73- . Negative; oppose sovereignty movement (439 Votes)
- . Positive; advances self-determination (222 Votes)
- . Don't understand issue (103 Votes)
- . Negative; U.S. meddling in sovereignty (93 Votes)
This is not a scientific poll — results reflect only the opinions of those voting.
Keep Hawaiian lands in Hawaiian hands!
Give only pure blooded Hawaiians anything special, not those whose ancestors have betrayed the race with foreigners.
Betrayed the race? Seriously? What an utterly foolish comment.
yes they have betrayed their tribe by mating with foreigners, so hardly any pure blood Hawaiians remain.
Actually a brilliant comment that points out how ridiculous and race-based this whole issue is.
What exactly qualifies as Hawaiian today? 50% Hawaiian by blood, 10%, 1%? The bums from the mainland that buy a one-way ticket to HI and setup tents by the beach, aren’t they now officially Kama’aina?
It should be more than 50%.
Should be only 100 per cent. All others are part Hawaiian and should not be called “native” Hawaiian. Whoevever dreamt that native Hawaiian title was trying to legitimize their status and obtain goodies from the government.
I try to understand the history of the islands, and the attitudes portrayed in the comments but if white people said anything like this…there would be more than an outcry.
I wish there was something in the middle they can agree on!
Like indigenous people all,over the world, organized entities have displaced their society. Sad as it is, like the Indians on the mainland they must be recompensed. How this is accomplished has been the bugaboo for all theses years. The door has finally opened for an equitable settlement. How to proceed is the problem facing the Natives. Acknowledgement or admission of the overthrow and how it should be defined seems to scuttle advancement of the negotiations. Why jeopardize further progress by demanding how to define the take-over. Arguments over the rhetoric only delays just renumeration to the ancestors. What is being demanded will never come to pass. A Government will never admit that overthrow was “illegal” as the US government was not involved. The plantation owners whose enterprises were,being threatened organized.
They already did United States Public Law 103-150, informally known as the Apology Resolution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apology_Resolution
The US has admitted its part in the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
But it was really white Hawaiian citizens standing up for their own rights in the Kingdom that brought about the revolution against the kingdom.
“B. Negative; oppose sovereignty movement.” — This option is ambiguous. Does it mean: “I’m against this process because I oppose the sovereignty movement.” Or is the intent: “I’m against this process because this process is opposed to the sovereignty movement.” This ambiguity invalidates this survey.
It means the former, not the latter. No ambiguity.
Read B in the context of A…
The big divide, within the Hawaiian Community, is the Hawaiian American Indian status versus the International Sovereign Hawaiian status.
A significant number of Intellectuals (as reported by the DOI), have sided with the Hawaiian American Indian status. The International Sovereign Hawaiian faction, has been growing stronger & rapidly, every day. Most of the Hawaiians living outside of Hawaii, are believers of an International Sovereign Hawaiian status,
This issue, will have to be voted, by Hawaiians & Non-Hawaiians. The Kingdom of Hawaii, before it was overthrown, was a cosmopolitan of people, and mixed blood lines.
My relatives in Oklahoma tell me the people are doing very well. They sell tax free gas and cigarets, and have bingo on the Rez. College scholarships for anyone who wants them. New band instruments and new football uniforms for the high school. A new Chapter House with free booths to sell crafts to the many tourists. Even a fancy new restaurant. (“Kamaaina discount” if you show your Native American I.D.) There so many jobs available that they have to go off the reservation to hire workers. Everyone who wants a job has one.
But then, the Hawaiians don’t think like an “Indian”.
Yes. They don’t. They’re not indians.
Organized crime here would like to exploit casino-style gambling on Hawaiian land. Hawaiians are too smart to let that happen.
Whatever happens the Hawaiians will never get it together. They all think they are going to be Chiefs, and will not have to work.
Too many cooks spoil the poi.
If we have a Native Hawaiian government and they have their own land, maybe they can build casinos like the American Indians on the mainland have done. The Hawaiians then will become affluent, the State will derive more money through taxes on the casinos and the affluent Hawaiians, and maybe even tourism will grow bigger. It’s a win-win for all.
On sacred lands?
Not all land on Hawaii is “sacred”. Besides, when $$$$$$ starts floating over their heads, their concept of “sacred” will change.
I put my choice in selecting that the Hawaiians should have their own govenment – Providing its leadership is “pure Hawaiian blood.” Pure Hawaiian blood is disappearing. With that said, I do hope the Robinson family keep that island folks “pure Hawaiian.”
I don’t have Hawaiian blood, but I do have the Hawaiian spirit 100 percent.
Self perservation for the Hawaiians with their own government means they don’t have to be mess with being over-tax-burden like the rest of us by the ruling politicial party in Hawaii – The Democrats. With a Hawaiian government, just maybe, what’s left of the beauty of this island (Oahu) will be preserved from developers who want to fill “cement” and remove the once beauty of this beautiful island.
During the 19th century, the Hawaiian royalty intermarried with Europeans, and now none of their descendants is 100% Hawaiian. Did they ‘betray the race’? All this talk of racial purity is a little scary.
Can’t fix the past. Also should not try to sacrifice the future to fix the past.
Polls are just another manufactured instrument manipulating democracy. Usually when polls are written, the outcomes are already known, and also– why are there two negatives and only one positive? Alter the wording, and we have essentially the same poll:
What do you think about a new international process that would restore Hawaii’s independence, if one emerges?
B. Negative; I support the military occupation of Hawaii
A. Positive; advances new global trade opportunities
D. Don’t understand issue
C. Positive; Observing international rights is a pathway to peace and justice