I wonder what Hitler had for lunch on January 20th, 1939. Was it cooked by a college graduate, or did that person only have trade skills? What price was paid for that lunch? Was it a fair price? What if some person of German ancestry wanted a refund for that lunch? What if the Statehood vote of 1959 was rigged and the UN was conned into taking Hawaii off the list of non-self-governing territories?
These are all interesting questions, but they really donâ€™t lead to any answers.
It is patently evident that Hawaii is a self-governing State. We have our own judiciary, legislative and executive branches. The citizens of the State of Hawaii have universal suffrage for all people 18 and over, regardless of race, creed or color. Even when it comes to federal law, we have three congress critters, and now, the President himself. One might have made the case that the Territory of Hawaii was not self-governing, since the executive was appointed, and although we had a congressional representative they were non-voting. But upon Statehood? Clearly, we were a self-governing territory and no longer belonged on any UN list of non-self-governing territories.
The question as to whether or not the UN correctly removed Hawaii from the list of non-self-governing territories has a clear answer -> they correctly removed Hawaii, since it was in 1959, and has been ever since, self-governed. Nobody could plausibly make the claim that elections in Hawaii are rigged by mainland interests, or that somehow Hawaii does not have a voice in the federal government.
It may be that in 1959 someone had a drink with someone, and gave them a nudge in one direction or another. But any rational examination of the situation would have led to the proper conclusion that the people of Hawaii were determining their own destiny, and they chose to become a State of the Union. Statehood was a dream of even the most die-hard ex-royalists – Prince Kuhio, a member of the royal family of the Kingdom of Hawaii, and a warrior in the 1895 counter-revolution that failed against the Republic of Hawaii, was our second congressional representative of the Territory of Hawaii, and fought for Statehood during his entire tenure.
I suspect that this analysis has some end in mind, some unspoken consequence of the legal ambiguity they seek to impose upon a clear cut situation. I suspect that perhaps their answer to the question of relevance probably doesnâ€™t involve a new referendum to clear the air, but some sort of â€œundoâ€ that would place power into the hands of race-based sovereignty activists.
I also suspect that if a person of German ancestry tried to get a refund for an overcharged salad eaten by Hitler on January 20th, 1939, theyâ€™d find little satisfaction.