Posts: 2,485
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2008
"Is it "might makes right" or "we are a nation of laws"? Can't have it both ways."
The current circus is neither. While acknowledge that many people find value in the traditional ways and while I would accept considerable legal concessions towards Native Hawaiians, I consider that the current circus is an example of wild extrapolation from what some people think some version of the past was, not necessarily even the past as it existed just prior to the overthrow, and I don't see justice being done here. The current hodgepodge of extremists trying to actually run the show on their own would be a spectacle I might pay to see from a safe distance, but I have property, friends, and family who don't deserve that.
Posts: 785
Threads: 6
Joined: Apr 2012
quote:
Originally posted by riversnout
There's the problem right there. In the opinion of a lot of people, the land was illegally stolen from the Kingdom. Search many other threads for that discussion.
Bottom line is that the State of Hawaii and the US government want to enforce their law using force.
Is it "might makes right" or "we are a nation of laws"? Can't have it both ways. Walking in the shoes of the other means acknowledging your own history as well as that of the other. So far, all I have seen from the "build it" team is a request that the other side move out of the way and quietly and peacefully disagree somewhere out of sight so they can continue their pattern over and over and over. We're not ready for the third way, yet.
Is it "might makes right" Do you mean as in: holding a group of citizens - who have done absolutely nothing wrong - hostage by force until you get your particular desired outcome?
or "we are a nation of laws" If those laws are being selectively enforced or ignored (for "special people"), then the answer is no... and if the answer is no, then they can be selectively enforced against whomever is the disdained group at that time... in which case we have mob rule... and any minority group that embraces selective enforcement of the laws has a lot more confidence in human psychology and social stability than I have...
"In the opinion of a lot of people, the land was illegally stolen from the Kingdom" And we are supposedly a nation of laws where those opinions can be taken to the appropriate authorities for resolution. To date, those of that opinion have not been successful in achieving their desired resolution... There is no prohibition to repeatedly making an effort to get those issues resolved in a legal manner - however, in a democracy, the majority will is supposed to determine the resolution of those individual opinions/grievances - not mob rule and selective enforcement of laws.
to quote a great statesman, who shall remain nameless, "(in a democracy) you can't get always get what you want, but, if you try, sometimes you'll find that you get what you need..."
Posts: 1,513
Threads: 18
Joined: Oct 2014
I'm not sure I want to see a third way born of this bizarre juxtaposition of the internationally esteemed astronomy community our guests, and the fringe bully element mixed racial claiming to be Hawaiians.
Either the OHA or another covert group will get their extra greedy cut of the money or they won't and we will see some movement. Until then hopefully the hurricanes weather will clear the road.
Posts: 997
Threads: 50
Joined: Aug 2012
What money are you talking about? OHA was awarded $15 million total for 2019 - https://www.civilbeat.org/2019/04/oha-pr...ust-lands/ -
Thats it, $15 mil...12 facilities housing 13 telescopes on the mauna alone, not counting all other ceded land which product Huge income for the State and the Hawaiians take is $15 million? Whats the UH cut for those telescopes on the mauna? that extra greedy cut comes from where?
eta...bold by me
Posts: 209
Threads: 4
Joined: Feb 2017
quote:
Originally posted by geochem
Is it "might makes right" Do you mean as in: holding a group of citizens - who have done absolutely nothing wrong - hostage by force until you get your particular desired outcome?
Yes, that is exactly what I mean:
http://libweb.hawaii.edu/digicoll/annexa...tition.php
"The petition, clearly marked "Petition Against Annexation" and written in both the Hawaiian and English languages, was signed by 21,269 native Hawaiian people, or more than half the 39,000 native Hawaiians and mixed-blood persons reported by the Hawaiian Commission census for the same year."
quote:
Originally posted by geochem
or "we are a nation of laws" If those laws are being selectively enforced or ignored (for "special people"), then the answer is no... and if the answer is no, then they can be selectively enforced against whomever is the disdained group at that time... in which case we have mob rule... and any minority group that embraces selective enforcement of the laws has a lot more confidence in human psychology and social stability than I have...
If by "mob rule" you are referring to:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_...y_(Hawaii)
I agree
quote:
Originally posted by geochem
"In the opinion of a lot of people, the land was illegally stolen from the Kingdom" And we are supposedly a nation of laws where those opinions can be taken to the appropriate authorities for resolution. To date, those of that opinion have not been successful in achieving their desired resolution... There is no prohibition to repeatedly making an effort to get those issues resolved in a legal manner - however, in a democracy, the majority will is supposed to determine the resolution of those individual opinions/grievances - not mob rule and selective enforcement of laws.
and who are "the appropriate authorities"? Certainly not the courts of the US, as they are the accused. How about this:
"Because international tribunals lack the power of joinder that national courts enjoy, it is possible––as a result of procedural maneuvering alone––for legitimate international legal disputes to escape just adjudication. For example, in Larsen, the United States commanded an enviable litigation posture: even though the United States admitted its illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, it repeatedly refused to consent to international arbitration" –American Journal of International Law, vol. 95, p. 927.
Posts: 14,142
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
The petition ... was signed by 21,269 native Hawaiian people, or more than half the 39,000 native Hawaiians and mixed-blood persons
A fitting example: something like "rule of law" (which we apparently lack) and/or "will of the people" (which polls show support for TMT).
If the TMT is not built, there will be no need for concessions.
Posts: 3,221
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2009
The jump from The Committee of Safety organized an internal coup overthrowing the Hawaiian Kingdom to the United States must acquiesce to an International Tribunal is quite the leap in logic. Some would say an impossible one really.
As for the Ku'e Petitions, Native Hawaiians were only about a third of the 109K population in the islands in 1897. So only about 20% of the population signed the Petitions Against Annexation (which made no voting difference in the Senate - same Senators still voted For or Against regardless of the petition). Regardless, why should the wishes of a split minority of the population be given absolute preference then (or now)?
Posts: 1,975
Threads: 47
Joined: Jul 2012
why should the wishes of a split minority of the population be given absolute preference
My thoughts exactly. They had their day(s) in court. It’s time to admit they need to move on.
Posts: 11,252
Threads: 765
Joined: Sep 2012
signed by 21,269 native Hawaiian people, or more than half the 39,000 native Hawaiians
I might have serious reservations about the validity of that petition, if the results don't reflect my personal opinion. For instance, did someone check the ancestry of each of the 21,269 Hawaiians who signed back in 1897? Is there a checklist for proof of I.D., or search for duplicate signatures? If not, can it be accurate? I think it's clear the answer is what I want it to be.
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 14,142
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
They had their day(s) in court.
Ah, but court rulings are only valid if they run against TMT.
I am starting to think the "third way" is: TMT isn't built, Big Island becomes a full-on banana republic, rule of law only applicable in Kona/Waikoloa because they have the budget.
No rule of law means no need for building permits, gun licenses, 329 cards, etc., and rampant unemployment once businesses start leaving.
But at least we'll be rid of Ige and Kim, so not a total loss.
|
