+- Punaweb Forum (http://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: No Coco Palms for you! (/showthread.php?tid=19208)
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 02-23-2018
It costs the protestors nothing; the rest of us get three tax increases
If only there was another taxpayer funded program which would help maintain and operate an organization, or perhaps an office that would manage Hawaiian affairs for these descendants of King Kaumualii. Maybe even some kind of department overseeing areas designated as Hawaiian homelands. Then, instead of Native Hawaiians finding themselves compelled to live as squatters in an abandoned, damaged, condemned structure just so they could have a roof over their heads, they might instead be provided with ownership of their own homestead where they could live a life of greater security with their family and loved ones. Maybe grow a patch of taro, breadfruit, or mango.
Recycle Puna. Humans, although probably not you personally, have already left 400,000 pounds of trash on the moon. - YouTube's Half As Interesting
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - MarkD - 02-23-2018
The Hawaiians were not trying to stop development or show anti-business sentiment. They wanted to take ownership of Coco Palms, to live on it.
Europeans/white men how ever you want to characterize them separated native Hawaiian from huge tracts of land in the 1800s. They either commandeered it or sometimes coerced Hawaiians into selling it. (Forcing land sale to pay taxes was a favorite practice.) Same with virtually every American Indian tribe's land.
Some property owners who bought land in Hawaii from the 1930s - 1960s purchased land whose original acquisition was suspect. Was the Coco Palms such a property? I don't know.
The Hawaiians are far too little too late to engage in any broad land recovery missions. And they are failing to act on Hawaiian Homelands.
But if Hawaiians are able to identify a property with suspect title history, their attempts at recovery have a stronger moral justification than attempting to block projects on Mauna Kea, IMO.
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - kalakoa - 02-23-2018
they are failing to act on Hawaiian Homelands
Which hypocrisy makes it difficult to take their other claims seriously.
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 02-23-2018
The Hawaiians are far too little too late to engage in any broad land recovery missions.
If Hawaiian Homelands was built out, I could understand displaced, landless Hawaiians attempting land recovery efforts. But the Hawaiian Homelands are empty. Instead of Coco Palms, why not live in tents or traditional palm sheathed structures outside DHHL offices?
Europeans/white men how ever you want to characterize them separated native Hawaiian from huge tracts of land in the 1800s.
It might be said Native Hawaiian men and women continue to separate Native Hawaiian people from huge tracts of land in the 2000s.
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - PaulW - 02-23-2018
You might sing a different tune if somebody turns up and squats on your property with no legal claim.
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - kalakoa - 02-23-2018
You might sing a different tune
I would be singing that tune immediately, not decades later.
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - MarkD - 02-23-2018
"You might sing a different tune if somebody turns up and squats on your property with no legal claim."
I find it useful to distinguish between a homeowner's property, in most places less than 3 acres, and these Hawaii corporations and ranchers that own vast pieces of land. IMO the larger a property, the more likely its history might have involved misappropriation.
Coco Palms' 17 acres is no vast tract, but it is pretty big. And it oceanfront (albeit behind the coastal road).
The haoles of the 1800s are known to have commandeered much oceanfront land around Hawaii. Hey, I'm a white guy; that's our history! We were pretty damn efficient at taking land that belonged to someone else wherever we went. Why deny it?
IMO this changes the equation a bit on whether trying to take land from a large Hawaii landowner or corporation is the same as running a small guy off the 1 acre lot he (or she) owns.
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - kalakoa - 02-23-2018
the larger a property...
The subdivisions were originally vast holdings; subdivision happened far more recently than the original wholesale land seizure. As the lands were "worthless", no protection necessary.
Coco Palms' 17 acres is no vast tract, but it is pretty big. And it oceanfront
Protestors only appear where big money is involved. The new Safeway was less than $20M, therefore did not warrant "protection".
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 02-23-2018
IMO this changes the equation a bit on whether... a large Hawaii landowner or corporation is the same as running a small guy off the 1 acre lot he (or she) owns.
My parents recently sold their home on a small city lot, about 12,000 square feet of land. I have the deed, it's pages and pages long going back to when that parcel was a farm, before that a larger farm, and even earlier part of a territorial claim before the area was a state. Oddly enough, there was no mention of people living there before that time.
The Great Mahele is a good place to start reading about land ownership in Hawaii. Although some might call it the Not So Great Mahele.
Recycle Puna. Humans, although probably not you personally, have already left 400,000 pounds of trash on the moon. - YouTube's Half As Interesting
RE: No Coco Palms for you! - PaulW - 02-23-2018
Some people are so obsessed with race. Can't we get past that yet?
I'm sure a lot of locals willingly sold their land to those evil white people.
Okay, so you demand that some white people hand back their land, just not you.