https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZtiJN6yiik

Facts from Hawaii/Hawaiian Archipelago/the Kingdom of Hawaii –
Hawaiian Genealogy(and History) Society Research material, November
12, 2003



NEGROS, NIGGERS, BLACKS, POLYNESIANS, ETC.
or ALL PEOPLE OF COLOR:

American Missionaries/Mercenaries Perspectives From Hawaii
Affecting the World Today



Extracts and Summary of each by Amelia Kuulei
Gora, one of
Kamehameha's descendants, a Royal person not
subject to the laws
(2003), Kingdom of Hawaii

The following are extracts from THE JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY –
Lessons from the Hawaiian Islands, written by an American
Missionary/Mercenary descendant during the period of King David
Kalakaua (died 1891) and discovered in his files at the Archives and
Main Library, Honolulu, Hawaii. A Summary of each point has been
prepared to bring the language, meaning, issues, etc. up-to-date for
clarity:

 The manliness, dignity, and wisdom that characterized the Hawaiian=

rulers in all their dealings with the representatives of foreign
powers in the early days, before recognition, were worthy of the
Romans. While attempting no unavailing resistance to the war-ships,
which they knew could annihilate them, they did not for a moment
cower or fear to speak their convictions; they were like the Indians,
who have been conquered but never subdued.(page 211)

Summary: Hawaiians were likened to the Romans. The author claimed
Hawaiians were like the Indians, conquered but never subdued.

Note: During Kamehameha's lifetime (1758-1819) he united the
Hawaiian Archipelago which was recognized by Russia, with Atearoa and
Samoa. (U.S. occupied Hawaii, England occupied Atearoa, and Germany
occupied Samoa. The three countries claimed to have a Protectorate
over Hawaii; however, confirmation by Hawaii's Queen Liliuokalani
(ruled 1891-1917) for such a Protectorate has not been found.
Research incomplete.)

In 1843 - England and France recognized Hawaii
and "mutually guaranteed the independence of the Islands, a pledge
still binding and perhaps worth remembering."

Note: France had recognized the United States as a nation. England
was not in agreement.

In 1844 - The United States took similar action, and from
that time till now (1891) American sentiment has been expressed in
the words of Daniel Webster to a Hawaiian diplomat, "If England takes
those islands, we'll make a fuss about it."

The following are selections revealing plans, secrets, conspiracies
by Americans from the United States operating as
Missionaries/Mercenaries in Hawaii and elsewhere:

 "The negro and the Polynesian have many striking similarities. Of=

both it is true that not mere ignorance, but deficiency of character
is the chief difficulty, and that to build up character is the true
objective point in education. It is also true that in all men
education is conditioned not alone on an enlightened head and a
changed heart, but very largely on a routine of industrious habit,
which is to character what the foundation is to the pyramid. The
summit should glow with a Divine light, interfusing and qualifying
the whole mass; but it should never be forgotten that it is only upon
a foundation of regular daily activities that there can be any fine
and permanent up-building. Morality and industry generally go
together. Especially in the weak tropical races, idleness, like
ignorance, breeds vice. The best of sermons and schools amount to
little when hearers and pupils are thriftless, live from hand to
mouth, and are packed at night either in savage huts or in dirty
tenement houses. Morality, though founded in spiritual life, depends
very much upon outward and social conditions; and, if man is to work
out his own salvation, he must learn how to work. Granted that
character in its highest sense is the objective point, then mission
work evidently should be organized with reference to supplying the
conditions under which morality and the creation of character are
feasible. Practical men, if possible, should go with preachers to
study, and in some measure to develop, local resources of labor, of
land, or of production, thus creating industries, occupation, and the
conditions of Christian living. The right men can do much in this
way with little capital other than their own brains. The man is half
the battle. "Progress through self-help," is the motto of our best
missionaries to-day; but ability to carry out the principle is rare.
What is impossible with one is possible to another. Seldom will a
man of mere theoretical education appreciate the power of seemingly
destitute savage people to help themselves. They can do more than he
thinks. The reaction of self-help upon character is the best result
of it. The English missionaries in Madagascar seem to have worked on
the right principle, leading those people primarily in their
industrial life. Labor as a moral force, is not yet fully recognized
in the missionary field."(page 214)

Summary: The negro is like the Polynesian needing the Pyramid
foundation of character made up of education, a good head, a heart.
Practical/Businessmen should develop local resources of labor, of
land, of production, creating industries, occupation, and conditions
of Christian living. Practical/Businessmen can with little capital.
Missionaries/Mercenaries are unwilling to help "savage" people. In
Madagascar, the English missionaries/mercenaries focused on
industrial life. In the missionary/mercenary field, labor as a moral
force is not yet fully recognized.

 Where the work is parental, as among, the childish Polynesians,
Africans, and Indians, as distinct from controversial among
Mohammedans and Chinese, the people accept missionaries as superior
beings and become even more religious than those who inherit
Christian ideas, in so far as religion consists in the outward
expression of rites and ceremonies. Their language is rich in words
of reverence and adoration; it makes prayer easy; and on the
spiritual side, their lives flower out without effort and with a
grace and beauty wholly their own. Mentally, too, they are far from
stagnant. But of true morality they have little or none, because
they do not possess its conditions, which require self-control rather
than pure devotional life. In our own highest civilization morality
is common, but spirituality is rare. (page 214)

Summary: Missionaries/Mercenaries considered their work as parental
authorities when working with childish societies such as the
Polynesians, Africans, Indians distinct from the controversial,
ancient civilizations the Mohammedans and Chinese. The missionaries
considered themselves as superior and claimed their own civilization
to have the highest morality.

 But the Hawaiian missionary was sent to proclaim the gospel, to
convert the heathen. Conversion is, indeed, the starting-point of a
better life: it is to character what the seed is to the ripe fruit.
The choice of God's service is the initial step: the goal is the
rounded, perfect, Christian life. To take the step requires the
decision, possibly, of a moment: to reach the goal is the struggle
of a lifetime. Viewed thus, one understands that it is not the
planting of the seed that costs, but the wise and vigilant care of
the growing crop. Much of the missionary work of the world has been
a patient, unselfish sowing of seed, which, taking root at first, has
in its early frail growth been choked by the vicious weeds about it.
(pages 214-215)

Summary: Hawaiian missionary(ies) were used/ sent to convert
the "heathen" in other barbaric countries.

 The Hawaiians, who stand as a type, soon learned to read the Bible=

and to pray to God; yet in two entire generations they have not
escaped from the surroundings and the habits that make virtue
impossible. That, in the second stage of work on the Islands,
certain mistakes were made, seems evident. For example, until the
year 1855 the native girls were comparatively neglected. The few
boarding-schools established for them amounted to little. The sexes
were not educated together, on moral grounds.
(page 215)

Summary: Hawaiians were labeled/prejudiced against and categorized
as a "type".

 On this point the testimony from Northern teachers of the negro
race has a direct bearing. Contrary to the strongest convictions in
the South, Northern teachers have been able, in the leading
institutions for those who lately were slaves (whose weakness is on
the moral side), to bring the sexes together most successfully during
the past fifteen years. The plan is equally good with Indians, and I
believe for all people in the early, if not in every stage, of
progress. The way to strengthen the weak is constantly to test them
under favorable conditions. To change low ideas of their mutual
relations into higher ones they must be trained, not in the abstract,
but in the concrete. Separation will not teach practical wisdom in
future intercourse, any more than by being kept out of the water can
a boy be taught to swim. If it be granted that the sexes of a race
cannot on moral grounds, with good management, be educated together,
then that race had better be given up—it is doomed to immorality.
When I was in the Hawaiian Islands in 1880 I found no one who
believed in such coeducation, though the other plan was a failure on
the side of morality. To-day there is hardly a ray of hope for the
Hawaiian woman. In spite of African degradation and the loose morals
of slave life, many of the colored girls of the southern States,
trained by the side of their black brothers, have in and after school
made a record of noble steadfastness. Separate schooling would I
believe have left them far weaker, and less able, to protect
themselves. Stronger teachers and more expensive buildings are
required for mixed schools; but if a race is to be saved it is by
creating the unit of Christian civilization, the family, and that is
only possible when equal chances are given to both sexes, and they
find each other out in the contact of school life.(pages 215-216)

Summary: Northern Negro teachers, who were former slaves, a morally
weak person, were able to successfully bring boys and girls together
in school. The Indians followed suit, although not as successful.
In order to be successful, the weak must be trained and constantly
tested for concrete results. Due to morality failure, Hawaiian women
have little hope for success in coeducation. The South
recorded "noble steadfastness" despite slave status/African
degradation and loose morals due to slave life. The girls were
called "colored" and the boys "black brothers".

 Our experience at Hampton forces us to consider carefully the
future relations of the young men and women whom we are training, and
we are more and more convinced of the power of virtuous family life.
It promises, in the future, to be the cornerstone of our work for
both races.(page 216)

Summary: At Hampton the training on young men and women focused on
a "viruous family life", promising to be a "cornerstone" for work
with "Negroes" now known as African Americans and Indians.

 Since the year 1855 the Hawaiian mission has given more attention,=

with liberal assistance from the government, to female education; but
always in separate schools, and with no encouraging results. The
mistake is irretrievable. (page 216)

Summary: Unlike the American counterparts in America, the
Missionaries/Mercenaries in Hawaii were supported by the government
to educate females in separate schools, with lesser success.

 The acquirement of the English language by the negro is a wonderfu=
l
help to his elevation. So the best Hawaiian families are those who
have dropped the vernacular and speak English. Savage dialects are a
part of a low, sensuous life, that must be forsaken together with
its other belongings. English is a tonic for both mind and soul.
(page 216)

Summary: The English language elevated the "negro". Hawaiians were
called "negro" as well and spoke English primarily.
Missionaries/Mercenaries considered Hawaiian language "Savage" and
indicative of a "low, sensuous life". His opinion was that "English
is a tonic for both mind and soul."

 I would draw attention to the now almost universal experience of
the disappointing results of attempting the higher education of
uncivilized races as a part of mission work. The reasons for this
seem evident enough. The sharp brain of the savage easily outstrips
his sluggish moral nature. With him mental attainment is merely a
matter of ready memory and of usually congenial effort. Moral
strength is the result of long and patient struggle. The mental food
which is given him creates a sense of power, over which his blunt
sense of obligation has little control. "Knowledge comes, but wisdom
lingers," and especially is this true of the races which lie directly
in the path of progress, and are the prey of the advance-guard of
traders and adventurers. Every power but that of self-control is
stimulated. In some quiet eddies of the great world-current, as in
British America and parts of Oceanica, where only good influences
have entered, there are undisturbed fields for simple Christian
teaching, where God's word entering the heart works out into well-
ordered righteous living; but liquor and licentiousness have spared a
very small part of humanity."
(pages 216-217)

Summary: The Missionaries/Mercenaries goals included educating
the "uncivilized races". "Savage" peoples were considered to be
intelligent, but the moral nature/development sluggish, in his
opinion.

 Education of the heathen, and of all backward races, must be of th=
e
head, the hands, and the heart, a judicious proportion being always
maintained. This is our relation to the negro, though we bid him God-
speed in every endeavor for the highest culture. The majority of
thinking people will admit that we of the civilized races do not need
so much what we are getting as this training of the whole life, for
lack of which our average types of manhood and womanhood are weakened
and point to no very hopeful future. One can well believe the truth
of what is said of some sections of Europe, viz., that in their
thrift and prosperity they still show the influence of their early
monastic teachers, who were laborers and leaders among them in all
practical arts. (page 217)

Summary: The Missionaries/Mercenaries goal for "heathen, and of all
backward races" is education, the mind, the working ability, and the
spirit. The writer as a Missionary/Mercenary admitted that he(with
other Missionaries/Mercenaries) belonged to the "civilized races" and
bid "negro" people success in attaining the "highest culture".

 In making a resume of Hawaiian history, I find that it divides
itself into three periods of thirty years each, as follows:
(page 217)

1. From 1790 to 1820, the generation preceding the mission, a time of
mental activity and material progress, and the beginning of the
nation's physical decay, all due to the presence of foreign
discoverers and traders.

Summary: In the Missionary/Mercenary's opinion, this period was the
beginning of Hawaii's, a recognized nation "physical decay" due to
foreigners.

2. From 1820 to 1850, in which the people embraced the Christian
faith, and civilized institutions went established through the
efforts of American missionaries, working against tremendous
obstacles. During this period, and even before, the harbors of
Hawaii were the annual rendevous of from fifty to three hundred and
fifty whale-ships, the crews of which, during weeks of refitting
between voyages, were paid off, and while indulging themselves almost
without restraint, made the fortunes of the merchants and ruined the
natives.

Summary: American Missionaries/Mercenaries witnessed the fortunes
made by businessmen, and natives. The docking for shipping became a
lucrative income venture for the Hawaiian Monarchy and the natives.
Exposure to the foreigners included disease, epidemics, thievery, and
decaying morals of the visitors as well, many were Americans.

3. From 1850 to the present time (1891). These years, all of which
come within my own personal knowledge, present a curious record. The
line of ancient chiefs has become extinct, the people have become
indifferent to religious duties, being anxious to assert their
political power, and the influence of the missionaries has greatly
decreased, especially since 1875. Great commercial prosperity
exists, due to the treaty with the United States and to the increase
of the sugar crop from 10,000 to 60,000 tons a year. The five
thousand male Chinese adults of 1870 have increased to twenty
thousand in 1883, creating a serious disproportion of sexes,
resulting in polyandry and in rapid demoralization. Another element
has been added in the presence of some thousands of Portuguese and
other Europeans, besides many Malays. The decrease of morality has
kept pace with the increase of wealth. Leprosy has made terrible
progress, affecting at least ten per cent of the native population,
whose death-rate has gained alarmingly on the birth-rate. A strong
race-feeling has sprung up; and to-day the Hawaiians as a people are
anti-haole (opposed to foreigners) especially to Americans, not
because Americans, but because Americans are the strongest. There
are but few natives of any strength left. This last period is
preeminently one of decay, offering much food for thought, especially
to those who are interested in mission work for like races in other
parts of the world. (pages 217-218)

Summary: The Missionaries/Mercenaries said "the line of ancient
chiefs has become instinct"; however, that is a lie, a FRAUD
statement. Kamehameha descendants EXIST, including others and
myself. Since 1875, the Missionaries/Mercenaries influence
decreased. Interesting to note that a FRAUD deed dated 1875 for
PEARL HARBOR also known as EXHIBIT D was entered in the First Circuit
Court Case No. 92-2435-07, a condemnation case. The deed by King
Kalakaua was to two alii nui/chief and chiefess who died 8-9 years
previously. I documented FRAUD in that case and have published
writings, copies of the documents for others.

For genealogy purposes: The alii nui/chief was an ancestor, a great-
great-great-great grandfather named Mataio Kekuanaoa, father of
Paalua (male) oldest son (my ancestor), and who was also the father
of Kamehameha IV, and Kamehameha V and others (including
stepchildren – more who were my ancestors as well).

King David Kalakaua had two documented children named Kaopu
(male)/Kaopumomona and Kamaka (female). Both children became part of
my families: Kaopu legally adopted my paternal grandmother. Kamaka
married my maternal great grandfather (first marriage).

King David Kalakaua's wife Kapiolani was a hanai/adopted child of
Kamehameha descendant named Kaluakini (male) true father of my
paternal grandmother who was legally adopted by her own grandmother,
mother of Kaluakini and King Kalakaua's son Kaopu. Kapiolani, also
known as Queen Kapiolani was a hanai/sister of my grandmother,
Elikapeka/Elizabeth Kaimiola Kaluakini. She had several children
including John Kekapu Gora and he married another Kamehameha
descendant and had several children including myself Amelia Kuulei
Gora.

Many Hawaiians, till today, are anti-haole/anti white/foreigners and
many continue to learn about the Missionaries/Mercenaries. The
saying known by Hawaiians/kanaka maoli/ Sovereigns/ Royals today
is: "When You're Brown, You're Down; When You're White, You're
Right." (see article posted on the internet forums recently)

 There were all the outward signs of a nation of steady habits; but=

the energy of the whites was behind and sustained it all; the people
were passive, plastic, practically infants. Of the white men's
signatures on the public papers of that day one-half was made by
marks, while only one native failed to write his own name. In
reading and writing the natives were the equals of the average New
Englander; but, being made of very unequal stuff, the growth was not
from within outwards. The two races were, in effect, two thousand
years apart in real civilization. (page 219)

The Whites claim that it was due to their energy that Hawaii became a
civilized nation. The aborigine/people of the land/Hawaiians
were "passive, plastic, practically infants".
Educated white men signed legal papers while
natives/Hawaiians/aborigine people made marks. It was the opinion of
the Missionary/Mercenary that the aborigine, although educated,
remained "two thousand years apart in real civilization", and
the "two races" Whites and Hawaii's people/aborigine/kanaka maoli
significantly differed.

 The Hawaiians in their little Pacific Paradise were like Adam and =

Eve in Eden without hardship, and it is a question whether humanity
can develop well under paradisaical conditions. They accepted
civilization, but did not adopt it; they did not know what it meant.
(page 219)

Summary: Hawaiians/aborigine/kanaka maoli were like Adam and Eve in
Eden. The Missionary/Mercenary questioned whether humanity could
develop well in paradise. It was his opinion that the whites were
accepted, but did not adopt the foreigners, and did not understand
the meaning of civilization.

 White men are as necessary in Government administration to-day as =

they were thirty years ago, and by no means all the native clergy can
be trusted with the church collections, or are above reproach
otherwise. (page 220)

Summary: White men, the "superior" race are necessary in running the
Government and native/aborigine/Hawaiian/kanaka maoli clergy can be
trusted either in church or government.

 I believe that while a democratic form of church organization is
natural and fitting for highly civilized people, it is of doubtful
value among weak Polynesians, and the like. Fitness to control is
rather a question of the state of society than of the individual; an
intelligent public sentiment in a race, is its best qualification to
take the helm in any department of economic, political or social
life. It has become a matter of experience, in my opinion, that in
guiding a race through the process of development, everything should
be given it but the helm. Self help and self-control should be taught
from the first: entire control should be given only at the last.(page
221)

Summary: Only "highly civilized people", not the "weak Polynesians,
and the like" is natural and fitting for a "democratic form of church
organization". "Fitness to control is" a matter of the "state of
society", not an individual; an "intelligent public sentiment" for
the "race" in question is the best "qualification" for the "weak
Polynesians, and the like" to lead, be at the "helm in the "economic,
political or social" part of a society. Excepting
the "helm"/leadership in Government, everything in
education, "guiding a race"/ "weak Polynesians, and the like",
assisting in the "process of development" is acceptable, was the
opinion of the Missionary/Mercenary. The first things to be taught
are self-help and self-control, and the last would be
entire "control" of Government.

 What was possible to these indolent, happy Island children, placed=

by Providence as heirs of the kindliest soil and climate on earth?
Nordhoff says truly, that no effort can make these heathens into
Puritans. Bishop Pattison demonstrated the uselessness of attempting
to make English Christians of the Melanesians, believing that
character was not an absolute result but the best that the conditions
would permit. Is it not true, that it is not daily victory which we
should expect, but daily struggle? A convert from barbarism may
neither be strictly truthful, nor honest, nor virtuous, and yet he
may be a Christian. He tries to do better, asks God for help, and,
with occasional relapses, works slowly along to better things. The
best man is he who makes the best fight. (page 223)

Summary: Nordhoff's opinion is that "heathens" cannot be made
into "Puritans". Bishop Pattison cited the "Melanesians" as being a
useless venture in converting into "English Christians". Although
a "convert from barbarism" becomes a Christian, relapses of lying,
dishonesty, and not "virtuous" behavior will continue. With God's
help, a "convert from barbarism" tries, has relapses, and corrects
himself slowly. "Whites", who had also converted "from barbarism"
early on adheres to the belief that "The best man is he who makes the
best fight."

Therefore, the point of "When You're Brown, You're Down and When
You're White, You're Right" or "When You're White, You Fight" fits in
this Missionary/Mercenary philosophy, backed by their government, the
United States.

 The ideal missionary of to-day needs to be a linguist, a scholar, =

an adept in the knowledge of men, an organizer of society, of
infinite tact and untiring energy, ready for any emergency, a man in
short such as Hamlin was in Constanople, or Livingstone in Africa.
He must not be hampered by directors at home, but must go as an
officer in command of a foreign expedition, however stuffed with
instructions with full liberty to act in the end as he may think
best. (page 223)

Summary: Intelligent Missionaries/Mercenaries "must not be hampered
by directors at home"/U.S. Government who supported and paid for
their work, and must operate as an independent "officer in command"/
a paid Mercenary "stuffed with instructions with full liberty to
act"/with assignments operating and representing his government in
barbaric countries.

 The splendid work done of late years in the African field, in
India, China and Japan, and in our own land, shows that the tendency
of modern educational thought and of missions is strongly in the
direction of better man-building. We have learned how to make money,
but not how to make men. Everywhere Christianity is hopefully
struggling with idolatry, and the semi-heathen faiths, and with the
worst degradation of all, that of corrupt civilization. Its ideas
must conquer, for they alone meet the needs of all men; but the life
which it demands must always be slow of growth. A maxim of mission
work might well be, "Ideas take root in a moment, habits only in
generations." (page 224)

Summary: Missionaries/Mercenaries endeavors are complemented in
educating Africans, India's people, Chinese, Japanese, and Americans
with "modern educational thought", building better men.
Missionaries/Mercenaries "learned how to make money", "but not how to
make men" also means "how to break men".

The saying known in Hawaii is that "you either make them
(substitute "it" or "men" etc.) or you break them(substitute "it"
or "men" etc.)".

 Hawaiian slavery, at one time so extensively advertised in this
country, is an absurd invention. (page 225)

Summary: "Hawaiian slavery" was not true and invented in this
country, according to the Missionary/Mercenary.

"Hawaiian slavery" is documented in various news articles due to the
early Missionaries/ Mercenaries being pulled by Hawaiians who were
harnessed to the wagons, like horses, delivering the
Missionaries/Mercenaries carcasses around at their leisure. Research
incomplete on the building of the churches made of coral blocks.
During the period, many Hawaiians were imprisoned for being Catholics
and put to hard work. It appears that the Protestant Churches were
built by Hawaiian/kanaka maoli/aborigine SLAVES.

 Civilization is represented by a highly intelligent class of
Americans, English, Germans, and other Europeans, numbering about
twenty-five hundred (with a handful of natives), not all exemplary in
their manner of living, but making a refined society in which there
is a remarkable proportion of college-bred men and cultivated women.
(page 227)

Summary: The "highly intelligent", "college-bred men"
and "cultivated women" who were Whites, made up of Americans,
English, Germans and other Europeans were from proper societies
forming "Civilization". Non-Whites or all others were considered a
lower intelligence, uneducated, uncultivated or barbaric races. This
group includes the title of this article: NEGROS, NIGGERS, BLACKS,
POLYNESIANS, ETC. (Indians, Melanesians, Middleeast – Mohammedans,
Iraqis, etc.) or ALL PEOPLE OF COLOR.
This article by an American Missionary/Mercenary verifies the
strategic plans of the Americans representing and supporting the
United States government in the past and the issues applied till
today which AFFECTS THE WORLD TODAY.

The Vaticans Papal Bulls of 1493 further validates the PLUNDERING
UPON INNOCENTS, the claimed "barbarous"/ barbaric/uncivilized nations
and participate in the feeding frenzy along with the
Missionaries/Mercenaries and the invited Businessmen supported by the
United States Government. The "Four Papal Bulls were issued by the
Vatican Hierarchy…which legally sanctioned Columbus genocide campaign
against indigenous peoples of the Americas. The Bull "Inter Caetera"
of May 3rd 1493 states, "the Catholic Faith and the Christian
religion particularly in our times, shall be exalted and everwhere
amplified and spread, (and) that the Salvation of Souls may be
provided for and Barbarous Nations subjugated and brought to the very
true faith…" The colonial Spanish affirmed this arrogance
claiming "the bulls gave them the right to use just WAR to convert
local populations who had refused to immediately accept Christianity"
(Las Casas, 1552)".

At the Parliament of World Religions, a "Declaration of Vision" was
drafted by 60 indigenous delegates.

The U. S. Supreme court ruling Johnson v. McIntosh 8 Wheat 543 (in
1823/1923) dopted the same principal of subjugation expressed in the
inter Cetera bull. This papal Bull has been and continues to be,
devastating to our religions, our cultures, and the survival of our
populations."

Reseach by Steven Newcomb, Shawnee/Lenape (American Indian) legal
scholar who said that "The root problem of indigenous nations and
peoples face is that they are still being deemed irrelevant by nation-
states, based on having been historically nullified under Christian
International law."

The U.S. along with supporting American Missionaries/Descendants,
Americans, Businessmen, it appears to be a current arm of the Vatican
as well.


DISCUSSION

The PLUNDERING UPON INNOCENTS is an ongoing campaign by the Whites in
the U.S. against the NEGROS, which really applies to ALL PEOPLE OF
COLOR in the WORLD today.

The wrongful dethronement of Hawaii's Queen Liliuokalani,
Constitutional Monarchy, in 1893 by American
bankers/planters/American businessmen/Missionary/Mercenary
descendants/Masons/Freemasons – set into place to break down Monarchy
Governments, formed a claimed "Provisional government" backed by
bankrupt United States.

Hawaii's Queen Liliuokalani was called and documented a "NIGGER" in
the newspapers, and by the U.S. Congress. Hawaii's Queen documented
that the claimed "Provisional government" was not a government but
an "entity" which was neither de facto nor de jure and backed by the
United States who BREACHED the Law of Nations.

Conspiracies have been uncovered due to interest by the
Missionaries/Mercenaries along with American businessmen, criminal
deviants, documented conspirators, updated label TERRORISTS applied
since letters to U.S. President Clinton in 2000.

American businessmen – included suspected spy, banker,
Mason/Freemason Charles Reed Bishop, invested in the Pacific Cable
Company in 1878 to support the U.S. government lack of monies for
cable lines to San Francisco for strategic purposes and fears of the
Japanese entering San Francisco Bay, and other areas in California.

Royal families, Sovereign families, Hawaiians/kanaka maoli/aborigine
Trusts were FRAUDULENTLY claimed by Conspirators/TERRORISTS.
Examples are the Kamehameha Schools – Bernice Pauahi Trust, Queen
Emma, King Lunalilo, Queen Liliuokalani, etc. FRAUD was entered in
Court cases. White judges, American Missionary/Mercenary descendants
had a significant influence in Hawaii's government since their
arrival in 1820. It appears that there are significant amounts of
FRAUD issues in court documents affecting aborigine land ownership
claims. Senator Daniel Akaka, Missionary/Mercenary descendant has
introduced the Akaka Bill (attempted for several years and recently)
intended to wipe clean all ownership deeds of aborigine lands granted
by Kamehameha III and transfer everything to the United States,
imprison researchers such as myself, etc. OPPOSITIONS have been and
are hereby documented.

Four U.S. Union Army Generals/their families were documented in
Hawaii prior to the wrongful dethronement of Hawaii's Queen.

Queen Liliuokalani documented that the United States BREACHED the Law
of Nations. She was called a NIGGER by the media and U.S. Congress.
The bankers/businessmen, partners and some descendants of the
American Missionaries/Mercenaries wrongfully assumed the Sovereigns,
Royals assets, resources, and OCCUPIED our lands, etc. The U.S. with
the CFR/Council of Foreign Relations and Great Britain formed an
entity which departed from the Law of Nations. The entity was called
the UNITED NATIONS with documented moves towards ONE WORLD ORDER/New
World Order, the goals of the ILLUMINATI, the Masons/Freemasons, etc.
see http://myweb.ecomplanet.com/GORA8037 specifically John B.
Nelson's, legal scholar, article.

Missionaries/Mercenaries along with American businessmen continue
their work to defraud, maintain FRAUD, DECEIT, CRIMINAL MALFEASANCE
like their ancestors. OPPOSITIONS are documented by many Royal
family members, Sovereigns, including myself deliberately mucking up
Court Records showing FRAUD, etc. on land cases including PEARL
HARBOR (see above).

Hawaii made a State through Pesidential Executive Order in 1959. In
1963 an OPPOSITION to Statehood, in answer to a legal notice by the
U.S. government was documented by a Kamehameha descendant, Harold
Abel Cathcart. Because OPPOSITION was documented, consent was not
given, and Sovereignty shall be.

In 1969, George Bush, former U.S. President, former CIA/Central
Intelligence Agency head, "arranged hearings on the dangers posed by
the birth of too many black babies", supporting General William
Draper's policy of developing nations likened to the "world famous
animal reserve-the Kruger Park in South Africa'. Draper's son was
appointed adminstrator to the UNITED NATIONS "Development Programme"
connected to the World Bank "supervising population control."

The PLUNDERING UPON INNOCENTS continued in 1990 with George Bush
former President ordering the "brutal slaying of 150,000 Iraqi
troops, in a convoy of military vehicles carrying white flags, on
their way back to Iraq under Geneva Convention rules of agreed
disengagement and withdrawal." The flags were flags of surrender.
Another 12,000 Iraqi soldiers "were buried alive in trenches they
occupied." Bush got his orders from the "Royal Institute for
International Affairs (RIIA) who received its mandate from the
Committee of 300, also known as the "Olympians." The Committee of
300 is headed by England's Queen Elizabeth moving towards ONE WORLD
ORDER/NEW WORLD ORDER, along with the U.S. who acts INTERDEPENDENTLY
with the UNITED NATIONS.

Additionally, the 13 White families of the ILLUMINATI: Astors- ;
Bundys- ; Collins- ; Dupont- ; Freeman- ; Kennedy- ; Li- ; Onassis- ;
Rockefeller- owner of Standard Oil absorbed into EXXON and other
companies, utilizing the GRANDFATHER CLAUSE, owners of the 911 Twin
Towers, gifted the UNITED NATIONS with Land in New York; Russell-;
Van Duyn-; Krupp-; Reynolds-; all made or continue to make monies off
of (1) slaves – Americans and all who countries citizens belonging to
the UNITED NATIONS and (2) "Barbarous" countries, businesses,
investments, etc. through breaking apart governments/Monarchy
governments as well as "politically, economically(lands, resources,
etc.), and socially" PLUNDERING UPON INNOCENTS who are the NEGRO,
NIGGERS, BLACKS, POLYNESIANS, ETC. (including Middleeast Iraqis,etc.)
or PEOPLE OF COLOR.

References: CHRONOLOGICAL HISTORY OF HAWAII, ABROAD, AND THE UNITED
STATES by Amelia Kuulei Gora and VALOR OF IGNORANCE by Homer Lea,
Archives – Honolulu, Hawaii, Affidavit/Lien No. 96-177455 filed on
12/17/96 (281 pages) at the Bureau of Conveyances, Honolulu, Hawaii,
PIRATES OF THE PACIFIC: CHARLES REED BISHOP AND FRIENDS by Amelia
Kuulei Gora, KAOLEIOKU – Kamehameha's Oldest Son, His Descendants and
Heirs by Amelia Kuulei Gora; WAR GAMES by Thomas B. Allen,
CONSPIRATORS HIERARCHY: The Story of the Committee of 300 by Dr.
John Coleman; MAINTAINING QUEEN LILIUOKALANI'S CLAIMS, ETC. by Amelia
Kuulei Gora; …AND THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE by David Icke

Website references: http://myweb.ecomplanet.com/GORA8037
http://www.the-catbird-seat.net/GE.htm
http://www.the-catbird-seat.net/IndonesianConnection.htm
http://www.the-catbird-seat.net/BrokenTrust.htm
www.greaterthings.com/News/Clinton-
Scandals/Riadi_Hawaiian_Link/greg.htm
Hawaii "something like apartheid" see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tino-rangatiratanga/message/7778
"For Capitalism to survive it needs blood to suck" –Malcolm X see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tino-rangatiratanga/message/7782
http://www.larouchepub.com
www.davidicke.com
http://www.johnkaminski.com
http://www.gregpalast.com see article the BROWN STUFF validating War
for OIL/
"war for EXXON" statement by U.S. President George W. Bush in last
paragraph.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html
http://www.cjr.org/tools/owners/ about NBC (General Electric), CBS
(Viacom), ABC (Disney), FOX (Murdoch) etc.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com
excite.com (forums- politics) see posts by "surfkick"
middleeast.org (forums) see posts by "amelia gora"
http://www.complete911timeline.org or
www.911pi.com (miscellaneous research) see posts by "surfchic"
delphiforums.com see posts at various threads by "hwnwahine"
bmj.com /British Medical Journal articles by "amelia gora"
http://www.pixi.com/~Kingdom
http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/govweb.html
http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel.htm
http://www.archives.gov/federalregister/executiveorders/2003.html#1330
3
hrw.com or humanrightswatch.com
http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.html
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3995.htm


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGeFf_rIAVQ

 

    

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSP0e5rXUl8&feature=related

You need to be a member of maoliworld to add comments!

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • Sharing Information to our Sister Nations Aetearoa, Samoan Islands, et. als.:

    Greetings,

    Am one of the descendants of Kamehameha from the Hawaiian archipelago.  
    Kamehameha along with the Chiefs of Aetearoa, and the Samoan Islands formed the Pacific Empire which was recognized under the Laws of Nations.
    Long story short, at the time of the wrongful, premeditated takeover of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893, treasonous persons, conspirators moved to usurp Queen Liliuokalani from a peaceful, neutral, friendly nation recognized in the International arena.
    The U.S. moved to assume the Hawaiian Kingdom, England moved to assume Aetearoa, and the French and Germans moved to assume the Samoan Islands.  
    Under duress, stress, usurpation, coercion Queen Liliuokalani and her loyal subjects remained patient and waited for the U.S. to make corrections.  Oppositions to Annexation was documented in 1897, Oppositions to Statehood, Akaka Bill was made over time by many of our Kanaka Maoli who continue to support the Hawaiian Kingdom that still exists today.
    The moves to explore, research the criminal wrongs have been made over time and many of the issues may be seen in the IOLANI - The Royal Hawk news on the web with 415 issues posted since 2003.
    The following is a reprint/repost which affects our Kanaka Maoli, and ALL People of Color.
    aloha.

    Reprint: NEGROS, NIGGERS, BLACKS, POLYNESIANS, ETC. or ALL PEOPLE OF COLOR by Amelia Gora (2003)

    img0010.gif

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZtiJN6yiik

    Facts from Hawaii/Hawaiian Archipelago/the Kingdom of Hawaii –
    Hawaiian Genealogy(and History) Society Research material, November
    12, 2003



    NEGROS, NIGGERS, BLACKS, POLYNESIANS, ETC.
    or ALL PEOPLE OF COLOR:

    American Missionaries/Mercenaries Perspectives From Hawaii
    Affecting the World Today



    Extracts and Summary of each by Amelia Kuulei
    Gora, one of
    Kamehameha's descendants, a Royal person not
    subject to the laws
    (2003), Kingdom of Hawaii

    The following are extracts from THE JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY –
    Lessons from the Hawaiian Islands, written by an American
    Missionary/Mercenary descendant during the period of King David
    Kalakaua (died 1891) and discovered in his files at the Archives and
    Main Library, Honolulu, Hawaii. A Summary of each point has been
    prepared to bring the language, meaning, issues, etc. up-to-date for
    clarity:

      (the above article was posted)
      
  • akaka bill < Prev  Next > 
    Posted By:
    • audreykeesing@...
    Wed Jan 16, 2002 10:12 pm  |
    • Options

    As an anthropologist, feminist visionary, leader of the Hawai’i Chapter of the National Organization for Women and member of the Hawaiian community, I wrote this letter to theUnited States government. It is not a perfect letter and I would probably have rewritten parts of it, if I had not been under deadline to mail it on time.  I also wrote this letter expressly to pass before the eyes of the democratic (possibly Masonic?) culture of the U.S. government. This letter was written on the last possible day and edited at the last hour before the post office closed. By the way, I am no longer at this address or phone number.

     

    Copy of Letter to the United States Government

     

     

    Audrey E. Keesing

    4057A Black Point Rd.

    Honolulu, Hawaii 96816

    (808)732-2270

     

    August 23, 2000

     

    Dear People of Hawai’i and the Nations of the World,

     

    I am testifying against the Akaka Bill in the public interest of the citizens of the United States of America and the indigenous people who are living under oppression of first world governments around the world.  I am a professional cultural and medical anthropologist, an international community health worker and a grassroots women’s leader who was recently nominated as an “Outstanding Woman of the 20th Century” by Cambridge, England.  I have been educated at the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Hawaii at Manoa and I have been an advocate for women in Hawaii and indigenous Hawaiian human rights for over eight years.

     

    While I applaud the U.S. government for trying to help the indigenous Hawaiian people to move toward self-governance, the journey of the Hawaiian Society and the descendants of the Nation of Hawaii is not the responsibility of the Department of the Interior.  The work of the grassroots community, by self-educating and reconnecting with the historical facts of the status of indigenous Hawaiians with regard to international law, has been the key to developing self-governance and comes from the passion of the people themselves.  While Senator Akaka, an Hawaiian himself, has the best intentions for his people, he is still a paid official of the United States government who has sworn allegiance to the people of America, not to the people of the self determining Nation of Hawaii who are are calling for political recognition today, as yesterday and one hundred years ago.  I know Senator Akaka is hoping that a period of dependent nation status could eventually lead to complete independence for the people of Hawaii from the United States government, but there is no guarantee and the world is watching and waiting for the truth to emerge.  The Nations of the World know that it was an unlawful act of conspiracy against the Kingdom of Hawaii which caused Queen Liliuokalani to be taken off her thrown by force, at a time when women of America did not have the right to vote and people “of color” did not have civil or human rights, even as President Lincoln abolished slavery decades earlier.

     

    Actually, the Hawaiian people have only recently been sprung from the bonds of racism and classism perpetuated by the United States government and the State of Hawaii, who had created a two tiered system of discrimination on the basis of blood quantum, 50% below and above, such that there were two sets of laws and opportunities for indigenous Hawaiians which kept the Hawaiian society divided.  I understand that the U.S. governments attempt to correct itself comes with the aftershock to Hawaiian society of losing their rights to elect their own indigenous Hawaiian representatives to the State Office of Hawaiian Affairs, following the infamous Rice vs. Cayetano U.S. Supreme Court case, which means that indigenous Hawaiians have lost certain indigenous or racial class protections under the State of Hawaii.  These alleged U.S. protections or so-called trust relationships have ultimately undermined their true human rights and civil rights of the members of the Hawaiian society, both as Hawaiian Nationals without the opportunity to reconvene their government, and also as U.S. citizens, as imposed by force and not by choice, based on history and imposed today.  However, the time for civil and human rights for indigenous Hawaiian people has finally come forward.

     

    President Grover Cleveland’s cry that the Queen be returned to the thrown was not heeded by those in conspiracy with their business and military interests.  The Clinton apology bill is an admission of this crime.  Yet, the Hawaiian people have never admitted defeat.  They have retained an Hawaiian society which has it’s own language, customs, and religious beliefs that foreigners cannot understand and may never fully understand.  This Hawaiian culture has it’s own power of spirit which is very real ans which is linked to the land and to the people of theKingdom of Hawaii.  Unfortunately, there is no one word to describe the concept of democracy in the Hawaiian language, but the word, “Aupuni,” means “the kingdom, the nation, the government.”  The word “Lahui,” means “the tribe, the race, and the nation.” When “Ka Lahui” became a non-profit entity, they could not get the kind of federal grants that the U.S. offered to American Indian tribes and Alaskan tribes and which the U.S. now wants to offer the Hawaiian people today.

     

    I believe it is time for the people of Hawaii to find their rightful position as equals under the Law of Nations.  I suggest the return of the land to the rightful government of Hawaii, by stages, perhaps as a militarily protected territory with a Compact of Free Association with a complete independence to be granted by  American withdrawal in a specified number of years.  The Hawaiian society has already lived as a tribe, and experienced segregation by blood quantum by the U.S. government, and the fact that true democracy has not come to the indigenous people of Hawaii in the entirety, as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, is an historical fact noted by the people of Hawaii that will not be forgotten in times to come…

     

    As a participant and an observer of the grassroots movement, I have seen people come together.  Hawaiian society has assimilated democracy and Christianity and many cultural values from around the world, as they have intermarried and had children with people of all nationalities.  The Hawaiian children today are truly children of the rainbow.  As the Hawaiian society has accepted the people of all nations of the world into their homeland with the message of “aloha,” unconditional love, the United States of America should respond to the people with understanding of the suffering that the Hawaiian society has endured.  I can speak of thousands upon thousands of injustices, I have personally witnessed and discovered and I have seen the devastation of the human spirit, and evidence of genocide, suicide, unlawful incarceration, disease, dependency on welfare, drugs and alcohol.  The dependent tribal nations of Alaska and American Indians are suffering also.  My hope for humanity is to elevate all indigenous peoples as equals under the Law of Nations to the so-called First World Nations of the world, so that we may learn their way to take care of Mother Earth and not be corrupted by people who would use force and domination to divide and conquer the people of the world.  If governments support the grassroots efforts, the people will show the way.

     

    Sincerely,

     

    Audrey E. Keesing

     

     

     

    On August 29th, 2001, I received two telephone calls reminding me to come down to testify about the Akaka Bill at the Blaisdell Conference Center on Ward and Kapiolani Blvd..  It was a nice summer day.  There were surprisingly few people notified of  the Akaka bill hearings but there was a room full of Hawaiian people.  The U.S. Senators, Congressmen and the American Samoan Congressmen and their attendants sat to the left of the people.  Panels of four people we called up to speak and sat to the right behind the table.  It was such a casual atmosphere, I was surprised.  The camera’s from community access television rolled.  People held signs of protest, notably, Greg Wongham who has a television show called “Corruption in Hawaii.”  He had a map of the Bishop Estate Trusts money laundering schemes and while I admired it, I had another one similar to it in my own mind filled with other types of information involving collusions between the attorneys of the State of Hawaii, the sex industry, the judicial system of the State of Hawaii centering around an invested group of Judges and the conversion of lease to fee royal trust funds which were capitalized on the stock market in the U.S. after going through subsidiary companies in South America, etc., that could not be printed on a chart.

     

    I had decided not to testify with my written testimony.  Instead, I decided to review the Constitution of the United States of America for the ways in which the U.S. had never treated the Hawaiian peoples as equals since 1959 when Hawaii became a state and before that time, of course.  I did not write my speech ahead of time, so there are small errors in speaking and thought because it is strange to stare into the faces of Hawaii Senators and Congresspersons.  I watched their faces change colors.  I watched Patsy Minks face turn black and then I saw her get up to leave and these impressions were distracting from my testimony. .  Please forgive me for my errors and speaking blunders. 

     However, I had organized the speech topically, especially around the Constitutional Amendments of the U.S..  This is what the U.S. Senate recorded as my transcript with my small amendments

    I have corrected this copy of the transcript below.  I was unable to correct the transcript that they sent to me, due to the fact that I was evicted from my office and residence shortly after this testimony.  I had to have my mail forwarded to me and shortly thereafter I moved again. Therefore I did not receive the transcript before the deadline of November 20th, 2000, in order to correct the transcript in time.  I have written in parenthesis that which was dropped out of my text in the original transcript I received from the Select Committee on Indian Affairs, Washington, D.C. 20510-6450 dated October 31st, 2000.

     

     

    Copy of Testimonial Speech Given at Akaka Bill Hearings

    S. 2899, Hn 4904 P2

    pp. 83-87

     

    Statement of Audrey Keesing, Honolulu, Hawaii

     

    Ms. Keesing:  “Aloha.  I suppose you want me to testify at this time, then, I have been called three times to testify this morning (this being the third).

                I guess you know that I am a cultural anthropologist.  I am an international public health community health worker.  I have worked for the feminist movement for a long time inHawaii.

                I have worked for the National Organization for Women, which gives moral support for and encourages political recognition of the indigenous Hawaiian people as an independent nation.

                It is my understanding that it was a group of corrupt businessmen that overthrew theHawaiian Kingdom, and that Grover Cleveland, our President, asked for the Queen to be returned to the throne.  That is the basis upon which all (indigenous) women’s rights in Hawaiihave been taken away, because the civil rights and human rights of women have been denied from that time forward.

                I believe that when I came here as a graduate student, I did not know this history at all. I had no idea that I was going to encounter something that looked to me like apartheid, when I discovered that there was (discrimination on the basis) blood quantum; when I found out that there would be people 50 percent above blood quantum that were offered housing, but that these (land under these) houses would not be owned by the people, and that they would have to be thrown off the land if their blood quantum was less than 50 percent.  This is the Homestead Act that I am objecting to, (because the treaty obligations were not fulfilled.)

                I did not know that there were royal trusts that had been looted and changed and stolen, and that the land would be taken (by the U.S. government.)

                I did not know that there would be money laundering everywhere, and that the sex industry would be used for these purposes, and people like Milton Holt and other people would be using the money from the Bishop Estate Trusts to perpetuate horrible acts on women, and women’s values would be a commercial enterprise for people of the tourist industry of Hawaii. 

    I did not realize that education would not be valued.

    I believe that there were mistakes made, and they are egregious.  They involve incarceration, hospitalization that were unnecessary, criminalization that is unnecessary, genocide, and drugs entering into neighborhoods.  I have personally been at  “one manalo [phonetic]” (Waimanalo Homestead) to throw out international drug dealers.  I was almost killed that day.

    There is terrorism by police force.  People are forcibly arrested  (and removed from their houses.)  I have seen (on television Hawaiian) people blow themselves up in their houses to try to keep the land they want to be part of (because ownership of the land is forbidden as a nationhood is not seen to exist and spiritually because the Aina, the land, is sacred.)  You cannot have any privacy in this state.  Your Social Security number is on your driver’s license.

    There are collusions (between the State of Hawaii) with insurance companies.  When I was working for advocates for consumer rights, which is a Ralph Nader organization,  I found out there were 20,000 people on the Big Island that could not (legally) drive because they had no insurance.  This is a tremendous amount of people that could not go to the store to get diapers, without fear of being arrested.

    I found out that people were being sold out (of their Royal trusts and nationhood) by Welfare (State of Hawaii, Department of Human Services which hires primarily social workers to do their bidding, *for example, the Child Protective Agency obtains foster kanaka maoli children and profits through a deal with a non-profit adoption agency) which was not adequate for a standard of living; that the social programs were not benefiting the people that they were intended to benefit.

    I believe that Congress is the only group of people that can admit the crime, the crime on high seas; that the Nation of Hawaii was not actually overthrown, because Grover Cleveland said that it was not; that Queen Lili’uokalani(‘s government or “aupuni” ) was a de jure government.

    Furthermore, I think that this bill may be a violation of the 15th Amendment, which is the right to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.  There are many people that were here under servitude (and) in the State of Hawaii that were not Hawaiian, who would understand what I am talking about in this instance.

    Also, I have seen personally, as a human rights and civil rights leader, violations of the first amendment, the right of free speech, religion, press, assembly; Amendment Number 6; fair trial; Amendment Number 8, bails, fines and punishments that are cruel; Amendment 14, denying of the life, liberty , and property of the people of Hawaii.

    I understand that all treaties made under the authority of the United States shall be supreme under the law of the land, which Section 5, number 2.  That means that the treaties that the United States made with the Hawaiian people are enforceable, and they are supreme on(to) the land of the United States.

    In fact, my great great grandfather, or uncle, actually was President Polk, who made the Friendship Treaty (with King Kamehameha III.)  I am the granddaughter of the U.S. Commissioner for the South Pacific, which (who) is Felix Keesing, who founded the Anthropology Department here in Hawaii.  I believe that cultural anthropology is a precursor to civil rights; that if we do not understand that we are all equal, then there can be no civil rights.

    I think the appropriate place for this (information and questions about the enforcibility of the Friendship Treaty) to go it to the Judicial Branch which, under this Article 3, Section 2, is supposed to honor the treaties between foreign nations.

    I wanted to tell you just how incredibly hurt I am, as a person who came here from the United State, believing in my Government, and how hurt I am by what my Government has done to the people here.  I want you to know of the incredible pain of not being able to sleep at night, nights on end of agony, when I realized the incredible wrongs being done, and I had no way to right them.  That moved me to write this Indigenous People’s Resolution with the National Organization for Women (published) on July 3rd, (1996.)

    I think that is about all I want to tell you, except that a lot of my friends are dying, are sick, and I can do nothing about it.  This is really painful to me, because I really do love the people of Hawaii.

    Thank you.

    [Applause.] (and cries of “We love you, Audrey!” from the crowd)

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Keesing follows:]        

     

     

     



    • [indigiaction] RE: FWD : (indig) Sovereignty and Immigration: An Anarchist Perspective < Prev  Next > 
      Posted By: Thu Jan 17, 2002 1:16 am  |
      • Options
      original post follows 


      "rcam" 
      To : 
      Subject : 
      ::woomera-discuss:: RE: FWD : Sovereignty and Immigration: An Anarchist Perspective 

      Date : 
      Wed, 16 Jan 2002 14:01:35 +1100 


      I found this, while interesting in parts... It might be worth exploring the terms in use, as well as their presuppositions a little bit more. If you continue to use those terms without asking what they mean, then you really will end up in all sorts of crazy contradictions. 

      For instance: 

      >> How can we, as non-indigenous persons in Australia, invite and welcome refugees and immigrants here? 

      For sure there are those who like to use slogans like 'Refugees are welcome here'. Amnesty likes that phraseology; the ISO some years back used the slogan 'Asians are welcome here'; ISO/RAC like it, etc. They seem to think it distinguishes them from those who are not 'welcoming' - but it really doesn't. All it does is announce that they have the authority to decide whether they are welcoming (or not). If someone has the power to welcome, they also have the power, by implication, to not welcome. The terms are exactly the same. It's nothing less than the announcement of sovereignty, even if in it affable version. If you want to relinquish sovereignty (which I would much prefer to do), then the only credible response would be to relinquish this authority to 'welcome' - literally, to decide who can or cannot legally exist within the boundaries of the nation-state. 

      Secondly, I know that many people come into contact with the word 
      'sovereignty' in the context of indig politics, but this is neither it's 
      origin nor its meaning. 

      'Sovereignty' literally means absolute, unconditioned authority. It's 
      derivation is 15th Century European (and colonial). Ie., 'the sovereign' - the monarch who both decides both what the law is and is above the law. 
      Therefore if someone or something is defined as being 'sovereign', it/they both determine the law and are above it. 

      'Sovereignty' is sometimes used in the context of indig politics as an 
      attempt to make a certain claim (for land rights, etc) intelligible within the dominant political framework. It's adopting a language which remains gravely inadequate for a claim which remains unintelligible from within the dominant language - eg., how does one make a claim for land rights where those rights are not for private property ownership as is understood within a western framework? You can, but it's easier to adopt the dominant lingo... 

      'Sovereignty' is not generally used outside of indig politics for the 
      precise reason that the locus of sovereignty is, formally at least, colonial rather than national (Australia being legally ruled by the English Crown). 
      In this sense, 'sovereignty' as an indig claim arises as an attempt to pitch directly against Crown (sovereign) authority over land - one sovereign against another so to speak. 

      Finally: 

      If you don't accept the colonisation of this continent then you can't accept the borders of this nation-state called Australia. Australia as a bordered entity only comes into existence with colonisation. One way to think about this is to note that the homogenisation of indig people as 'Australian Aborigines' only occurs as a result of colonisation, there being hundreds of different indig groups before this (and still). 

      If you don't grant the authority of the nation-state, then how can you grant that anyone's existence is criminalised or legalised by this same 
      nation-state? Using phrases like 'illegal occupation' might ground one's claim in the dominant juridical framework, but it also reproduces that dominant framework by doing so. Is that really what anarchists would like to do? 

      Instead of grounding the critique of colonisation and dispossession in the law (or rather in a deference to some abstract notion of The Law), you could instead ground it in a consideration of the processes of colonisation, ie., what they accomplished, and draw parallels from there. The key phrase here is 'enclosure of the commons'. 

      For instance, and only very sketchily: people were thrown off lands so that this land could be used first as a penal colony, then for the pastoral industry. They were forced into missions and reserves, where they were trained to become domestic and pastoral workers, and often used as slave labour. The land was fenced off and partitioned, and (until very recently) indig people were subjected to a system of pass laws, 'anti-nomadic' laws and the like. This partitioning followed on from the enclosure of the commons in England, Wales, Ireland, etc. This ealier enclosure of the commons also saw people thrown off lands and put into workhouses and poorhouses. They too were subjected to pass laws - these being the first historical instance of migration laws. Those who resisted most and refused to enter the growing system of wage labour and slave labour in the workhouses were 'transported' to the new penal colony of NSW. 

      There are not only parallels therefore between the enclosure of the commons that took place in Britain prior to the colonisation of this continent and the enclosure of the commons that took place during colonisation, but also with the new world borders of today. These latter are the new systems of enclosure, including new version of the workhouse/poorhouse/reserve. 

      Angela 

      Bee Viva" | Block Address | Add to Address Book 

      Subject: Sover/Immig. article in text. 

      To: s11_awol@yahoogroups.com 

      CC: s11-awol@yahoogroups.com 





      Article 


      Sovereignty and Immigration: An Anarchist Perspective 
      Part one 

      This article is the first in a series of articles to 
      be written based on the above topic and others in the 
      future. It is hoped that a variety of topics in 
      future will be discussed by small groups of anarchists 
      and people with close affinity to Anarchism with the 
      aim of developing anarchist principles and ideas 
      further. Besides trying to develop these ideas and 
      principles through discussions there is also a desire 
      for building unity amongst ourselves. By having an 
      open space that is focused on a topic, without 
      pressure to have to come to a decision, without the 
      topic being personal or about a resource or space, we 
      can talk honestly amongst ourselves. We can find out 
      what it is that we have in common as Anarchists: Our 
      ideas and Principles. And then we can focus on these 
      and build our community. It also gives us space to 
      find out what we, as individuals, believe and why we 
      come to believe what we do. Sometimes it is easy to 
      just follow the crowd: “I am an anarchist therefor I 
      hate cops, equality for everyone, capitalism is 
      destroying the earth etc”. But why do we say and 
      believe these things? These discussions are just one 
      way we can get in touch with the analysis and 
      understanding behind our principles and beliefs. They 
      should not be taken for granted and we should be 
      constantly re-analysing and accessing them, in turn 
      making them and us stronger at the same time. 

      The following is a review, analysis and over view of 
      what was discussed at this first discussion: 

      On Sunday the 9th of December 13 Anarchist’s from the 
      Northern Suburbs and a few from else where got 
      together to discuss Anarchism, Sovereignty and 
      Immigration. This topic was chosen because of the 
      current problems occurring in Australia and around the 
      world, especially concerning the problem of the 
      movement of people, in particular refugees seeking 
      shelter away from their war torn origins. It is 
      particularly a major issue for people living in 
      Australia due to our government’s reaction to and 
      racist attitudes towards both refugees and the 
      indigenous population of Australia. There were 
      initially a number of problems that the group faced in 
      discussing these two issues. Where to begin was the 
      biggest, along with having an understanding of the 
      terms and meanings of Sovereignty and Immigration. 

      It firstly had to be recognised before starting to 
      tackle these issues that we can not treat Indigenous 
      Australians as a homogenous group of people. There 
      exist many different opinions and ideas within 
      indigenous communities, all across Australia, some 
      that heavily conflict with Anarchist principles and 
      some, which we share and have affinity with. However, 
      more importantly, looking at the history of Australia 
      it must also be recognised that problems between 
      Indigenous and Non-indigenous Australians have never 
      been resolved. Australia’s ‘white’ history is based 
      on the invasion of another people’s home and it is 
      argued that the ‘Australian Government’ does not have 
      sovereignty over this land. The reconciliation 
      process has not occurred nor has the recognition, 
      especially by the government that Aboriginal people 
      were and are custodians of Australia before white 
      settlers. Indigenous Australians do not enjoy the 
      same rights and freedoms as non-indigenous Australians 
      and there has never been a Treaty between us. 

      This is where we, as anarchists, first encounter the 
      conflict between the problem and struggle for 
      indigenous self-determination and the current movement 
      of people in the form of refugees. How can we, as 
      non-indigenous persons in Australia, invite and 
      welcome refugees and immigrants here? And how then can 
      we tackle the issues of Immigration and the current 
      refugee crisis in this context? It appears that both 
      the Left and anarchists are overlooking this conflict 
      of interest. It was noted that the Left (as well as 
      anarchists) have been using a number of slogans that 
      state a set of demands which come into conflict with 
      the unresolved issues between indigenous and 
      non-indigenous. Slogans and demands such as: 

      Open the Borders / No one is illegal / We are all boat 
      people 

      The problem is how can we as people who also desire 
      reconciliation with the indigenous custodians of this 
      land say and ask for these things? Surely these 
      demands and slogans come into conflict with indigenous 
      sovereignty and self-determination? But what is 
      Sovereignty and what does indigenous sovereignty 
      actually mean? What would it mean to us and what 
      effect would it have on the structure of society? And 
      would it conflict with Anarchists principles of 
      freedom and equality? These questions are hopefully 
      to be tackled at the next discussion. However, let us 
      first look at the above slogans: 

      One problem with these slogans, especially “We are all 
      boat people” is the possibility or the interpretation 
      of this can be seen as using the indigenous struggle 
      to add credibility to a particular campaign. This 
      actual slogan is particularly offensive because it 
      ignores the fact that we are not all ‘boat people’. 
      While playing on the fact that Australia was colonised 
      by ‘boat people’ all us non-indigenous folk use the 
      concept of our illegality (illegitimate claim to 
      Australia) to make a statement about Australia’s 
      immigration and refugee policies completely ignores 
      the existence of Indigenous people and their 
      custodianship over this land. On the other hand ‘No 
      one is illegal” contradicts this because due to our 
      own Common Law all non-indigenous people on this land 
      are illegal. And “Open the Borders”, while its 
      sentiment is well meaning like the others, it ignores 
      indigenous sovereignty and self-determination. It 
      again forgets the history and the conflict that still 
      exists. These slogans presented the groups with many 
      problems and so the discussion continued in another 
      vain. 

      One particular stream of thought and discussion was 
      around Indigenous Struggle as Class Struggle. The 
      majority of the indigenous population of Australia is 
      unemployed or under-employed, they are among the most 
      oppressed. It was mentioned that we should align 
      ourselves with the most oppressed of our society ‘as 
      the most oppressed’ and not as different types of 
      groups, indigenous/non-indigenous. That we should 
      identify as a class and not as minorities. As 
      mentioned above, the indigenous population is made up 
      of different communities and among them exists an 
      elite and privileged class. Of course we do not 
      support the elite and privileged classes, no matter 
      from what minority they come from, however, it 
      complicates the issue some what. Another suggestion 
      was that the formation of land councils, based on 
      class, could deal with the problem. However, like the 
      experience of other minorities, a resolution for the 
      indigenous struggle is not going to be based solely on 
      class. It is very much just as an historical, 
      cultural and racial problem as a class one, and an 
      experience which non-indigenous people can not relate 
      to. A part of the reconciliation process must be to 
      resolve the historical and cultural struggle of 
      indigenous people. We must recognise the history of 
      their dispossession from the land and their 
      oppression. We must recognise that there is a lot of 
      healing that needs to be done and that on many 
      occasions this must come from within their own 
      communities. They need, just as much as we do, 
      autonomy and control over their own communities. This 
      is why we must address the problem of reconciliation. 
      What is reconciliation? Where should it come from? 
      Whose responsibility is it? We know that it will not 
      come from the State so it must therefor come from 
      communities. The group felt that reconciliation 
      should be a process between local communities and the 
      local mobs in a way that both groups maintain their 
      autonomy [Autonomy is very important to this whole 
      argument. It is an anarchist principal and practice 
      that we share with the traditional and modern 
      indigenous communities]. In many ways there appeared 
      to be consensus on the need for a Treaty, between us, 
      non-indigenous groups and locals mobs and that this is 
      what form reconciliation should come in. 

      Because of the unresolved issue of indigenous struggle 
      it was very hard for the group to move into a 
      discussion of issues that related to indigenous 
      struggle and immigration. So immigration was tackled 
      as a separate topic in part. It was mentioned that 
      there are different types of immigration and that the 
      one we were mostly concerned with was that of 
      refugees. It was also noted that there are also 
      different types of refugees, for example political and 
      economic. While attempting to ignore the conflict 
      with the indigenous struggle the issue of immigration 
      was looked at from a number of other viewpoints. One 
      problem with the idea of Open Borders, especially in 
      the context of a ‘free market’ corporate society, is 
      that of wages. It was mentioned that immigration has 
      a downward effect on wages. With immigrants taking 
      jobs at lower rates and as non-union workers. Illegal 
      immigrants in some sense are desired by capitalists 
      and the State to maintain low wages. Of course this 
      is something that can not be blamed on those who 
      migrate and it is not the intention here or was it in 
      the discussion to do so. It must be recognised that 
      it is to be blamed on Capitalists and Governments who 
      insist on continuing to exploit non- western peoples 
      by any means. Creating situations such as War to 
      further their dominance and influence over them and 
      their origins, thus creating a movement of people in 
      search for the promised riches of democracy and 
      freedom in the West. In attempted to deal with this 
      sort of problem it was suggested that a similar 
      campaign as the European Living Wage Campaign should 
      be started. Eliminating the use by the State of 
      immigrants and refugees to lower wages. 

      There are now a lot more questions and topics which 
      need to be further discussed, some of which were 
      mentioned in passing, for example: what is an 
      anarchist society conception of immigration? As 
      anarchists, do we believe in control of 
      land/space/boundaries? What does freedom of movement 
      actually mean? Would an anarchist society have 
      controls on immigration? What are people against 
      immigration? What is sovereignty, reconciliation, 
      Treaty? Is indigenous sovereignty conceivable with 
      out the State? Is there a ‘New Global Proletariat’ 
      (unemployed migrants)? How can we rebuild society in 
      Australia? What is the relation between Indigenous 
      Struggle and Refugees? What are the commonalties 
      between the two struggles? 

      During the discussion many more forms of action were 
      suggested, these were noted and then discussed in a 
      little more depth at the end of the session. They 
      included beginning a dialogue between local indigenous 
      groups in our areas, in particular the idea of 
      negotiating a treaty between local mobs of indigenous 
      and non-indigenous. Invasion Day was also mentioned 
      with people interested in doing some actions and 
      events before and on the day. The Woomera protests 
      were also mentioned as a place where these issues can 
      be connected. There was also criticism from within the 
      group that reconciliation and the negotiation of a 
      Treaty often involved reformist politics and how were 
      we to resolve the issue without resorting to 
      reformism. 

      In concluding, it must be said that the discussion 
      was a great success. At the end we went around to see 
      what people had felt and thought about it and in 
      general everybody felt positive that we had taken a 
      step in the right direction. That there were positive 
      things that we could do about the problems and 
      conflicts that we face. It also appeared that we 
      could resolve these issues without sacrificing our 
      principles, that if we stuck to working along 
      non-hierarchical, grassroots structures at a local 
      level that the possibility for a better future was 
      promising. The need for a Treaty between local groups 
      was emphasised as essential and the current refugee 
      crisis was also central in connecting our ideas about 
      capitalism, the ‘free’ movement of money and its wars 
      with its effect on people, highlighting our need for 
      change. 

      Written by Bonnie Zuidland, but with thanks to all the 
      participants for their contributions of ideas, 
      analysis, clear and open thinking, honesty and support 
      for this project. 


        

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5xVRXLgLxw

This reply was deleted.