'm white, black, or reptilian. Please take off your shoes.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- free_everybody 10y agoZuck is just trying to straighten out who owns the land and who should be compensated. The article throws around the word 'lawsuit' with the intent of invoking its negative connotations with the reader. There is a good discussion to be had about Hawaiian land ownership but Zuck is not the (only) villain here.
- _1 10y ago> "fell in love with the community " ... and decided to "plant roots and join the community ourselves". By suing the locals and hiding behind a walled, 700 acre estate. Sounds very neighborly.
- HillaryBriss 10y agopeople that rich live by a different standard. we can expect more from them than from a middle class home buyer. Z has a lot of options. buying "700 acres of rural beachfront land" to create a "secluded family sanctuary" and "enhance the seclusion" is only one of them. imagine if, instead, Z wanted to win a local popularity contest: he could create a permanent arrangement where he gives the state of Hawaii 699 of those acres for use by the local families that used to own it, or the general public -- keeping, say, one acre for his own family's use. it's an option. there are other less extreme options, too, options that would also generate positive, as opposed to negative, attention in the press. of course, none of this is required by law, but we should keep in mind that Z has many possible choices which the rest of us lack. given the limited quantities of land -- especially beach front land -- in Hawaii and the long-term traditions (and poverty) of the local, long term inhabitants, it's understandable that people in Hawaii would scrutinize his choices and expect something less selfish. even if he manages to gain full, legal title to the land, what can we expect the attitude of local people to be when they have even less access to that land than they did in the past?
- randyrand 10y agoI find it interesting that colonialism is bashed so much when in reality it brought much of the world into the modern era. would the world really be a better place if colonialism never happened ?
- woofyman 10y agoColonialism killed hundreds of millions. https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COMM.7.1.03.HTM https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COMM.7.1.03.HTM Edit: Their land stolen and plundered.
- randyrand 10y ago"their land?" the land on this world needs to be shared.You cant just expect to own an entire continent for yourself and not have to share it.
- jly 10y agoJust to look from another viewpoint, the 'modern era' has not been so great to everyone. The individuals who were occupied, for one, may not view it this way. People of the world that are exploited by the modern era (of which they are many), also would not agree.
- legodt 10y agoYeah, great if you are a moderately monied christian white dude... An absolute horrow show of your country being exploited, stunted, and manipulated for centuries for everyone else.
- mwfunk 10y agoLike everything, it's a mix of good and bad. Maybe it does bring many of the noncontroversial benefits of the modern world to people who would not otherwise get them, and maybe sometimes it can inflict other forms of harm to the indigenous people who are enjoying those benefits. Like everything more complicated than "1+1=2" or "the sky is blue", it's a superposition of a bunch of pros and cons that different people will all weight differently. Where human nature screws everything up is the brain's tendency to want to focus on one pro or one con and pretend like everything else doesn't matter, or ignore the fact that rational, informed people might still disagree on how each pro or con should be weighted when evaluating whether something is a net good or net bad.
- microDude 10y agoI went to Kaui for a 2 week camping trip a few years back. I would listen to the local radio broadcast at night, which I really enjoyed. It was some local DJ that would talk about native rights and issues. One thing that stuck out to me was an interview he did with a Native American from the main-land. The guest was amazed at how much local Kaui natives were able to defend their rights and maintain (at least influence) control.
- local_kauai 10y agoThe thing is, a lot of Hawaiians don't want to sell. This lawsuit forces sale of their rightful property to the highest bidder. It's a clever way for rich mainlanders to obtain property from Hawaiians. A lot of Hawaiians are not interested in the money. Several local people living on the property were kicked off when Zuckerberg bought the land. A 6 foot wall was built and police began regularly patrolling a nearby road off the property questioning people walking on the road.
- harryh 10y agoIf those Hawaiians don't want to sell they can buy out their co-owners at which point they would own full title to the land.
- local_kauai 10y agoIn mainland terms that makes sense but in Hawaiian culture it does not. They do not have money. Their wealth is in the community, sharing, fishing rights and land rights. They don't believe in buying each other out. Sharing is a big part of their culture and is part of aloha. Our mainland system is being imposed on them.
- local_kauai 10y agoThe thing is, a lot of Hawaiians don't want to sell. This lawsuit forces sale of their rightful property to the highest bidder. It's a clever way for rich mainlanders to obtain property from Hawaiians. A lot of Hawaiians are not interested in the money. Several local people living on the property were kicked off when Zuckerberg bought the land. A 6 foot wall was built and police began regularly patrolling a nearby road off the property questioning people walking on the road.
- jly 10y agoZuckerberg seems like a good guy, he clearly has some very strong philanthropic ideas about how he will spend his vast fortune, and he seems to be trying to navigate the strange property laws of Hawaii in the right way. Having said that, it kind of pains me to see one of our millennial altruistic thought-leaders already fully engaged in such wealth and property consolidation. $100M, multi-hundred acre estate in a place he may spend a couple weeks per year? It doesn't give me a lot of confidence for the future of our species, sadly. This is not a popular opinion, but the more I see where the world is going, the more I would be encouraged by seeing aggressive taxation or forced charity/redistribution from the bulk of inheritance. Our system of capitalism needs some serious brakes if we want it to be sustainable in the long-term.
- jayjay71 10y agoI saw a comment on HN about this recently where someone suggested a 100% inheritance tax. I wonder what society would be like if we were able to implement this effectively.
- harryh 10y agoIt seems to me that would only incentive rich people to be more outlandish consumers during their lives. If the government won't let me give it to my kids I might as well go ahead and buy that yacht.
- Inconel 10y agoI'm not nearly knowledgable enough on economics to determine the overall effects of such a tax, so please take this with a very large grain of salt, but couldn't it be argued that you purchasing a yacht would be better for the economy than passing on a fortune to heirs? Yachts seem to require a ton of skilled labor to build and maintain. I assume they provide for many solidly middle class jobs.
- LordKano 10y agoIt's a horrible and horribly short-sighted idea. The very wealthy would just hire their heirs as consultants or advisors and pay them exorbitant salaries. Sure, the government would take ~40% in taxes but that still better than losing 100% of it. It would also push them to donate their fortunes to found private corporations and allow their heirs to "buy" the shares. Or move their money offshore into assets that aren't readily convertible like real estate. How is the US government going to seize 10,000 acres of land in Brazil? Unless you're prepared to enact Cold War era Soviet Union levels of control on all economic activity, the people who you most want to target will be able to side-step your plans.
- _13gp 10y agoAs someone who was born, raised, and lived a significant portion of my life in Hawaii, I really wish he approached this in a better way or just chose a different place. There is still a lot of negative sentiment (arguably justifiable given history) towards "outsiders" within the islands and maneuvers like this do not help things. I don't see how the negative publicity surrounding this is worth having property and "joining a community" that you'll probably only spend Christmas in.
- Firegarden 10y agoI live on Kauai. I moved here 5 years ago from Canada. I can tell you most people don't understand Hawaii has a much different culture, history and people than "mainland" America. Mark is making a huge mistake. The people on this island in particular are much more community and heart based. The fundamental mistake Mark is making is that he is entering into a lose-lose situation. This will NEVER be forgotten and he will NEVER be welcome here. He will always have to watch his back while he is here. In my opinion his best course of action is to stop all law suits and make amends. People will forgive him for making a mistake but only if he can admit it first. This is not California. The island will "spit him out". Kauai is known for being the last island of Aloha. Good luck Mark.
- lagadu 10y ago> He will always have to watch his back while he is here. What do you mean "watch his back"? People will physically attack or steal from him? Because that sounds like the kind of society any reasonable person wouldn't want to be a part of.
- Firegarden 10y agoYour guess is as good as mine. What would you do to someone that used their money to take away home land that has been in your family for generations because you didn't have the right paper work to prove your ownership in a court of law. Living out here you realize that the bodies are not buried in dirt.
- dilap 10y agoHow do you feel about "Nazi punching"?
- local_kauai 10y agoYes that is the point. He will get blackballed. It is a small community ;) The way it works is if you come with aloha people will embrace you. Or own up to your mistakes and people may forgive. If you come in like this, things can get ugly.
- deleted 10y ago
- gukov 10y agoWhat happened to "bridges, not walls", Mark?
- nojvek 10y agoThis is gentrification for the Hawaiian right? I was just in maui last week and it was beautiful. Mark buying 700 acres just signals other billionaires in a dick measuring contest. Maui real estate is already insanely priced for the average person. I only hope the Silicon Valley dickbags work on fixing the homeless situation in SF rather than making more people homeless