+- 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: Cultural Rifts? (/showthread.php?tid=15291)
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Johnd - 12-29-2014
Host culture? learn from the land and the Hawaiians? Hawaiian nation? Bout time to look at things as they were not as we like to imagine them.
jdo
RE: Cultural Rifts? - ironyak - 12-29-2014
punafish - thank you for your many insights. I found your reference to Pirsig to be particularly meaningful. When faced with the dilemma's two horns of Truth versus Beauty, slipping through the middle to find Quality may be beneficial.
“The place to improve the world is first in one's own heart and head and hands, and then work outward from there.”
Robert M. Pirsig
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Johnd - 12-29-2014
quote:There are more Hawaiians living in the mainland than here. I doubt that anyone in Vegas, Calfornia, Arizona is questioning their right to live there, or should we start a petition as well? Some folks need to get a life asap.
Originally posted by Punatic007
On a sunday morning some years back we went to the Maku'u market for a fun shopping experience and came upon a booth of "native" Hawaiians who were asking for signatures for their petition for sovereignty to reclaim Hawaii.
I read their literature, it stated those of us who were not born here would go before a council that would decide if we could stay, if not they would kick us out and take our homes.
The lady said she was pretty sure I'd be able to stay and could she have my signature?
jdo
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Rob Tucker - 12-29-2014
I have observed, in reading this history of Hawaii, that the waves of immigration to the islands since the days of Captain Cook and whaling anyway have been driven by the large landowners.
One by one the large landowners imported workers for the fields. Portugese, Chinese, Phillipino and Japanese were all invited here and one by one took their place and slowly took made their way up the social ladder.
Each ethnic group brought their own cultural affinities to the mix and for the most part were controlled and contained by the plantation system. One did not rock the boat or there were serious consequences.
Then in the late 1950's the large landowners, especially on the Big Island, made what could be called a mistake. They subdivided huge tracts of land, mostly in Puna, and planted for sale signs. In doing so they invited mainland haoles here and we came. We also brought our cultural affinities with us and those included going to meetings, taking notes and complaining.
We newcomer haoles did not owe our jobs and income to the plantation and could not be threatened with themselves or family members losing their jobs. We were generally economically independent and as such outside traditional control. But we were invited to come and here we are.
It is my position that like other ethnic groups we are as entitled to stay as are the Portugese, Phillipino, Chinese and Japanese. The powers that be will just have to adjust. It was their decisions which made the present reality
It is not a good/bad thing. It is just they way it is... and it all comes back to what has proven to be the illegal subdivision of tens of thousands of lots on the Big Island.
The Hawaiian are not to blame for this. Neither are we. If there is resentment it should be aimed at the large plantation land owners who still exercise as much control as they can over the politics and economic structure of these islands as they can.
RE: Cultural Rifts? - lavalava - 12-29-2014
PMAR through Shipman!!!
RE: Cultural Rifts? - geochem - 12-29-2014
quote:
Originally posted by Rob Tucker
It is not a good/bad thing. It is just they way it is... and it all comes back to what has proven to be the illegal subdivision of tens of thousands of lots on the Big Island.
Rob, I wouldn't disagree with most of your accounting of the Island's history, but I'm unclear on the basis for your statement that the subdivision of the land was illegal. Certainly, in retrospect, the subdivision of some land areas was unwise and short-sighted, but what laws - that were on the books at the time - was the subdivision in violation of - and recognizing too, that the laws were/are a reflection of the culture existing at the time...
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Rob Tucker - 12-29-2014
Within the planning code for the Territory of Hawaii was a bill Regarding Subdivision of Real Estate (Ord. 58) in 1947. That bill, was amended (Ord. 1953-128) which passed and became law, and contained a set of requirements for roads that must be completed before a subdivision could be approved for sale to the public.
The road requirements stated road widths, road frequency, road beds and road surface. None of these requirements were enforced in 1959. In fact for many subdivisions the tract maps were approved and property offered for sale before even the most rudimentary paths were bulldozed.
For example the Ord 1953-128 had this language:
"7. Pavement of streets and roads within the County of Hawaii.
All streets and roads hereafter constructed within
the County of Hawaii shall have an approved six (6)
inch base course and three (3) inch asphalt macadam
pavement or two (2) inch asphalt concrete pavement
which shall conform to the standards as set forth
by the Department of Public Works"
As another example the frequency requirement would have required HPP to have at least two more main avenues from Hwy 130 to the ocean. All the roads would have had to been built to county standards of width, road bed, grade and road surface. Gravel roads were not acceptable... by law.
Knowing that a number of primary investors in these subdivisions, in addition to large landowners, were state and county politicians and the pending statehood posed unknown affects and costs to their ventures the CoH rammed the tract maps through to protect the profits of the developing ventures. They did this in violation of their own planning codes and have never looked back.
I did speak with Helene Hale, "mayor" at that time, and she honestly told me the intention was to create a tax mine where off islanders would buy lots, pay taxes and never move here expecting county services. I give her credit for being honest... but the deal was done, the big guys made their money, and "substandard roads" - created by the CoH - have been disenfranchised from services, maintenance or access to Fuel Tax Revenue ever since.
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Southernmost - 12-29-2014
Which really all started with the great Mahele and the overthrow. Wealthy sugar barons who's descendants are still around to this day and still calling the shots as Rob said. And they needed water for their sugar plantations so they DIVERTED the water from the mountains with flumes and ditches. Which in turn cut off the supply going into the Hawaiians taro patches (lo'i), which lead to the Hawaiian losing his #1 source for food nutrition. Which lead to the Hawaiian to have to move out of traditional life and assimilate. Kalo(taro) is also very spiritual to Hawaiians. Hawaiian culture believes it is what they originated from. Just one of the many ill effects the sugar kings had on the Hawaiian.
Here is a song about Kalo
http://youtu.be/zJFrfGuqCmA
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Southernmost - 12-29-2014
I would also have to add the federal, state and corrupt county governments have to own much of the blame also. All about $$$
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Johnd - 12-29-2014
quote:simply brilliant. thank you sir
Originally posted by Rob Tucker
Within the planning code for the Territory of Hawaii was a bill Regarding Subdivision of Real Estate (Ord. 58) in 1947. That bill, was amended (Ord. 1953-128) which passed and became law, and contained a set of requirements for roads that must be completed before a subdivision could be approved for sale to the public.
The road requirements stated road widths, road frequency, road beds and road surface. None of these requirements were enforced in 1959. In fact for many subdivisions the tract maps were approved and property offered for sale before even the most rudimentary paths were bulldozed.
For example the Ord 1953-128 had this language:
"7. Pavement of streets and roads within the County of Hawaii.
All streets and roads hereafter constructed within
the County of Hawaii shall have an approved six (6)
inch base course and three (3) inch asphalt macadam
pavement or two (2) inch asphalt concrete pavement
which shall conform to the standards as set forth
by the Department of Public Works"
As another example the frequency requirement would have required HPP to have at least two more main avenues from Hwy 130 to the ocean. All the roads would have had to been built to county standards of width, road bed, grade and road surface. Gravel roads were not acceptable... by law.
Knowing that a number of primary investors in these subdivisions, in addition to large landowners, were state and county politicians and the pending statehood posed unknown affects and costs to their ventures the CoH rammed the tract maps through to protect the profits of the developing ventures. They did this in violation of their own planning codes and have never looked back.
I did speak with Helene Hale, "mayor" at that time, and she honestly told me the intention was to create a tax mine where off islanders would buy lots, pay taxes and never move here expecting county services. I give her credit for being honest... but the deal was done, the big guys made their money, and "substandard roads" - created by the CoH - have been disenfranchised from services, maintenance or access to Fuel Tax Revenue ever since.
jdo