- This topic has 6 voices and 11 replies.
-
Posts
-
I did not know about a push for Hawaiian independence, but it does exist. Would it exist without the post-colonial, liberal ideology in our society today? Probably not. Will it be successful in having Hawaii break off from the U.S.? I can't imagine this would ever be a possibility.
About 1,000 demonstrators who would rather see Hawaii's independence restored are expected to rally outside the conference at the Hawaii Convention Center."We want to show how U.S. imperialism has spread across the Pacific and across the world," said Lynette Cruz, an organizer of the Hawaiian Independence Action Alliance. "It'll be fun."
A while back I read something about this. Wish I could remember it better, but it was basically about how native Hawaiians always had this problem or concern. I don't think it's all that new.
I wonder if Alaskans felt the same way
No, at least not this year. They celebrated, even plan to issue a "50 years of statehood stamp." http://www.stlbeacon.org/coins_and_stamps/alaska_celebrates_50_years_of_statehood
There is an organization in Texas that wants Texas to reassert their sovreignty as a nation and secede from the Union. They insist that the treaty granting them statehood gives Texas the right to secede if it wants. I dont know how true it is but the story is there. The group is also small. Here is their website: Texas Seccessionists
Now that I think of it, isn't there an Alaskan separatist group as well that people tried to link Sarah Palin to?
Yeah, her husband was allegedly a member of the Alaskan Independence Party. I wonder if secessionism in Alaska is more because they were made up of tribal nations like the Native Americans of other regions across the country rather than for political/Constitutional reasons.
Yeah, her husband was allegedly a member of the Alaskan Independence Party. I wonder if secessionism in Alaska is more because they were made up of tribal nations like the Native Americans of other regions across the country rather than for political/Constitutional reasons.
Didnt we illegally purchase it from the Russians? I mean come on, 2 cents an acre was a deal even in the 19th century, regardless if it is frozen wasteland for 2/3 of the year.
Hawaii didn't really want to join the US but some american businessmen (Dole Fruit Company) were more looking to their commercial interests than the emancipation of a people.The 25th President of the United States McKinley was open to persuasion by U.S. expansionists and by annexationists from Hawaii: the Newlands Resolution in Congress annexed the Republic to the United States and it became the Territory of Hawaii.However the Democratic Revolution of 1954, which was a nonviolent revolution, took place in the Hawaiian Archipelago consisting of Industry-wide strikes, protests, and other acts of civil disobedience. The Revolution culminated in the territorial elections of 1954 where the reign of the Hawaii Republican Party in the legislature came to an abrupt end, as they were voted out of office to be replaced by members of the Democratic Party of Hawaii. The strikes by the Isles' labor workers demanded similar pay and benefits to their Mainland counter-parts. The strikes also crippled the power of the sugar plantations and the Big Five Oligopoly* over their workers.*The Big Five Oligopoly name given to a group of former sugarcane processing corporations that wielded considerable political power in the Territory of Hawaiʻi and leaned heavily towards the Hawaii Republican Party. The Big Five were Castle & Cooke, Alexander & Baldwin, C. Brewer & Co., Amfac and Theo H. Davies & Co.. In 1993, a joint Apology Resolution regarding the overthrow was passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton, apologizing for the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom. It was the first time in American history that the United States government has apologized for overthrowing the legitimate government of a sovereign nation.The following document is quite interesting as well:Annexation of Hawaii, 1898America's annexation of Hawaii in 1898 extended U.S. territory into the Pacific and highlighted resulted from economic integration and the rise of the United States as a Pacific power. For most of the 1800s, leaders in Washington were concerned that Hawaii might become part of a European nation's empire. During the 1830s, Britain and France forced Hawaii to accept treaties giving them economic privileges. In 1842, Secretary of State Daniel Webster sent a letter to Hawaiian agents in Washington affirming U.S. interests in Hawaii and opposing annexation by any other nation. He also proposed to Great Britain and France that no nation should seek special privileges or engage in further colonization of the islands. In 1849, the United States and Hawaii concluded a treaty of friendship that served as the basis of official relations between the parties.A key provisioning spot for American whaling ships, fertile ground for American protestant missionaries, and a new source of sugar cane production, Hawaii's economy became increasingly integrated with the United States. An 1875 trade reciprocity treaty further linked the two countries and U.S. sugar plantation owners from the United States came to dominate the economy and politics of the islands. When Queen Liliuokalani moved to establish a stronger monarchy, Americans under the leadership of Samuel Dole deposed her in 1893. The planters' belief that a coup and annexation by the United States would remove the threat of a devastating tariff on their sugar also spurred them to action. The administration of President Benjamin Harrison encouraged the takeover, and dispatched sailors from the USS Boston to the islands to surround the royal palace. The U.S. minister to Hawaii, John L. Stevens, worked closely with the new government.Dole sent a delegation to Washington in 1894 seeking annexation, but the new President, Grover Cleveland, opposed annexation and tried to restore the Queen. Dole declared Hawaii an independent republic. Spurred by the nationalism aroused by the Spanish-American War, the United States annexed Hawaii in 1898 at the urging of President William McKinley. Hawaii was made a territory in 1900, and Dole became its first governor. Racial attitudes and party politics in the United States deferred statehood until a bipartisan compromise linked Hawaii's status to Alaska, and both became states in 1959.from http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/gp/17661.htm
As you can no doubt guess, I don't think we should have apologized. Apologizing gets you nowhere in international or national politics. As soon as an apology is tendered the sharks start circling.
In 1993, a joint Apology Resolution regarding the overthrow was passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton, apologizing for the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom. It was the first time in American history that the United States government has apologized for overthrowing the legitimate government of a sovereign nation.
I was not taking it personally, I was responding to this part of your post. Apologizing for the annexation of Hawaii was a bad idea because it sets a bad precedent. I don't think the nation has a duty to apologize for bad things that happened in the past, the annexation of a large part of Mexico, slavery, etc. As I said, apologizing shows weakness, especially in international politics. It causes the professional victims to come out from under their rocks because they smell blood.The narrative shows Imperialism at its best. It also demonstrates Social Darwinism, if you buy into that kind of thinking. The pineapple company took down a country.
