Would Hawaii live in peace and prosperity if it were suddenly its own independent state?
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.”
deleted by creator
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?
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?
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.
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!
They did before they were conquered. Why is that so hard to imagine now?
Hawaii was annexed in 1898. So, why dredge up anger at the conquest over 100 years later?
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?
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)
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.
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
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.
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.
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)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overthrow_of_the_Hawaiian_Kingdom
note the dates. it was forcibly annexed by a coup government. the later vote to join as a state took place well afterwards
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”.
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
says the troll
trolling is when you know more about history than your average liberal white supremacist
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.
Person is in bad faith and worse, smug. Hhit em with a PPB.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
🐷 💩 🥎
Lol your mind sure is something.
spoiler
What if 90% of Hawaiians had revolted (and lost) while 90%+ of the other 10% of Hawaiians voted in the referendum?
Like the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement which began actively protesting and gained support in the 1960s, pretty soon after the referendum?
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?
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?
So you don’t have an argument and have to make shit up. Cool. Judging by your other responses in the thread, you’re a shill trying to astroturf support for the U.S., so Imma block you 💅
So you don’t have an argument and have to make shit up.
“I know you are but what am I?” is not a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
Judging by your other responses in the thread, you’re a shill trying to astroturf support for the U.S., so Imma block you 💅
nah, just argue the facts, which I provide. you don’t like it and hurl childish insults in response. blocking me is doing ME a favor. bye!
this never happened
The referendum had widely been expected to pass; Crimea’s parliament has already voted to seek annexation by Russia…
Update at 3 p.m. ET: The Polls Are Closed; 93 Percent Approval Cited
there’s moving the goalposts, then there’s moving them 55 years into the future and to the other side of the planet.
We’re taking about Hawaii here. you’re so lost and hate the US and “The West™®©” so much that you think this is one of your Ukaine/Russia arguments. WOW….
- You said “[a yes vote on Russia annexing Crimea] never happened.”
- I showed that it did.
- You responded with “We’re taking about Hawaii here.”
Get the fuck out of here
Should I kill you with my sword or with my gun?
Sorry, “I want to live” was not an option on the ballot
sigh…
Should I kill you with my sword or with my gun?
Sorry, “I want to live” was not an option on the ballot
Referendum is literally: “Would you like to be a state or a territory? Independence is not an option.”
False dichotomy is when you point out that people might want something other than two shit binary choices.
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.
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
True, just clarifying the best case scenario. Did the Hawaiian people recently vote to leave the union that I am unaware of?
When did they vote to join? They fought pretty hard to keep their rightfully elected government.
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)
93% of natives or all inhabitants?
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.
Not al residents are natives, right? So what % of natives voted in favor?
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.
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.
Swarming lands with your settlers and then claiming b-but they muh voted for it, is peak lib cracker imperialism. The french did the same in New Caledonia.
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.
We don’t even let our own people live in quiet peace and prosperity. 😩
One day!
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.
The US is still bitter that Hawaii was more advanced than the United States of Backwards way back when.
