• Sinister [none/use name, comrade/them]@hexbear.netB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hawaii is a victim of colonialism to this day. The sovereignty of hawaii was illegally stolen. Every day natives of hawaii are priced out of their own homes by their alleged fellow citizens. A genocide beneath the very fingers that so like to point towards other nations.

    • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The US is still bitter that Hawaii was more advanced than the United States of Backwards way back when.

  • Chais@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    The US banned Hawaiian language, overthrew our country, let us die in Maui fires, devastated our universal healthcare, & illegally occupies Hawaii to this day. My mother’s hands were broken for speaking Hawaiian in school. The US is not a beacon, but the destroyer of independence.

    Always has been.

  • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Would Hawaii live in peace and prosperity if it were suddenly its own independent state?

    • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      Probably not with the US around. It’s never let any other country live in quiet peace and prosperity. It’s always worth being optimistic, though.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      It would be up to the people who live there to figure out how to run things. This is certainly not an argument for US to continue occupying them.

      • adroit balloon
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        how is it an “occupation” when Hawaiians themselves voted to become a state by a 94+% majority?

        On June 27, 1959, a referendum asked residents of Hawaiʻi to vote on the statehood bill; 94.3% voted in favor of statehood and 5.7% opposed it. (source)

        • CannotSleep420@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          If voting “yes” on a referendum to be annexed is an accurate way of knowing that the majority of the populace supports annexation, does the same logic apply to Crimea being annexed by Russia? If not, why not?

          • adroit balloon
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            If voting “yes” on a referendum to be annexed

            inventing some history again are you? because this never happened. if you have to stoop this low to try to “score points” how much lower will you stoop?

        • ikilledtheradiostar [comrade/them, love/loves]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The choice was to become a state or remain a territory. Either yes or no would have had Hawaiian peoples occupied. Statehood could be seen as a regaining a scrap of self determination but all it ended up doing was impoverishing the natives and ceding all wealth to colonizing capitalists. This is a primarily function of bourgeois democracy.

          • adroit balloon
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            by voting to become a state - especially to such an overwhelming majority - you can hardly argue a dispositive attitude towards the US being there or towards joining the union. so, not only have you moved the goalposts, you’re arguing a straw man and your own emotions.

            I’m sticking with provable facts.

            • ikilledtheradiostar [comrade/them, love/loves]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              Once again they were given a choice between becoming a state or remaining a territory. Not for independence. It’d be like offering a scrap of bread to a starving man in exchange for the man legitimizing your ability to keep him malnourished.

              The ole adage of "the only thing worse than being exploited is not being exploited " comes to mind.

              Since you can’t be assed to read your own damn wiki article I assume you’re just in bad faith.

              • adroit balloon
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                Once again they were given a choice between becoming a state or remaining a territory

                Hawaiians could have protested, revolted, or one of many other options. But they didn’t.

                That’s the thing about facts— your opinions don’t magically make them untrue, regardless of how many folksy sayings or logical fallacies you conjure.

                • Kaputnik [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  18
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Like the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement which began actively protesting and gained support in the 1960s, pretty soon after the referendum?

                • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  14
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What if 90% of Hawaiians had revolted (and lost) while 90%+ of the other 10% of Hawaiians voted in the referendum?

                • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  14
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You’re the one reducing possibilities. Your dichotomy is between staying a territory and becoming a state. While being a state is nominally better than being outright occupied subjects, prior to colonization they were better off, and you suggest decolonization and not being colonized aren’t options.

          • adroit balloon
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            sigh…

            Should I kill you with my sword or with my gun?

            Sorry, “I want to live” was not an option on the ballot

              • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                19
                ·
                1 year ago

                False dichotomy is when you point out that people might want something other than two shit binary choices.

              • adroit balloon
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                your lack of ability to imagine another option (such as revolt, etc.) does not mean you “win” the argument. it just means you lose because you lack imagination.

                • CascadeOfLight [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  23
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  YOUR ARGUMENT is that the result of this referendum matters. It doesn’t because, as you’ve identified, both options are the same. As for Hawaiian resistance, they’ve been fighting continuously for a hundred years and, like every other liberation movement against the USA, have been ruthlessly suppressed by the fascist police and petty-bourgeoise militia of the “middle class”. And, like every other liberation struggle, victory is inevitable as the empire continues to crumble beneath the weight of its sins.

                  Also, neat how you’ve got five devoted followers upvoting you within two minutes on every one of your shitty empire-shilling posts for the last several hours thinkin-lenin

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          from your own link

          In 1897, over 21,000 Natives, representing the overwhelming majority of adult Hawaiians, signed anti-annexation petitions in one of the first examples of protest against the overthrow of Queen Liliʻuokalaniʻs government.[143] Nearly 100 years later, in 1993, 17,000 Hawaiians marched to demand access and control over Hawaiian trust lands and as part of the modern Hawaiian sovereignty movement.[144] Hawaiian trust land ownership and use is still widely contested as a consequence of annexation. According to scholar Winona LaDuke, as of 2015, 95% of Hawaiʻiʻs land was owned or controlled by just 82 landholders, including over 50% by federal and state governments, as well as the established sugar and pineapple companies.[144] The Thirty Meter Telescope is planned to be built on Hawaiian trust land, but has faced resistance as the project interferes with Kanaka indigeneity.[clarify][145]

          If you think a referendum from 1959 fairly represents the interests of the native population then what else is there to say.

          • adroit balloon
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            If you think a referendum from 1959 fairly represents the interests of the native population then what else is there to say.

            that it does, and you have failed to prove otherwise despite quoting a block f text you clearly don’t understand— OR are intentionally misrepresenting, hoping everyone else here is too stupid to realize you’re trying to pull a fast one on them.

            Fortunately, I’m not the idiot you think I am.

              • adroit balloon
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                A referendum to either become a state or remain a territory is not relevant to the question of the occupation.

                only because you’ve moved the goalposts when you couldn’t win that argument with facts.

                People were never given a choice of independence

                the people always ave that choice. they can protest, revolt, etc. Did the Bolsheviks just ask the Tsars to pretty please step aside?

                Seems that you’re intentionally arguing in bad faith here.

                I’m not the one ignoring facts, employing logical fallacies and hurling personal insults when I don’t “win” online arguments.

                Clearly you’re a much bigger idiot than I thought you were.

                can’t argue with facts, so playskool insults it is. classy. no wonder I see he molding full of you getting posts and comments removed, and you’re totally banned form lemmy.world.

                also explains this post https://lemmy.ml/post/2756876

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  27
                  arrow-down
                  16
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  only because you’ve moved the goalposts when you couldn’t win that argument with facts.

                  I didn’t move any goal posts. I said Hawaii is an occupied territory, and you came back with BuT ThEy HaD a RefErEnduM. Forgetting to mention that the referendum wasn’t actually about independence and that the people of Hawaii were never given a choice of independence by their occupiers.

                  There is no false dichotomy here. It’s hilarious seeing your comment history where you communicate through memes like a 5 year old child.

                  the people always ave that choice. they can protest, revolt, etc. Did the Bolsheviks just ask the Tsars to pretty please step aside?

                  People in Hawaii are revolting against your regime as we speak.

                  The facts are that you made false claim and now you don’t even have the decency to admit it. No point having further discussion with a liar.

                  also explains this post https://lemmy.ml/post/2756876

                  love living rent free in your collective heads

          • adroit balloon
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            note the dates. it was forcibly annexed by a coup government

            the facts don’t support your assertions. even if they did, it’s irrelevant because….

            the later vote to join as a state took place well afterwards

            just as I said and the facts I gave support. since 94% of people voted to become a state, no rational person would call it an “occupation”.

            • Kuori [she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              lmao you illiterate jackass. a sham vote to join a nation that overthrew your actual government by a bunch of people who moved there specifically to move the needle on that exact vote means nothing. christ, you liberals really love white nationalism as much as the flag fuckers do

      • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        True, just clarifying the best case scenario. Did the Hawaiian people recently vote to leave the union that I am unaware of?

          • adroit balloon
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            in 1959, with a 93%+ majority:

            Hawaii—a U.S. territory since 1898—became the 50th state in August, 1959, following a referendum in Hawaii in which more than 93% of the voters approved the proposition that the territory should be admitted as a state.

            There were many Hawaiian petitions for statehood during the first half of the 20th century. The voters wished to participate directly in electing their own governor and to have a full voice in national debates and elections that affected their lives. The voters also felt that statehood was warranted because they had demonstrated their loyalty—no matter what their ethnic background—to the U.S. to the fullest extent during World War II.

            (source)

            On June 27, 1959, a referendum asked residents of Hawaiʻi to vote on the statehood bill; 94.3% voted in favor of statehood and 5.7% opposed it. The referendum asked voters to choose between accepting the Act and remaining a U.S. territory. The United Nations’ Special Committee on Decolonization later removed Hawaiʻi from its list of non-self-governing territories.

            (source)

            • WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              24
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think it’s more than a little dishonest to say that the native Hawaiians voted for this. At the time of this referendum, they composed about 15% of the population and their culture and identity had been suppressed for generations.

              The US government even admitted in 1993 that the native people never agreed to this.

              • adroit balloon
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I think it’s more than a little dishonest to say that the native Hawaiians voted for this.

                almost as dishonest as claiming is said something I didn’t and then moving the goalposts to win an argument…

                At the time of this referendum, they composed about 15% of the population and their culture and identity had been suppressed for generations.

                irrelevant. sad, but irrelevant. thy got to vote, just like anyone else, and, even by your numbers, 2/3 of THAT population voted for statehood.

                The US government even admitted in 1993 that the native people never agreed to this.

                that’s not what that says, but it’s nice to know how easy it is for you to lie to try to get ahead in an argument. “winning” online debates must be very important for you.

              • adroit balloon
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                as you can clearly see,

                On June 27, 1959, a referendum asked residents of Hawaiʻi to vote on the statehood bill; 94.3% voted in favor of statehood and 5.7% opposed it.

      • Defaced
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can I ask you something? And this is me being genuine here, because I’m clearly out of the loop, but what is it about communism that you think is really great? Just forget about the capitalist propaganda comments, I want your genuine opinion, why is it great and what drew you to it?

        • diegeticscream[all]🔻@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Can I ask you something?

          No

          And this is me being genuine here, because I’m clearly out of the loop, but what is it about communism that you think is really great? Just forget about the capitalist propaganda comments, I want your genuine opinion, why is it great and what drew you to it?

          The anti-communism in your comment history is clear. I can see that you are J.A.Q.ing off with no interest in engaging honestly.

          Is there a reason that you’re intent on derailing this thread for a question you’re clearly not interested in the answer to?

          Why do you think millions of the most oppressed turn to communism?

          Why do you think the most rich bourgeois and the most vile Nazis revile communism?

          Have you looked to your right and left, and seen who swells your ranks?

          I have. I’m content with the side I’ve chosen. Are you?

          • Defaced
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            You can choose not to answer and I respect that, I’ve seen you guys post around here a lot. While I have in the past tried to avoid those conversations, I’ve simply never given any of you a chance to speak your mind. Do I believe there are people on lemmy that just want to troll? Absolutely! There’s people like that everywhere, I’m simply trying to understand your perspective because I’ve never engaged in the subject, now I’m intrigued. I’ve gotten to a point where I just have to know what drives you and why. Answer if you want or ignore me, I won’t harass you about it. I’m just trying to give you a chance to speak and explain so I can better understand. There’s no trickery here, I promise.

            • diegeticscream[all]🔻@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              You can choose not to answer and I respect that, I’ve seen you guys post around here a lot. While I have in the past tried to avoid those conversations, I’ve simply never given any of you a chance to speak your mind. Do I believe there are people on lemmy that just want to troll? Absolutely! There’s people like that everywhere, I’m simply trying to understand your perspective because I’ve never engaged in the subject, now I’m intrigued. I’ve gotten to a point where I just have to know what drives you and why. Answer if you want or ignore me, I won’t harass you about it. I’m just trying to give you a chance to speak and explain so I can better understand. There’s no trickery here, I promise.

              Ah, silly me. I’ll choose to believe you’re interacting genuinely. I will, of course, come to regret this.

              My answer is rooted in several reasons:

              • The inability of liberalism to put in effect the progress that liberals talk about (based in COVID deaths, hate crimes, and continuing rampant inequality).
              • The hysterical fear that liberal democracies use in blocking information on Communism (if “Mao is as bad as Hitler” why do public libraries always stock books by Hitler and never by Mao?)
              • The ease of explaining the present deplorable state of the world with the banal evil of the profit motive.
              • The blatant lies put forward by capitalism - not only are Mao and Stalin not monsters, they both write with a clear and academic voice. You can easily find works written by both, and they do not match the stories told in the U$.

              And the emotional pull of the millions who pulled themselves from slavery and oppression through Communism:

              Ballads of Lenin

              Comrade Lenin of Russia,
              High in a marble tomb,
              Move over, Comrade Lenin,
              And give me room.

              I am Ivan, the peasant,
              Boots all muddy with soil.
              I fought with you, Comrade Lenin.
              Now I have finished my toil.

              Comrade Lenin of Russia,
              Alive in a marble tomb,
              Move over, Comrade Lenin,
              And make me room.

              I am Chico, the Negro,
              Cutting cane in the sun.
              I lived for you, Comrade Lenin.
              Now my work is done.

              Comrade Lenin of Russia,
              Honored in a marble tomb,
              Move over, Comrade Lenin,
              And leave me room.

              I am Chang from the foundries
              On strike in the streets of Shanghai.
              For the sake of the Revolution
              I fight, I starve, I die.

              Comrade Lenin of Russia
              Speaks from the marble tomb:
              On guard with the workers forever —
              The world is our room!

              • Defaced
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Wow, that’s a wild point of view. Thank you for sharing, that’s actually really fascinating to see things from another perspective. Unfortunately I don’t think I would ever agree to follow in those world views, but I respect your right to believe them and that’s realistically what both sides need to achieve, mutual respect. So thanks.

                • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  11
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Why don’t you read some communist literature? There’s 150 years worth of recommendations on almost every conceivable topic from many countries and in many languages. Almost all of us started as liberals until we read something that changed our minds. Once a Marxist has explained capitalism, there’s almost no chance of going back (although some do, and they tend to become the worst type of monster).

      • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hawaii was annexed in 1898. So, why dredge up anger at the conquest over 100 years later?

        • WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          First of all, that’s not at all a reasonable reply to my comment. Second, how the hell do you have the gall to openly post this fascist garbage for all the world to see?

          • adroit balloon
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            they voted to become a state in 1959, with a 93%+ majority. how is that “fascist” just because you disagree with it?

            Hawaii—a U.S. territory since 1898—became the 50th state in August, 1959, following a referendum in Hawaii in which more than 93% of the voters approved the proposition that the territory should be admitted as a state.

            There were many Hawaiian petitions for statehood during the first half of the 20th century. The voters wished to participate directly in electing their own governor and to have a full voice in national debates and elections that affected their lives. The voters also felt that statehood was warranted because they had demonstrated their loyalty—no matter what their ethnic background—to the U.S. to the fullest extent during World War II.

            (source)

            On June 27, 1959, a referendum asked residents of Hawaiʻi to vote on the statehood bill; 94.3% voted in favor of statehood and 5.7% opposed it. The referendum asked voters to choose between accepting the Act and remaining a U.S. territory. The United Nations’ Special Committee on Decolonization later removed Hawaiʻi from its list of non-self-governing territories.

            (source)

            • WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because you are saying it was 100 years ago, so your crimes no longer matter. The holocaust is coming up on 100 years ago now as well. I’m guessing that all the peoples murdered by the Nazis should just get over it and start loving the fascists now as well?

              As for your garbage referendum, see my reply to your other post with this garbage.

              • adroit balloon
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                Because you are saying it was 100 years ago, so your crimes no longer matter.

                YOU are saying that, not me. keep your words out of my mouth.

                The holocaust…

                As for your garbage referendum

                “I don’t like it, so I’m going to call it names!”

                grow up

                • WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  15
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I confused you with the other fascist above, whose post I was replying to.

                  Hawaii was annexed in 1898. So, why dredge up anger at the conquest over 100 years later?

                  You’re just here sealioning on an attempt to justify ethnic cleansing. The Holocaust comparison is NOT a false equivalence by the way. Hitler was inspired by the US.

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Judging by their history, probably not. Just like people’s everywhere, Hawaiians have a very violent history full of warfare!

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Nuʻuanu

      “Caught between the Hawaiian Army and a 1000-foot drop, over 700 Oʻahu warriors either jumped or were pushed over the edge of the Pali (cliff). In 1898 construction workers working on the Pali road discovered 800 skulls which were believed to be the remains of the warriors that fell to their deaths from the cliff above.”