6 Thoughts on “South Park: Ginger Kids – TV.com

  1. Lana aka Ululani aka Lana Ululani on 11/14/2005 at 12:08 pm said:

    I love South Park! Don’t hate….

  2. You’re just like Cartman in this episode Lana! You find yourself as part of a minority group that is looked down upon by others – they can’t eat inside the cafeteria because of their “race” (in this case, since everyone else enjoys the cafeteria, this is a limitation of RIGHTS, not privileges).

    Now you find yourself rallying the other gingers to fight against this lack of RIGHTS…but instead of looking for EQUALITY, you look for PRIVILEGE. Just like Cartman, you want to have special rights for gingers, and have gingers be the majority by lording over all others.

    Maybe you can learn the lesson that Cartman so facetiously learns at the end – we should all just get along, and share our rights. No single group deserves special privileges that others don’t share.

  3. Lana aka Ululani aka Lana Ululani on 11/15/2005 at 4:30 am said:

    Okay you called me Ululani then Lana. Aside from that I personally have experienced “being looked down upon” based on my race and have never espoused that I want special privileges based on my race. Even if you read my words it’s not about special privileges. It’s about rights. Civil rights but I know that some people mistakenly perceive my words to mean what they want them to mean since after all only their experiences are the only ones that can possibly happen in this world and you’re right… no single group deserves special privileges that others don’t share… like how white people do. That is the group that Ken Conklin and Thurston Twigg Smith are in :)

  4. Civil rights are something we all share.

    Privileges are something that only some people have, and others don’t.

    We all share the right to free speech, no matter how offensive.

    We don’t all share the right to 20% of the revenue from government lands, like OHA.

    We all share the right to vote, and participate in government.

    We don’t all share the right to lease lands for $1 a year by lottery.

    We all share the right to freedom of religion.

    We don’t all share the right to go to Kamehameha Schools.

    What special privilege do you think Conklin and Twigg-Smith have by being white? Do they get to drive in special lanes only for whites on the freeway? Are there white-only beaches for them?

    Are you so incredibly blind you can’t see the racism you possess in your heart? Renaming privileges as “rights” does not make your argument stronger, it only makes your description incorrect. In Hawai’i, the only race with special privileges enshrined by the government are the kanaka maoli. Name me ONE privilege reserved for whites and part-whites only. Name me ONE privilege reserved for japanese and part-japanese only.

    You really need to learn the proper use of the words “right” and “privilege”.

  5. Lana aka Ululani aka Lana Ululani on 11/15/2005 at 2:29 pm said:

    “Civil rights are something we all share.

    Privileges are something that only some people have, and others don’t.

    We all share the right to free speech, no matter how offensive.”

    Yes… they are described in the constitution and in its amendments: http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/constitution/

    “We don’t all share the right to 20% of the revenue from government lands, like OHA.”

    First of all, the basis if that the land was stolen from Hawaiians. I know this from personal experience. Then upon statehood it was mandated by law that Hawaiians receive a portion of the revenue. By law the local state and federal governments should return the land to Hawaiians as well but yes we Hawaiians DO have a right to our land and access to our land. Unfortunately state and federal entities created problems then solved it with the creation of such entities as the DHHL and OHA. Again a US appeals court refused to rehear the case:

    http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051108/NEWS23/511080342/1173/NEWS

    so legally you are incorrect.

    “We all share the right to vote, and participate in government.

    We don’t all share the right to lease lands for $1 a year by lottery.”

    Again on November 7, 2005 a US appeals court upheld its ruling that limited the standing of a group of Hawaii taxpayers to challenge the funding of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands:

    http://starbulletin.com/2005/11/08/news/story11.html

    “We all share the right to freedom of religion.

    We don’t all share the right to go to Kamehameha Schools.”

    I agree BUT the Kamehameha Schools is a PRIVATE institution.

    “What special privilege do you think Conklin and Twigg-Smith have by being white? Do they get to drive in special lanes only for whites on the freeway? Are there white-only beaches for them?”

    First of all they compose part of the 74% majority of this country. Secondly they have money and thus power which they mistakenly believe entitles to dictate to others how and/or if and/or when they can exercise their rights. They also have white privilege. I could go on.

    “Are you so incredibly blind you can’t see the racism you possess in your heart?”

    Dude… I AM PART HAOLE. I married a haole dude. You can stop the invalid racism argument any time as I am not racist against Haole people like Twigg Smith nor Conklin. However neither of them married a Hawaiian woman. Twigg Smith married Bessie then Laila. BOTH OF WHOM WERE WHITE WOMEN so obviously it’s you who seems blinded by your opinion that Hawaiians should be working hard like everyone else. I have news for you. They do. I know that myself and many Hawaiians were on welfare for a time partly because of what happened to our ancestors. If that did not happen to you then fine. I can respect that but not all Hawaiians experienced the same things. For example I am not struggling like other Hawaiians to make ends meet but I do know many Hawaiians who continue to struggle mentally and physically. Unlike you and perhaps Ken Conklin you dismiss the emotional anguish that some people endure or have endured partly because they are Hawaiian.

    For example, have YOU lived on Hawaiian Home Land? I highly doubt it. IF you did then you would know that these Hawaiians are not there because they WANT to be there. Take for example Keaukaha. EVer been there? I highly doubt it but there is an infestation of coqui frogs. There is no air conditioning. Sure they can lease the property for about $1 per year for 99 years but it is NOT a freebie. These Hawaiians were displaced from other locations. Of course you do not read about that and even if you did I highly doubt that you would be compassionate but not ALL Hawaiians are looking for handouts. They are fighting for what is rightfully theirs. Why do you think that people are doing more research when it comes to Milolii and South Kealia? Because Hawaiians there were displaced and being that I am American… I prefer to be compassionate to those people who were invaded. As strong and as colonistic America is… I AM COMPASSIONATE.

    “Renaming privileges as “rights” does not make your argument stronger, it only makes your description incorrect.”

    Note that I have never used the words interchangeably. Again the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to reconsider its ruling of a suit had contended that revenue from ceded lands — crown land under the Hawaiian monarchy that became public land and eventually was handed over to the state with statehood in 1959 — should benefit Hawaii’s entire population, not just Native Hawaiians through Hawaiians-only programs.

    The appeals court refused to reconsider that issue. Thus the DHHL stands.

    http://starbulletin.com/2005/11/08/news/story11.html

    ” In Hawai’i, the only race with special privileges enshrined by the government are the kanaka maoli.”

    Yes the US illegally occupies and continues to illegally occupy Hawaii.

    “Name me ONE privilege reserved for whites and part-whites only.”

    It’s called White Privilege.

    ” Name me ONE privilege reserved for japanese and part-japanese only.”

    That’s easy. Congress passed the Civil Liberties Act of 1988. Popularly known as the Japanese American Redress Bill, this act acknowledged that “a grave injustice was done” and mandated Congress to pay each victim of internment $20,000 in reparations.

    You really need to learn the proper use of the words “right” and “privilege”.

    “You really need to learn the proper use of the words “right” and “privilege”. “

    No… looks like you do.

  6. First of all, the basis if that the land was stolen from Hawaiians.

    Really, who stole it? Are you referring to the government lands, the crown lands, that were for the benefit of all kingdom citizens regardless of race, that transferred to the Republic, that transferred to the U.S., and were transferred back to the State of Hawai’i? How do you think they got stolen? Do you blame Kamehameha III and his Great Mahele? If so, why should the U.S. be responsible for what the monarchs of the kingdom did?

    Again on November 7, 2005 a US appeals court upheld its ruling that limited the standing of a group of Hawaii taxpayers to challenge the funding of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands:

    We can only hope that a more reasonable judicial opinion comes from the Supreme Court. The 9th circuit got it wrong this time.

    I agree BUT the Kamehameha Schools is a PRIVATE institution.

    So was Girard College, but in 1968 the Supreme Court ruled that it could not violate the 14th amendment by allowing only one race in.

    First of all they compose part of the 74% majority of this country.

    Being part of a majority does not mean you have special privileges. Just ask the majority blacks in South Africa during the 80’s apartheid.

    Secondly they have money and thus power which they mistakenly believe entitles to dictate to others how and/or if and/or when they can exercise their rights.

    Money and power are not limited by race. There are also very rich kanaka maoli, aren’t there? Try and think of a privilege they enjoy just because of their race…

    They also have white privilege.

    And what particular privilege is that? The privilege to sit in the front of the bus? Specifics, please. Your empty rhetoric offers nothing useful.

    Dude… I AM PART HAOLE. I married a haole dude.

    Neither of those facts precludes you from being the racist that you are.

    However neither of them married a Hawaiian woman.

    What about William Burgess and his wife Sandra? Again, though, your race and the race of your spouse does not make you any less able to be racist.

    I know that myself and many Hawaiians were on welfare for a time partly because of what happened to our ancestors.

    Oh really? How far back are you willing to place the blame? Can we blame the ali’i pre-1778 for subjugating the commoners, who were then doomed to be on welfare? Or do you blame the monarchy for instituting a great mahele which gave away 1/3 of the land to the ali’i?

    For example I am not struggling like other Hawaiians to make ends meet but I do know many Hawaiians who continue to struggle mentally and physically.

    But struggle is not based on race! I know many non-kanaka maoli, many portuguese, filipino, chinese, japanese, even CAUCASIANS who struggle mentally and physically! Why are they less worthy of help?? If you want to fight poverty, let’s fight poverty together. Giving away privilege based on race is NOT the way to go.

    Sure they can lease the property for about $1 per year for 99 years but it is NOT a freebie. These Hawaiians were displaced from other locations.

    Why isn’t it a freebie? Why can’t they move anywhere else? What locations were they displaced from and by who? And if it’s not such a great privilege, why not give that privilege to everyone regardless of race?

    They are fighting for what is rightfully theirs.

    What do you think is rightfully theirs? When did they lose it? The first property ownership amongst kanaka maoli, and all hawaiian nationals, occured with the Great Mahele. Should the U.S. be responsible for what the Kingdom did?

    The appeals court refused to reconsider that issue. Thus the DHHL stands.

    One can only hope the Supreme Court will give a more reasonable ruling.

    It’s called White Privilege.

    And what is that? Does it get you to the front of the line in the supermarket? Can it get you to the front of a bus?

    And if it’s really “white” privilege, don’t 99% caucasian 1% kanaka-maoli also get it? Is it just color? Do these “whites” have stamps on their birth certificates they can use to exercise their “white privilege”?

    Again, enough empty rhetoric, answer the questions…we need details, not soundbites.

    That’s easy. Congress passed the Civil Liberties Act of 1988. Popularly known as the Japanese American Redress Bill, this act acknowledged that “a grave injustice was done” and mandated Congress to pay each victim of internment $20,000 in reparations.

    That did not give money away to all Japanese by race, it gave money to those specific people who endured a specific harm.

    What specific kanaka maoli endured specific harm from the U.S. government? The queen? She lost her kingdom, and the crown lands allocated to support her (even though she tried to claim them in 1910 with a lawsuit the Supreme Court dismissed). Was anyone else specifically harmed?

    If all kanaka maoli, and only kanaka maoli were stripped of their property rights with the 1893 overthrow, perhaps you’d have a case that was similar to the reparations paid to the interned japanese. But kanaka maoli continued to participate in government at the highest levels, and dominated the Territorial Legislature till the 1930s. Your comparison of internment reparations to kanaka maoli demands for special privilege is a poor one.

    You really need to learn the proper use of the words “right” and “privilege”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

Post Navigation