Replies

Many similarities can be drawn between The Native Caribbean Islanders, Native Americans, and the Hawaii Polynesians people. All remained relatively Isolated until the European age of Exploration roughly the 1500s-1700s. At which point European explorers or "The white male" came. While many of the people's ancestors did face atrocities, we are able to see their predecessors thriving today. From the Casino's of New York to the the tourist industry of Hawaii. These people are most certainly not oppressed.

I'm saying that Natives in general love Tourism.

here we go again...

"Two years after the Declaration of Independence, and while the American colonies were still fighting to be independent, Captain James Cook arrived in Hawaii. At the time, Hawaii was in the process of moving from regional monarchs, usually one per island, to a consolidated monarchy that spanned all the islands. One language was spoken throughout the islands, and as happened in Europe, an entire linguistic group was moving towards becoming a single nation-state.

Kamehameha I (the Great) of the Island of Hawaii first consolidated his power there. He then conquered Maui and Oahu. There were bloody battles, particularly on Oahu, and his conquest was vigorously opposed by the rulers of the other islands and their warriors. Kamehameha then attempted to invade Kauai, but his fleet was turned back by a storm. Following several years, the ruler of Kauai decided to pledge his allegiance to Kamehameha, and the unification of the Hawaiian islands was complete. Kamehameha used some European advisors and weapons in his fight to conquer the island chain.

Kamehameha and his predecessors were hereditary monarchs. They ruled by divine right and the right of birth, with the support of the religion and the priesthood (kâhuna). All land belonged to the monarch and passed to their heir. The nobility (ali'i) got their grants of land from the King. The commoners (maka'âinana) had certain understood rights to use the land, and obligations to provide support to the ali`i and the King.

Hawaii in 1778 in many ways resembled feudal Europe. The major difference, other than religion, was the absence of...."

From here

Kamehameha wasn't a "white man" in your context and, in fact, was the first conquerer of the Hawaiian Islands, though later usurped by social reforms.

" What took hundreds of years to evolve in Europe, happened virtually overnight in Hawaii. American missionaries arriving in 1820 brought with them not only their religion, but their political and social views. Once the Hawaiian religious beliefs were put aside, one might logically question by what right the King ruled, or why women could not eat meals with men, or why commoners could not own land. The missionaries taught reading and writing, and the Hawaiians overwhelmingly responded - many say they achieved a higher rate of literacy than that in the United States at the time.

By 1840, a mere 62 years after the first European contact, Kamehameha III promulgated the first Hawaiian Constitution. Just as the Magna Charta subjected King John of England to the rule of law, the 1840 Constitution subjected Kamehameha and his heirs to the law. The 1840 Constitution established a House of Nobles and an elected House of Representatives whose assent to new laws and changes to the Constitution was required. In less than a generation Hawaii went from a hereditary despotic government based on divine right to a Constitutional monarchy with an elected legislature. "

My bold.

What similarities? Specifically