Nothing riles up Americans more than being told “no”. I owe you nothing. I was simply pointing out that a member of a country/culture that violently subjugated another country/culture doesn’t morally or ethically get to decide that what they do or say is or isn’t offensive to the country/culture that they violently subjugated.
Well now I’m saying you can’t be offended by what I said. You have to agree with me, because freedom of speech or whatever.
Yes, I agree that it isn’t that simple, and as I said in another comment here, people of a specific culture will have differing opinions and feelings on the matter. That doesn’t mean that non-Hawaiians get to decide what is offensive to Hawaiians, and that is what I am addressing.
There is a difference. OP is asking if indigenous Hawaiians would find it offensive. You have been stating that it isn’t as a matter of fact, even though it’s not for you decide.
Again, I ask you, what do you think gives you the right to decide?
Who is “they”? Just because the state tourism bureau does it, doesn’t mean it necessarily represents the will or wishes of indigenous Hawaiians.
Then you have no right to speak for them or decide what is or isn’t offensive to them.
Some indigenous Hawaiians would find it offensive and some wouldn’t. Hawaiians are not some homogeneous entity sharing the same thoughts and sensibilities. That being said, it sounds like the event centres around cultural stereotypes, which are romanticized from a western point of view, from a specific point in time, and in that sense I would find it in poor taste, but I am not Hawaiian. In my opinion, these sorts of things marginalize cultures more than they “celebrate” them. I would encourage you to try to educate your daughter on the history of colonialism in Hawaii, as that won’t be covered in class in any detail, I’d wager.
Everything is political. For example, Maude Flanders was killed off in the Simpsons because of a pay dispute between the voice actor and the studio.
Ragebait title. Bullying is one thing. Death threats is another. That goes way beyond simple bullying. The arrest was fully justified.
Astroturfing isn’t just paid shills. It’s also useful fools parroting the same talking points, which makes it appear to be a grassroots-led initiative. It’s muddying the water, like framing the argument as renewables vs nukes instead of renewables vs oil/gas/coal as this article is talking about. Increasing solar and wind power is a good thing. Period. But every time there’s a discussion about how a country is investing in wind and solar, you nuclear bros make it about nukes vs renewables. Fossil fuels have to go. I do not endorse or support the use of fossil fuels of any kind. But nuclear energy is not a real solution, and all you are doing is derailing the conversation, which was about increasing renewable energy, which again, IS OBJECTIVELY A GOOD THING. Building NPPs take way too long and are way too expensive to save us from catastrophic climate collapse. Climate collapse is already happening. Crying about NPPs being decommissioned 30 years ago literally helps no one. It is spilled milk. It is nothing but a distraction that will prevent or delay the transition away from fossil fuels TODAY.
The amount of astroturfing for the nuclear energy lobby is insane. Always the exact same talking points. Every. Single. Time. Anytime a post is made about a country switching to wind or solar energy, these nuclear bros bombard the thread saying the exact same shit. Must be a coincidence…
Then you should have no problem if it was abolished.
Constitutions can be changed.
The dam collapsed due to flash flooding due to storm Daniel which dumped a much higher than normal amount of rain.
It’s working exactly as it is designed to. Funneling money from the poor to the rich.
There’s a lot of money in the nuclear industry and they spend a lot of money to shape public opinion about it. No doubt they use troll farms to manufacture consent too. For me, the biggest and most glaring problem with nuclear power is the human element that can’t be trusted long term. Governments and industry will go to any length to cut costs, to line their own pockets, to lie, and put their personal ambitions above anything else. That’s how you get Chernobyls and 3 mile islands and fukushimas. It’s also not financially viable without massive government subsidies and government insurance. It’s highly centralized, and easily controlled and monetized by capitalists. It requires a readily available and reliable source of water which is something that climate change will cause problems for. Plus they take forever to build and cost billions. The answer nuclear bros have to that is to cut red tape, but then you have the problem of Chernobyls and Fukushimas. The fact is, nuclear is not a solution. Capitalism and the idiotic need for endless growth and exploitation is the problem. We need de-growth and switch to a combination of wind, solar and other real clean energy.
The Road, by Cormac McCarthy. Very grim, but beautifully written.
Cool deflection. If only we could do both…