3 ms·
My understanding (based on visiting hawaii as a tourist and not much else) is that no, there's not a US-legally recognized sovereignty, but there is a step bac
by ergothus 8y ago
My understanding (based on visiting hawaii as a tourist and not much else) is that no, there's not a US-legally recognized sovereignty, but there is a step back from:
* "They voluntarily joined the US" language
* the repression of culture - in particular but not limited to language, which was apparently ruthlessly quashed for a long while and is enjoying a lot more respect today, relatively speaking.
In a courtroom I doubt this would count for much, but in a war of PR releases it can be significant, and most of what I found about this case was press releases.
- jmisavage 8y agoThere's a rich history of corporations and the us government screwing over Hawaiians. The monarchy was overthrown by a group of businessmen and sugar planters after they forced Queen Liliuokalani to abdicate. Two years later it became a US territory against the wishes of the natives. Then the sugar industry help keep it a territory for 60 years because they could import cheap foreign labor.
- adrr 8y agoHistory of Hawaii is all about using force to take land from the population. First settler where from the Marquesas Islands and they were conquered by the Tahitians.
- rootoor 8y agoWhat’s your point? Are you saying that it doesn’t matter that sovergty was taken violently from the Hawaiians because their ancestors conquered the original inhabitants hundreds of years ago? Would it be fair if Russia came in and took Hawaii from the US because the “History of Hawaii is all about using force to take land from the population”?
- bufferoverflow 8y agoBut how far back in history do you want to go? Why is it that pre-US owners are the real ones and not the pre-pre-US ones?
- 8bitsrule 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overthrow_of_the_Kingdom_of_Hawaii https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overthrow_of_the_Kingdom_of_Ha...