05-19-2015, 09:06 AM
thanks for providing the legal definition as proposed in the not-yet-passed Akaka Bill, Wao nahele kane. i don't see any reference to % of lineal descent, so i presume that means as little as a fraction of 1% of said racial category legally qualifies for special status.
that touches on the problem of a legal definition. i am also interested in the causal definition as used in everyday conversation. obviously there would be a wide ranging spectrum of definitions. so often i see the term thrown around quite casually and in a way often suggesting that some innate special traits are bestowed upon those given the highly loaded title (elevated spirituality, connection to nature, primary status of belonging, etc). ..as if all these traits are passed down primarily by "lineal descent", or being hereditary. does 10% "indigenous Hawaiian" lineal descent outweigh, say, 90% ethnic English ancestry? are we suddenly finding ourselves in the realm of quantifying racial purity?
that touches on the problem of a legal definition. i am also interested in the causal definition as used in everyday conversation. obviously there would be a wide ranging spectrum of definitions. so often i see the term thrown around quite casually and in a way often suggesting that some innate special traits are bestowed upon those given the highly loaded title (elevated spirituality, connection to nature, primary status of belonging, etc). ..as if all these traits are passed down primarily by "lineal descent", or being hereditary. does 10% "indigenous Hawaiian" lineal descent outweigh, say, 90% ethnic English ancestry? are we suddenly finding ourselves in the realm of quantifying racial purity?