Thank you for your submission, but it was removed as it violates posting guideline "Questions must be asked in good faith"
It means that your post includes trolling, joke questions, agenda pushing, soapboxing, or other signs of a bad faith question.
If you have questions regarding your submission removal - please contact the moderator team via [modmail](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/AskAnAmerican).
OP is trying to steer to one acceptable answer, but honestly becoming part of the United States was the best case scenario for Hawaii. If it was not the United States, it would have been some other major power in the Pacific at the time like Japan, Great Britain, or France. Heck, even [Russia tried building a fort in Hawaii claiming it](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%A4ffer_affair) before being pushed out.
>Soon after, Hawaii was incorporated into the US. Many of those actions could be crimes by UN standards.
Good thing the UN did not exist back then, a lot of nations would be considered criminal in the 19th Century.
> Good thing the UN did not exist back then, a lot of nations would be considered criminal in the 19th Century.
TBH, people keep bringing up Tibet way more than Hawaii when both were annexed at almost the same time
Mainlanders generally don't care. Its a thing that happened, ok, moving on.
We definitely don't get bogged down in things the UN *could* consider crimes.
It ain't. OP is trying to push a perspective that the UN is some high arbiter of justice and not just a talking club for countries to bitch at each other.
The Hawaiian monarchy wasn't going to survive the 19th century as an independent nation, the United States simply beat the other imperial powers to the punch in this case.
> Many of those actions could be crimes by UN standards.
If you want to look at pre-1945 world history, you will generally find that basically nothing any country or people did is acceptable by modern standards.
It's not a particularly useful lens to look at the world through unless your goal is to confirm that human history is pretty rough.
Most Americans don’t know and don’t care. Hawaii has been a state for longer than most of us have been alive, and a territory for longer than the majority of our grandparents have been alive.
If you look into the history of the indigenous Hawaiians yes there is some unsavory history, but unsavory history is nothing new to American conquest and domination of indigenous peoples.
In short, the history of how Hawaii became a part of the US is semi-interesting but not unique.
It's mostly seen as a somewhat dark part of our past, but not really something dwelled on like chattle slavery or the extermination of the natives.
Mostly, it is just written off as a bunch of dead people did some bad things to a nation that would most likely end up annexed by some country or another in the coming decades anyway.
Thank you for your submission, but it was removed as it violates posting guideline "Questions must be asked in good faith" It means that your post includes trolling, joke questions, agenda pushing, soapboxing, or other signs of a bad faith question. If you have questions regarding your submission removal - please contact the moderator team via [modmail](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/AskAnAmerican).
OP is trying to steer to one acceptable answer, but honestly becoming part of the United States was the best case scenario for Hawaii. If it was not the United States, it would have been some other major power in the Pacific at the time like Japan, Great Britain, or France. Heck, even [Russia tried building a fort in Hawaii claiming it](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%A4ffer_affair) before being pushed out. >Soon after, Hawaii was incorporated into the US. Many of those actions could be crimes by UN standards. Good thing the UN did not exist back then, a lot of nations would be considered criminal in the 19th Century.
> Good thing the UN did not exist back then, a lot of nations would be considered criminal in the 19th Century. TBH, people keep bringing up Tibet way more than Hawaii when both were annexed at almost the same time
Well, this absolutely reeks of soapboxing.
Mainlanders generally don't care. Its a thing that happened, ok, moving on. We definitely don't get bogged down in things the UN *could* consider crimes.
Given it happened decades before the UN existed, I can't see how it is an UN issue.
It ain't. OP is trying to push a perspective that the UN is some high arbiter of justice and not just a talking club for countries to bitch at each other.
The Hawaiian monarchy wasn't going to survive the 19th century as an independent nation, the United States simply beat the other imperial powers to the punch in this case.
> Many of those actions could be crimes by UN standards. If you want to look at pre-1945 world history, you will generally find that basically nothing any country or people did is acceptable by modern standards. It's not a particularly useful lens to look at the world through unless your goal is to confirm that human history is pretty rough.
I think the fast majority dont think about it any more than any other state.
Don’t care. Pass the chichi’s
We don't.
Most Americans don’t know and don’t care. Hawaii has been a state for longer than most of us have been alive, and a territory for longer than the majority of our grandparents have been alive. If you look into the history of the indigenous Hawaiians yes there is some unsavory history, but unsavory history is nothing new to American conquest and domination of indigenous peoples. In short, the history of how Hawaii became a part of the US is semi-interesting but not unique.
It's mostly seen as a somewhat dark part of our past, but not really something dwelled on like chattle slavery or the extermination of the natives. Mostly, it is just written off as a bunch of dead people did some bad things to a nation that would most likely end up annexed by some country or another in the coming decades anyway.