Advantages and disadvantages of a restored Kingdom

[PunaMauka2]

yes yes ...serious stuff here, Lee. we are nation building on Punaweb and we must be prepared for the coming apocalyptic global collapse. what form of government will we have? taxes? currency? many pragmatic details to hammer out here before the impending deoccupation of the Kingdom. limit to intelligent questions only please.

[Kaimana]

Why do you even post if you aren't going to add to the conversation?

[PunaMauka2]

order in the court! bailiff, remove that disturbance. serious stuff.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Those are a little different since those are internal issues

They may be theoretically different, but practically speaking, what do you think would happen if the US government paid reparations to a Hawaiian Kingdom while bypassing blacks and native Americans? Recent events similar to those in Baltimore would break out in every city across the county. The US government is not going to allow that to happen.

[Kaimana]

Again if you're saying the US would not follow Constitutional and International law, I don't have an argument against that. I'm only arguing what should happen per Constitutional and International law.

[ironyak]

PM2 has enrolled for a troll in training course so he has a required number of posts for his homework. I'd like to say he's trying to better himself, but...

For clarity, Ka Lahui is suggesting a nation based in the ~1.6 million acre of ceded lands, more akin to the system used for Native American nations. Theirs is also a constitutional democracy so both the approach and the goal are more familiar.

Kaimana is talking about a restoration of the Kingdom of Hawaii and all of its lands at the time of the 1893 overthrow, correct? This is much more disruptive change so the pros and cons would be more extensive.

PS there is nothing in the constitution about reparations so you're side stepping HOTPE's pragmatic question.

[Kaimana]

But Treaties are considered law of the land by the constitution. So by signing on to the Geneva convention treaties they are in fact constitutional laws.

[terracore]

The USA is never going to "Give Hawaii back". Not only is there no precedence for this, Hawaii already voted on this and 93% voted to become a state. I bet the numbers would be different this time, but nowhere near the numbers needed to start another civil war.

IF the various free Hawaii movements could come to an agreement on what they wanted and IF democracy prevailed and voted one of them in power and IF they could convince the US congress and senate to let Hawaii go, it could not be a completely free and independent nation. It would have to make treaties with somebody to protect it from future foreign occupation. My guess is that they would choose somebody like the USA over somebody like North Korea or China. This would involve some sort of territorial or commonwealth status which would inevitably give Hawaii less representation and less tangible financial benefits than we have now.

People like to talk about going back to the way things were, but how many really want to give up their cell phones, TV, McDonalds, microwave dinners, and resume a hunter-gatherer lifestyle? Next time you are driving through Keaau and see the McDonald's drive through line overspilling onto the street you'll have your answer. I'm not trying to be crass but look at the lifestyle and standard of living on the other Pacific island nation-states. People risk their lives leaving their families behind crossing deserts and climbing fences to get into the USA illegally. Not so many people want to start a revolution to leave.

[Kaimana]

*facepalm* I don't even know where to start with all this.

[terracore]

That is why I am lacking understanding. Perhaps you can try?