Chagos Is.

[hessian]

Perhaps now the native Hawaians will be able to reclaim their Kingdom from the American settlers who squatted then overthrew the legal government. Here's hoping...

[ynnafymmi]

So long as the Yanks can take out all the schools,hospitals,public toilets,libraries,etc along with them.As the Hawiaans always ask-"what has USA ever done for us?"

[DTCwordfan]

The Hawaiians only got the name 'Hawaii' when Capt. Cook visited the islands and was heard to say, 'Hi - Where are we?'

[DTCwordfan]

and they still have the Union Jack in their flag.....

[DTCwordfan]

It may be no bad deal - an exchange of the Chagos to the Americans for Hawaii....the economy of the state for the Yanks to have their air-base. But then I guess, it would come with Oprah Winfrey and then that means the D&D of Sussex would possibly follow her....

So, may be, forget it......

 

[davebro3]

And will the Native North American Tribes regain their lands? Bloody pilgrims🙄

[1ozzy]

Colonisation was such a wonderful conscript for all countries that were colonised🤔

Please forget the fact that they were happy living their own life style, until greedy rich invaders invaded🤫

[davebro3]

Yeah! Get the bloomin pommies out of OZ & let the Abos do their thing.

[ynnafymmi]

Errr,arent you a Ozzy,Ozzy?May i ask what you have given back to the aboriginal people you stole their lands from?

[Old_Geezer]

The colonised may have had a level of happiness beforehand because humans are good at accepting whatever is their norm; but that is likely to be because they didn't realise how much better life could be if they had sorted themselves out as the invaders had. Indeed being dragged into the modern world will have been a benefit in the longer term. Except where the natives refused to accept the new ideas; and/or when the local areas held many "tribes" than refused to get on with each other and so spent much of their resources smiting each other.

[davebro3]

If the indigenous tribes had been left to get on with it there probably wouldn't be the world over-population we are now experiencing.

[Khandro]

Further to DTC at 18:52 Fri.

A couple of tourists disembark in Hawaii, the wife says to the first official there, "Please settle an argument we have been having : Is to pronounced 'Hawaii' or Havaii'? he says 'Havaii' she says, "Thank you", he says, "You're Velcome". 🙂

[New Judge]

"...but that is likely to be because they didn't realise how much better life could be if they had sorted themselves out as the invaders had."

The difference here is that the Chagos Islands were not "invaded" as such. In fact they were not colonised in the traditional sense at all. They were discovered and occupied.

When the first French settlers arrived there (from Mauritius) to set up their coconut plantations the islands were uninhabited. In fact Mauritius itself was uninhabited in the early 1700s when the French arrived. It had been previously occupied by various settlers from both the Middle East and Europe but had been abandoned, with the most popular reason given for that being that the island was overrun with Macaque monkeys which destroyed everything the settlers tried to establish.

The only people living on the Chagos Islands when Mauritius gained its independence in 1965 and when the UK relocated them when the base at Diego Garcia was established were descended from freed slaves (who worked on the original plantations set up by the French) and from workers subsequently contracted to work there by the plantation owners.

There was never an indigenous population who could lay claim to the islands and the only link any of them had with Mauritius is if they or their ancestors came from there under  contract to work.

I mentioned a Guardian article in another thread. It is interesting to note that in their "timeline" describing the history of the islands, it says (under the year 1814) "Britain formally takes possession of the Chagos Islands and nearby Mauritius from France."

However, under the heading 1968 to 1973 it says "The entire population of the Chagos Islands are forced to leave their homes, with most moving to the main island of Mauritius or to Seychelles, thousands of kilometres away."

Mauritius is not the "main island" of the Chagos archipelago. If it has a main island it is Diego Garcia (which is certainly the largest). But it is "thousnds of kilometres away" (more than 2,000, in fact). But Mauritius conveniently changes from being "nearby" when the islands were ceded from France to the UK, to being "thousands of kilometres away" when the relocation of the residents is being discussed.

In fact many of the former residents and their families are even more thousands of kilometres away now, having made their way from Mauritius and the Seychelles to Crawley in Sussex. But that doesn't get much of a mention as I imagine it would not fit the left-wing narrative being promulagated by the Guardian.

The entire story of the Chagos Islands and their inhabitants is being completely distorted and their relationship with Mauritius being made to appear as something it certainly is not.

[ynnafymmi]

One wonders whether the Chaggosians at present living in the hell of being in the UK will be flocking back to their tropical paradise?