All the land in the United States was stolen from indigenous people, Ive heard many arguments as to what should happen to this land from balkanization, giving back power to tribal governments, or just doing what the USSR did and making a USSA. I dont know the answer for what to do with the interior states, I think leftists are more concerned about weakening the power of US imperialism than dealing with the issue of drawing borders for a post-capitalist United States, but Hawaii is special.
There are not many places in the United States where outright secession is a leftist goal, Hawaii is unique in that it was a nation until relatively recently, it was annexed long after the Americans manifest destinied their way across the continent. Hawaii had a central government, it had a monarchy, it engaged in capitalism and industrialization on a far greater level than any Native American tribe did. With tribes in the United States it can be hard to determine how they can have an independent state after so much displacement and cultural genocide, Hawaii is different, they have the greatest capacity of becoming an independent nation out of any colonized territory.
Im simplifying a complex issue by saying Hawaii can be independent if they kick out the military and tourists, thats certainly easier said than done. They could also nationalize all the farms, get rid of the golf courses and highways, and try to begin to fix their already fucked up water supply and invasive species problems. Hawaii could become the Pacific Cuba. The only group that could do such a thing ironically are monarchists, which is strange because we don't really think of them as leftist but in Hawaii's case they are. Strange bedfellows, I for one want to see monarchal communism (does North Korea count as that?)
I would really like to see some type of Polynesian federation, as a way to stand up to American and British and French and Australian imperial interests.
In 2022 anything can be a destroyer if you can launch an anti-ship missile from it.
Hawaii is only 10% native Hawaiian. The rest is Filipino, Japanese, White, and Latino. It would need a serious landback program to undo that.
I think this argument would work better for Puerto Rico.
The video of Castro reading off the names of American corporations that are being expropriated, but it's a Hawaiian leader reading off a list of billionaires who are being permanently banished and their mansions retaken.
I was more responding to the prompt. Of course a communist state would be better than nothing, but at this point native representation would be proportional and not a plurality as the OP is suggesting. You'd have to manage a lot of ingrained reactionary elements from the immigrant population who moved there or had recent ancestors who moved there as a result of tourism. Not exactly the type who value indigenous rights.
The only immigrant population that would be a problem would be the white people, just kick them out and let the asians and africans stay.
Although I would love complete property abolition perhaps restricting property ownership to just native Hawaiians would be the most practical way of achieving an independent Hawaii. Dont let them be landlords though, just have the state rent out the land.
As for Puerto Rico, I think freeing Hawaii would do more good due to the amount of US military bases.
I for one want to see monarchal communism (does North Korea count as that?)
No, that's literally just propaganda. The DPRK is a democracy and the Kims lead because they are popular because they're essentially a family of "heroes" in their nation. You can argue that is less than ideal, but that is an inherent flaw in democracy, that celebrities are inherently powerful.
In terms of electoral outcome, North Korea is only fractionally less democratic than Japan and Singapore, who have in practice had single party rule for as long as the DPRK has existed.
Hawaii had a central government, it had a monarchy, it engaged in capitalism and industrialization on a far greater level than any Native American tribe did. With tribes in the United States it can be hard to determine how they can have an independent state after so much displacement and cultural genocide, Hawaii is different, they have the greatest capacity of becoming an independent nation out of any colonized territory.
I agree with the goal of Hawaiian independence and just want to add that it's probably not super helpful to judge whether or not an indigenous group should be entitled to sovereignty based on how much they adhered to the European Westphalian concept of a state prior to colonization.
I do like the idea of a Pacific Cuba. However, I legitimately worry about logistics. If Hawai'i were to succeed, the CIA would be all over that shit.
Also, pardon me for being stupid but what exactly is bad about tourism? Is it that a lot of tourists are inconsiderate, or is tourism itself the issue?
Tourism in Hawaii is largely about commodifying Hawaiian culture for the consumption of affluent white people
and rich asians but they are less bad. the only good Hawaiian tourists are the dead ones.
Partially because it incentivizes spending on tourism that doesn't benefit locals, and partially because tourists are scum and everyone who lives in a tourist area hates tourists.
The unconquered* Seminole indians are an interesting example. They fought off the US war dogs, fiercely independent. And rode these early successes to establish their own casinos and trademarked apparel. They own the Hard Rock Cafe chain, and other ventures. Becoming one of the more relatively wealthy indian nations in the interior where tribal members receive dividends from these resources. With money comes other problems. But its an interesting comparison to Hawaii. Seminole post . Bonus track Aloha mahalo 🌺
The difference between the Seminole and Hawaiians is that the Hawaiians are literally on an island thousands of miles away from the mainland. You take out the US and they are thousands of miles away, the Seminoles are literally living inside the United States. That makes it very hard to be independent.
Why would you want a monarchy? Why not just actual communism?
Hawaii had a central government, it had a monarchy, it engaged in capitalism and industrialization on a far greater level than any Native American tribe did.
this was the result of Kamehameha doing a weird fusion of western state stuff and buying enough weapons from brits and americans to dominate the other native hawaiians. the resulting institution of trade seems to have been an unintentional instance of biological mass suicide, but the result was like 80% population decline over 120 years, which is abysmal and bleak. about 50 years into the western-style monarchical state thing, they did european feudal property rights. idk, overall, it seems like historically the introduction of western trade and western technology was the worst thing that ever happened to the many independent polynesian tribes that existed before the unification of the hawaiian islands. that said, uncritical support to hawaiians being allowed to reclaim their land, it just seems like hawaiian secession would more likely just be a transfer of wealthy to tenuously native american billionaire "activists" and not to improve the lives of the people who live in poverty next to ostentatious displays of colonial wealth accumulation. did i mention that a billionaire just owns one of the islands outright, and it's fucking awful to be a native of the island because of it?
I don't know either. There would have to be a pretty intense treaty program and negotiation and for what it's worth, from what I've heard from indigenous peoles, they usually don't want all the settlers to leave. But maybe we'd have to handle it like the French and the pied-noirs in Algerian decolonization, I really don't know.
from what I’ve heard from indigenous peoles, they usually don’t want all the settlers to leave
I know a few haole. Entirely anecdotal, but I get the impression that in Hawaii, the indigenous culture is largely if a bit superficially, respected by people of all different racial backgrounds living there (not tourists). I could see that being useful for developing a multi-ethnic society that still respects the indigenous inhabitants of the land, idk. A culturally diverse nation that simultaneously recognizes the primacy of indigenous culture.
