4 ms·

I'd just note that, while I'm nowhere near an expert on the topic, a big part of the problem generally is a fundamental cultural disconnect. Native Hawaiians ha

by _jal 9y ago

I'd just note that, while I'm nowhere near an expert on the topic, a big part of the problem generally is a fundamental cultural disconnect. Native Hawaiians had a more communal ownership model that appears to strike mainland US culture as fundamentally illegitimate. It tends to manifest now when a billionaire is annoyed that there's no one seller to go to when they want their island. In the past, it was plantation owners. This is of course nothing new; one argument for displacing mainland Native Americans was that they didn't grok the virtues of private ownership of land. (In reality, the rationalization never matters; in such things, might quite literally manufactures right.)

AndrewKemendo 9y ago
I mean it's based on established rule of law - which is codified with documentation and process. That communal ownership doesn't have record keeping or otherwise would seem to be unnecessarily unbalanced towards those with family right. Isn't the idea of family right and inheritance something that people rail against in the states eg. eliminating things like inheritance tax etc... are very popular among some groups because "just because you were born into it doesn't mean you earned it." Seems to be some cognitive dissonance here.
JumpCrisscross 9y ago
> Native Hawaiians had a more communal ownership model that appears to strike mainland US culture as fundamentally illegitimate You're projecting agreement where there isn't any. The State of Hawai'i could pass a law placing these lands into public trust. Hell, the current owners could get together and do that themselves. That isn't happening because some want to keep the land, some people want to sell, and some might want something else, but nobody is sure who can do what with what. > one argument for displacing mainland Native Americans was that they didn't grok the virtues of private ownership of land The courts, here, are trying to assign ownership to the natives. This is strengthening their claims to their land, not diminishing it.

by _jal 9y ago

AndrewKemendo 9y ago

I mean it's based on established rule of law - which is codified with documentation and process. That communal ownership doesn't have record keeping or otherwise would seem to be unnecessarily unbalanced towards those with family right. Isn't the idea of family right and inheritance something that people rail against in the states eg. eliminating things like inheritance tax etc... are very popular among some groups because "just because you were born into it doesn't mean you earned it." Seems to be some cognitive dissonance here.

JumpCrisscross 9y ago

> Native Hawaiians had a more communal ownership model that appears to strike mainland US culture as fundamentally illegitimate You're projecting agreement where there isn't any. The State of Hawai'i could pass a law placing these lands into public trust. Hell, the current owners could get together and do that themselves. That isn't happening because some want to keep the land, some people want to sell, and some might want something else, but nobody is sure who can do what with what. > one argument for displacing mainland Native Americans was that they didn't grok the virtues of private ownership of land The courts, here, are trying to assign ownership to the natives. This is strengthening their claims to their land, not diminishing it.