Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Nationalist Movements in Hawaii and Puerto Rico


This week we are exploring the reasons that the US government sought colonial rule over regions of the Caribbean and South Pacific at the turn of the 20th century. The legitimacy of US authority over commonwealths like Puerto Rico, Guam, Samoa and even the statehood of Hawaii remain controversial issues in modern society. This week's blog asks that you read some articles on contemporary nationalist movements and analyze the call for independence that is becoming a strong political movement among indigenous people in these areas.


Directions:

Actively read the following articles on independence movements in Hawaii and Puerto Rico


A)Hawaii



B) Puerto Rico



Summarize the articles and explain the reasons why Puerto Rican and Hawaiian nationalists feel their homelands should be granted full independence by the US government.


In your opinion, would autonomy and self-rule benefit the people of Hawaii and Puerto Rico or exacerbate poverty and other problems that exist in these areas today? Explain using support from the article, your knowledge of history and any outside sources that you may use to further research this assignment. If you read other sources, be sure to cite the URL or newssource in your post.


minimum 200 words, please comment on the post of one of your peers.


Due Friday 3/7 before class.

17 comments:

Ian said...

Ian Murphy
History
Block A

The though of the United States seeking to colonize areas in the Caribbean and South Pacific had brought controversy to the peoples inhabiting the area since the turn of the 20th century. Several areas such as Hawaii and Puerto Rico even now question the legitimacy of U.S. control in these areas, and have organized political movements against it. In Hawaii, a bill known as the Akaka Bill was proposed by the U.S. Senate so that natives to Hawaii could be recognized by the government. Many natives disagreed with this bill, but exactly how they disagreed varied; some wished the senate would reconsider and make another proposition, while, others opposed the senate in its entirety and demanded independence. The Puerto Ricans have also begun an independence movement, but they feel that the U.S. is more oppressive than the Hawaiians do. Personally, I don not see why we must maintain control over every area in the premises of the continent. If people in these areas feel that they should govern themselves and lead themselves away from poverty their own way, I say we let them do it. Besides, we as a country forced ourselves onto them when we colonized and annexed them; clearly they never asked for our benefit. Besides, imperialism is highly undemocratic of us, and I am in general support of the actions these Hawaiian and Puerto Rican individuals are taking.

Larry Williams Jr. Blog said...

Larry Williams
Block A
History Blog

After reading both articles it was clear to me and to anyone else who is reading that these countries recieved there independence. Both articles had a compelling story of there history and how the United States took that freedom right out of there hands. The people of Hawaii and the people of Puerto Rico tried there best throughout the years to fight the U.S's imperialistic views and become a nation again. In my opinion, the U.S was completly wrong to take control and the fact that they killed innocent people and took people's homelands makes you wonder whether or not we are the bad guys.

Tiff said...

Hawaii and Puerto Rico are just two area where they are having trouble with U.S control. Hawaiians are even showing it to tourists who go to the area where there are a hardworking 10,000 people there. They created a bill called the Akaka bill which is suppose to create "a race-based government."but on the other side there are native Hawaiian activists who want total independence from the United States. Because "the government wouldnt give back their land" they have decided to instead "just take it back"(Kanahele said). This then created protesters to come together and protest. on the other hand Puerto Rico,has been under U.S. control since 1898. Puerto Ricans are subject to U.S. laws,but they have no representation in Congress and don't have the right to vote in presidential elections. even without having a say in political things, Puerto Ricans fear changing the status because they are currently worse off economically than any state in the Union. Both areas dont want to be under the U.S government, but Puerto Rico has the problem that they might not be able to substain themselves since they are economically poor. Hawaii on the other hand have no problem and have been working on their independence. I agree with Ian when he says "I don not see why we must maintain control over every area in the premises of the continent. If people in these areas feel that they should govern themselves and lead themselves away from poverty their own way, I say we let them do it." If they want independence let them have it.
T-Rez

Sylv(: said...

Sylvia Shojai

Although the United States once had to fight for its independence from Britain, it seems that the nation has forgotten what it feels like. Since the United States was formed and grew more powerful, it has imperialized many countries all over the world. Hawaii and Puerto Rico are two examples of countries that were invaded by the US government, and taken over. Hawaii has become an American state, and Puerto Rico is currently a commonwealth. Both these victims of US imperialism do not approve of what the US has done, and are continuing their struggle to break free from the rule of the US. The people in Hawaii and Puerto Rico are aggravated with being stomped all over by the US and have been fighting to gain back their freedom with the lead of political activists, protests, and rallies. In the article “Rebuilding a Hawaiian Kingdom” by Tomas Alex Tizon, the independence movement being pursued in Hawaii is elucidated. The Hawaiian town of Waimanalo is not like the typical Hawaiian vacation spot. It is a place not welcome to tourists where about 10,000 natives reside. Within this town there is a village called Pu'uhonua o Waimanalo, that is even more connected with Hawaiian sovereignty. Also known as Refuge of Waimanalo, this village is a tight knit community of only 80 inhabitants that rely on each other as a large family. This community was founded by the legendary activist leader, Dennis "Bumpy" Kanahele, an eleventh generation descendent of King Kamehameha. The King ruled Hawaii when it belonged to itself and therefore the spirit of sovereignty was passed along to Kanahele. Kanahele has made it his obligation to reunite Hawaii to what it once was, starting with Pu'uhonua o Waimanalo. He won the land of Pu'uhonua o Waimanalo after protesting on a beach with a large body of supporters. He put his past of criminal behavior aside to work towards his ultimate goal: total independence from the US. His “thug side” is a common stereotype against Hawaiian citizens. “Today, the state's estimated 240,000 native Hawaiians — those with 50% or more Hawaiian blood — make up about 20% of the population and fare poorest in almost all socioeconomic indicators. They have the state's worst health statistics, highest number of school dropouts, highest unemployment rate and highest levels of incarceration.” Because of this it is undetermined whether autonomy and self rule would help the people of Hawaii, or harm them. The Pu'uhonua o Waimanalo village seems a bit primitive in its lifestyle and form of governing. Regardless, they are deserving of their land and right to be agitated with the US controlling them as a state of America. They should be granted their land back, so they can start to rebuild and return it to its own ways.

The US Senate was considering a Hawaiian sovereignty law called the Akaka bill, but it was rejected. There was further discussion of forming a native government, which is approximated to take a very long time to establish. The Hawaiian natives are seeking independence from the US primarily because of the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893, which caused the annexation of Hawaii. It is a grudge that Hawaiians hold over the US because they ruined the stability and ancient ways of their country.

In the article “FBI Witch Hunt Stokes Puerto Rican Independence Movement” by Jessica Pupovac, discusses the Puerto Rican independence Movement which similarly to Hawaii, is the nation’s desire to gain independence from the US. Puerto Rico is not considered an American state; its status under the US is a commonwealth, although it has been under US control since 1898. The independence movement was promoted by Filiberto Ojeda Rios, founder of the Popular Boricua Army which is also known as Los Macheteros. Quite a scene was stirred up when he was assassinated by FBI agents on September 23, 2005 for being considered a major radical threat. His death affected all Puerto Ricans, because they looked to him as a source of hope and a progress of change. They all mourned the loss of an activist leader when he was killed by the US FBI agents. It seemed like his death was a scandal by the US government. He was working towards the shared goal of independence from the US, and inspired others to follow his path.

Puerto Ricans are subject to US laws, but have no representation in Congress, and are not able to vote in presidential elections. They are also in a rut economically, being in the worst condition of any other state in the union. “The per capita income in Puerto Rico is $20,058, less than that of Mississippi, the poorest state. Almost half of Puerto Ricans live below the poverty line, and a third of its population is unemployed.” Puerto Rico has the short end of the stick in this situation. The country wants independence but is so unstable and in poverty that is probably will not have the ability to support itself for quite some time, so that autonomy and self rule do not look like a reasonable possibility for them. It would only worsen their current state, making an unfortunate situation. They are also struggling with gaining sovereignty, especially because the FBI is investigating the activist leaders, and imprisoning them to keep them from proceeding with their cause. I completely agree with José Lopez when he says "Sometimes, the more you repress people and try to stifle dissent, you create more consciousness, and it has the opposite effect that the government would want." By suppressing activists in prison, people are becoming aware of the outrageous circumstances in Puerto Rico and beginning to rethink what is actually going on there.

Unknown said...

Both articles are connected because both were at one time controled by the United States. Hawaii was granted statehood and is a part of the united states where as puerto rico is now a common wealth. Neither country wanted to be overtaken by the U.S. but in the end they simply could not such stop a super power. Due to the fact that puerto rico is a common wealth, it is neglacted by the U.S. The government doesn't really support it, and the economy is very poor. I agree with the quote by José Lopez, "The idea that you can sell to the world that you are a democracy, a benign empire, that you struggle for human rights and self-determination -- the Puerto Rican independence movement is constantly challenging that." If the United States, claims control over puerto rico it should try to make things better economicly.

KristinaCats said...

Dear beloved buddies of csihsis,
"The people have seen a version of it materialize before their eyes," says Tomas Alex Tizon Times Staff Writer in the first article, Rebuilding a Hawaiian Kingdom. When entering Hawaii most people expect to be greeted with leis by hula dancers and to be surrounded by five-star hotels, but the real deal is that Hawaii is a state of 10,000 citizens who sometimes don't accept tourists, even Americans. In retrospect, i can't seem to blame the innocent civilians of Hawaii to neglect us, because in reality we stole them and made us apart of the United States. Hawaii feels that one day they will eventually return to the Kanaka Maoli who are the ancient Polynesians who settled in the islands. The article also focuses on the opinion of Kanahele, an Hawaii Islander. Being unhappy with their lifestyle in Hawaii full of a high poverty rate, school dropouts, like himself, highest level of imprisonment along with unemployment as well Kanahele and fifty friends decided to protest about "the stolen lands". Unfortunately the police were involved and Kanahele was sent to state prison for fourteen painful months. Polls showed that three out of four Hawaiian residents supported sovereignty, and Kanahele, who is the most militant of the activists, gained a reputation as a thug-hero for his rebellious actions. Kanahele stood up for what he believed in and continued to try and change Hawaii for the better and became even more of a hard-core activist. This is what sovereignty is to me," Kanahele said. "Standing here on your land, not owing anything to anybody, not being afraid of anyone, knowing you fought the right fight with attitude — and looking out at that. This is the beginning, brah, just the beginning." I completely admire his passion for doing what he thought was right along with other supporting independence movements. Agreeing with Larry Williams, the United States shouldn't have just taken over Hawaii we should have just let them be and stand as an ally with them because now as they are apart of America, most of the Hawaiian Islanders are unhappy being apart of our free world and want to be on their own just like old times.

Until next week..love always and forevuh,
Kristina Catsz<3

Sylv(: said...

Tiffany and I both recognized the point that Puerto Ricans want independence from the United States, but are too deep in poverty to run by themselves. They would have to worry about supporting themselves, which they could not do. I also agree with what Ian and Tiffany said about the US feeling the need to control everyone around them. I think that if the countries can maintain sovereignty, then they should gain independence.

mikemcsherry291991 said...

At the start of the 20th century, America had gainned control of purto rico, cuba, hawaii, and the phillapens. America has given freedom to Cuba and the Phillapeans. While Hawaii and Purto Rico are still parts of America. Many people from both area's want their own freedom, but if both became there own coutries could they be able to run themsleves. I think that both if they did become free, would struggle for a long peroid of time. I think that the ecomey struggling right now would make it hard for them to make money. Also would America have a role in creating a government, many former clonies have struggled through war after becoming it own coutray. While i do agree with the ideas of Hawaiians and Puerto Ricans, I think it will be very unlikey it will happen.

Samantha said...

Hawaiian nationalists seem to feel that Hawaii should gain full independence from the United States, becuase they were stolen by the United States. It is somewhat unclear to me but it seems as if the Hawaiians feel this way, becuase they were once part of a different nation, and now they belong to the United States. Puerto Ricans, who are technically under United States rule, are not represented like every other state, under the saem rule. They have no representation in congress or our government, yet they are expected to follow our rules, no wonder they want their independence. Hawaii should remain a US state, because for as long as I have been living it has always been a state, and it woudl be weird if it was one day not a state anymore, but Puerto Rico, is not exactly a state but a territory, so it woudlnt be much of a sacrafice for the United States to give up Puerto Rico. To me Puerto Rico always seemed liek its own nation, not part of the United States. But, I also agree with Mike McSherry, would these places be able to run themselves? Before the United States took over, they obviously did, but that was a different time than now.

COCKMONSTER said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
QUELMI said...

Both articles "Rebuilding a Hawaiian Kingdom" from the Los Angeles Times and "FBI Witch Hunt Stokes Puerto Rican Independence Movement" from the AlterNet.com both discussed independence movements. The article "Rebuilding a Hawaiian Kingdom" focused mainly on the independence movement in Hawaii. It discused and detailed

klown27 said...

Puerto Rico and Hawaii do not get the same treatment as the official United States Landscape. the fact that hawaii and Puerto Rico are a part of the united states is taken for granted. Most people just these places as good vacation spots. They created a bill called the Akaka bill which is suppose to create "a race-based government. As tiff pointed out in the article," on the other side there are native Hawaiian activists who want total independence from the United States. Because "the government wouldnt give back their land" they have decided to instead "just take it back"(Kanahele said). In my opinion, Hawaii does have a right to feel this way want to separate from the United States. Since we aquired Hawaii by basically running in and using force, it is only right that they should feel rebelious and be against being considered a part of the United States. Tiff also pointed out that Puerto Ricans are subject to U.S. laws,but they have no representation in Congress and don't have the right to vote in presidential elections. Originally, these lands were taken in order to not have to pay for boat docking. The gain of Hawaii and Puerto Rico by the United states was not in any way meant to benefit Hawaii of Puerto Rico.Hawaii has a lot to offer to the world and could make it on its own. Yet Puerto Rico without US support could become corrupt like Cuba. These places are separated from the rest of the United States. These areas share different customs, and have different cultural studies. it is only fair to grant them full independence. yet this may cause an increase in transportation between these places. If Hawaii and Puerto Rico want independence, by all means they should be granted this yet does that mean the funding between the US would be cut.

Miss. Francis said...

Ian- G+: Thoughtful post

T-Rez - G+ I wonder if the Hawaiians (seemingly) object to US authority less than the nationalist in PR because they have the right to vote and full citizenship rights.

Sylvia - E: deep analytical work

Paige- N+ Thoughful but missing elements and doesn't meet word requirement

Cats - E-: I love your sustained effort to keep a familial vibe on the blog. Solid and informed analysis.

Mike S-: A solid start but still short of the 200 word requirement


Sam: S+: I encourage you to write even more!
Vinny - G Thoughtful and informed

Miss. Francis said...

Quelmi - N: This is way short of the 200 word requirement

Miss. Francis said...

Larry - N+ : solid start but short of the 200 word minimum

Conrad said...

Conrad Mallien
Block A
4/15/08

Throughout the past fifty years, both the people of Hawaii and Puerto Rico both have have been fighting for their rights to a home, their home! But for years, the American government has oppresed them or given them something worse than decent. Three years ago, FBI agents busted into the home of Filiberto Ojeda Rios, shot him, then left him to bleed to death. Even though Filiberto was part of Los Macheteros (a popular Boricua Army), it has been 18 years since Los Macheteros has participated in any armed actions. In 1993, Kanahele, hawaiian activist and ex-con, and 300 followers occupied Makapuu Beach armed with copies of Clinton's "Apology Resolution". Fifteen months later, Governor John Waihee presented an offer; Kanahele and his followers to leave peacefully and in return they would get a measly 45 acres of rugged, hillside, forest terrain. Later, Kanahele's group agreed to sign a renewable 55-year lease at a cost of $3,000 a year. In the end, they got one symbolic and beatiful view of a white sandy coastline and a slice of crystal blue ocean that seems to show there may be better things to come.

Conrad said...

Samantha, I think I can see your point. I know I wouldn't want someone coming into my house saying "this is now my property and you'll be following my rules." I would be evicting them as soon as possible.