Posts: 735
Threads: 20
Joined: May 2006
quote:
Keep in mind that our ancestors didn't come here to profit. They learned to live in harmony with nature. This is not limited to kanaka by the way but you'll see this evident in many other indigenous cultures. Capitalism was a foreign concept.
I know what I am posting will not go down well with some of you but the Kanaka Maoli and other indigenous people exploited nature to the best of their ability. Before Hawai`i became infested with humans, there were several species of giant flightless birds here. They are all extinct now and known only from fossils. What happened to them is obvious, the Hawaiians wiped them out from over hunting. Who knows how many other species were driven to extinction during this period? If they had had the technology back then, many more species would have been wiped out for sure.
Humans are humans whether indigenous or not and it's is in our nature to exploit nature. This concept of the "noble savage" living in complete harmony with nature was conceived by racist writers of the 18th and 19th centuries. It's ironic that indigenous peoples have come embrace this myth. I suppose this is due to the rise of left wing liberlism and the so called "green" eco movement.
quote:
One idea down the tubes is the idea of the eco-friendly Polynesians. Fossil evidence suggests a significant Hawaiian impact. Once the Polynesians arrived in Hawaii, they began to do two things to the birds here. First off, they ate an awful lot them. In the archeological garbage pits of Hawaiians past are numerous bird bones. Native bird bones dominate the earliest sites. As time progresses there are less and less native bird bones in the middens and more and more Polynesian introduced food sources such as dog, pig, and chicken. These pits show several extinct species of flightless land birds and numerous species of seabirds. Secondly, the Hawaiians cleared vast areas of lowland forest habitat with agricultural plantings, firewood gathering, and burning for grassland cultivation. This loss of habitat drove certain birds to extinction and many others were forced into marginal areas.
http://www.hawaii-forest.com/essays/9706.html
Posts: 6
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2007
quote:
I know what I am posting will not go down well with some of you but the Kanaka Maoli and other indigenous people exploited nature to the best of their ability. Before Hawai`i became infested with humans, there were several species of giant flightless birds here. They are all extinct now and known only from fossils. What happened to them is obvious, the Hawaiians wiped them out from over hunting. Who knows how many other species were driven to extinction during this period? If they had had the technology back then, many more species would have been wiped out for sure.
And your recycled garbage has been done & redone. Your concept of "exploitation" is nothing like what happened back in the old days. Can you, who try to impress with what little you can about flightless birds, count the number of endangered species including extinct since post-western contact? You'd be surprised at the numbers, trust me.
quote:
Humans are humans whether indigenous or not and it's is in our nature to exploit nature. This concept of the "noble savage" living in complete harmony with nature was conceived by racist writers of the 18th and 19th centuries. It's ironic that indigenous peoples have come embrace this myth. I suppose this is due to the rise of left wing liberlism and the so called "green" eco movement.
Correction, the "noble savage" is a western concept. Key word, WESTERN. Not a native concept. These racists writers you mention of course, is another "western" introduction. What about our ancient 'olelo no'eau? Momi just provided one that was said by her son. There are so many telling us how to live in harmony with nature. We don't need outsiders from the 18th century using a western concept to judge a culture unfamiliar to them and applying western analogies to what they really cannot comprehend. Does that make sense to you? Am I making myself clear? I hope I am, I know sometimes I tend to go off on a tangent and too wordy to a point no one can understand what I am saying.
quote:
One idea down the tubes is the idea of the eco-friendly Polynesians. Fossil evidence suggests a significant Hawaiian impact. Once the Polynesians arrived in Hawaii, they began to do two things to the birds here. First off, they ate an awful lot them.
OOps, that's where you are wrong. Nothing in our traditions says that they ate birds. Yes, many of them were used for feathers. Of course I am referring specifically to na kanaka 'oiwi, I can't speak about other Polynesians. Perhaps you read in some of the books written by non-native people who are experts in western anthropology that said otherwise?
quote:
In the archeological garbage pits of Hawaiians past are numerous bird bones. Native bird bones dominate the earliest sites. As time progresses there are less and less native bird bones in the middens and more and more Polynesian introduced food sources such as dog, pig, and chicken. These pits show several extinct species of flightless land birds and numerous species of seabirds.
Yes, but where is your proof that it was eaten?
quote:
Secondly, the Hawaiians cleared vast areas of lowland forest habitat with agricultural plantings, firewood gathering, and burning for grassland cultivation. This loss of habitat drove certain birds to extinction and many others were forced into marginal areas.
Vast areas? So what you are trying to imply in order to justify your own point here, is that in days of old they still destroyed, although compared to today which has had even a more devastating effect that contributes to the slow extinction of mankind, speaking on a global term of course.
Posts: 735
Threads: 20
Joined: May 2006
Hey I knew some people would get upset by my post. I welcome the moderator to delete if it is deemed too controversial. I stand by what I posted. I choose to believe in the science of archeology rather than tradition.
quote:
OOps, that's where you are wrong. Nothing in our traditions says that they ate birds. Yes, many of them were used for feathers.
Traditions don't even mention the fact that there were giant flightless birds here at one time. The fossils were only discovered a few years ago. Who knows what else is waiting to be discovered?
Posts: 2,314
Threads: 59
Joined: Jun 2003
I just hope Rob will end this senseless thread. I have never seen this much bad vibe on Punaweb before.
Aloha,
John S. Rabi, ABR,CM,CRB,FHS,PB
http://www.JohnRabi.com
Typically Tropical Properties
75-5870 Walua Road, Suite 101
Kailua-Kona, HI 96740
(808)327-3185
Posts: 52
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2006
Are you suggesting that a supernatural power took the life of the offending grave robber the same way the cave closed with your grand father in it till the relics were placed back?
The limited knowledge we have about the native population in north America prior to the European landings suggest they were opportunist, manipulated the environment to fit there needs. As there culture became less nomadic a social order developed intent on the kings or chiefs keeping the spoils of the under class for protection of the population social services and order. Sounds like they were profit oriented to me. It is how cultural life expands.
If you get a chance read 1491 it deals with life in the America's prior to the European conquest.
Keith
Keith
Posts: 160
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2006
John, I'm amazed you have survived here. Thanks for the one liner posts just to have your advertisement on the web.
During early migrations, we have no idea what kind of food source was on these islands. Theoretically, there was not much at all. So before you go blaming the Polynesians for causing tons of species to become extinct. You have to take a look at any migration to new land that was undiscovered. So if they ate birds besides the chickens they brought along with them, I dare not give the guilt trip about it. All civilizations have changed the landscape and I heard some people saying that Hawaiians changed the land before while taking a class on ethnobotany on Kaua`i. Not half as bad as people do today. Yes, they made lo`i and farmed and mulched and used greenery for mulch. It's the same with Native people all over the world. They did not rape the forests, they took what they needed. They made the farmlands in the midsections to the coastlines and kept the forest presteine. Did you know that the reason for most of the bird extinction was from #1. Captain Cook's ships bringing the mosquito (beside all the tons of other diseases that almost caused the extinction of the Hawaiian culture and natives all over the world.)#2. The introduction of the mongoose which ate the eggs of ground dwelling birds (like nene, pueo, koloa ducks). #3. The coqui frog will probably be one of the worst which eats native bugs found nowhere else in the world but make up the basis for the ecosystem in Hawaii. Hmmmm....
Note related to this post *Captain Cook did not discover Hawaii cause the Hawaiians already were here.
Hi Keith, I'm not suggesting anything but just telling the story. The Hawaiians don't have a word for supernatural because everything was and is considered "natural". I think you have good observation of the issue though.
Edited by - momi on 03/08/2007 09:32:35
Posts: 8,463
Threads: 1,032
Joined: May 2003
Well John, I’ve been following this thread and the word senseless had not occurred to me yet. Some of it might be uncomfortable for some perhaps but I do not think that heartfelt communication is senseless. That cuts both ways too.
One thing quite unique about Hawaiian history, which many or most don’t understand, is that the most traumatic events are actually quite recent and as such are effectively still open wounds for many.
As for bad vibe: we have seen true bad vibe here on Punaweb before. This is not it. As I said, uncomfortable maybe - depending on who you are and how you hear things.
It has been my intention that Punaweb become an actual reflection of Puna and it’s peoples. Not a feel-good promotional tourist site - but a vehicle for the residents, present and future, of Puna to know and understand each other better. The reality of who we are might turn some away and it might lure some home.
Unless this topic, or others, becomes a venue of personal attacks it will continue.
(P.S. 1491 was a very, very interesting article in, I believe, Atlantic Monthly a few years ago. -read it if you can find it. Or maybe it is a book title?)
Aloha,
Punaweb moderator
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 735
Threads: 20
Joined: May 2006
Sure the pre-contact Hawaiians didn't impact the environment as much as other groups but what I'm saying is that if they could have they would have. If they had had the technology they would have built skyscrapers back then. The nene goose was almost wiped out because the Hawaiians suddenly had guns to shoot them with. They sold the birds to tourists for profit. The sandal wood forests were cleared also for profit. For a people who knew nothing of capitalism, they sure learned quickly.
Posts: 2,314
Threads: 59
Joined: Jun 2003
quote:
Well John, I’ve been following this thread and the word senseless had not occurred to me yet. Some of it might be uncomfortable for some perhaps but I do not think that heartfelt communication is senseless.
You are right Rob, "senseless" was a wrong choice of words. I probably should have said "fruitless" instead. The subject itself doesn't bother me and not uncomfortable for me but I don't like to see personal attacks. I certainly took the "foreigners" snipe a personal attack on most of us and an offending remark. There are many of us here who love Hawaii and respect its culture, history and traditions just as much if not more than some of those who claim to be natives.
Aloha,
John S. Rabi, ABR,CM,CRB,FHS,PB
http://www.JohnRabi.com
Typically Tropical Properties
75-5870 Walua Road, Suite 101
Kailua-Kona, HI 96740
(808)327-3185
Edited by - John S. Rabi on 03/08/2007 10:13:56
Edited by - John S. Rabi on 03/08/2007 10:15:46
Posts: 160
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2006
Are you sure the Hawaiians shot the nene with guns, or the newcomers? Who brought the guns? By the time Captain Cook arrived, the Hawaiians already learned not to do that through trial and error like any culture. The sandal wood forest got devastated because under the rule of a few chiefs the Hawaiians were forced to leave their occupations of fishing and farming to go to the hills to gather sandalwood. Due to the fact that the people were going through famine, because the main occupations were not as much done during this time, the Hawaiians that were forced to go up into the mountains died from hypothermia so the Hawaiians who survive the ordeal pulled out the sandalwood pulapula on the way down to preserve the lives of their families. That is true but you need to look at the fact that the chiefs were getting a taste of money which was new here at the time. note: before the Tahitians arrived captilalism was not as big as the will and knowledge of survival. The Tahitians brought capitolism and were still learning about it at the time of the sandalwood industry.
Also, Hawaiians did not sell the forest birds, they used the ulu sap to catch them, then plucked one or two feathers and released them. No forest dwelling birds were eaten, these feathers were used in the capes. Only certain people would go into the forest as it was a place where the gods dwelled so the occupation of being a feather gatherer was an art that consisted of mimicking the bird calls and luring them closer, scientific inquiry of what flowers or fruits they liked best. Th reason for this scientific inquiry was to be as gentle to the forest as possible. Hmmmm where are you getting our information from?
Also, the flightless moa was also made extinct in New Zealand as well and I don't blame the maoris for trying to survive and the ability to keep their families alive or for bringing the polynesian rat in their canoes which possibly led to the extinction of the long legged owl (Grallisrix auceps) of Po`ipu, Kaua`i which stood 4 feet tall and also ate birds.
I don't use the past to justify things but maybe we can learn from them. When you place blame on a culture you overlook the reasons why things occured.
John, you would get offended at foreigners I explained why I used it. You seemed to have only read a few of the posts and not all. Good one. Your very thorough. Your comments and your inability to get educated is what worries me about what you are telling foreigners who want to move here. This is why I'm very concerned about you.
Edited by - momi on 03/08/2007 10:27:15
|
