Control of land in these isles

I’ve been quizzed by many what’s my personal view on land alienation.

There’s, however, the “personal” and “citizenship’s” views that must be separated so we don’t confuse the two differing view points.

Personally, I’d like to see land ownership remain in the hands of the indigenous people. But in order to perpetuate this protectionist concept the NMI would have to declare full political independence. I’m not sure that this route is the route to take in the immediate future.

Then there’s my US Citizenship’s view where, as a US Citizen and believer in time honored traditional American Values, land ownership should be opened to every US Citizen regardless of place of origin. So that you’re not tangled up in the web of confusion over citizenship rights, simply delete the term “American”. You’d find that no matter how you dissect it, there still remains the universal principle of the rights of citizens to own land. Such is a citizenship’s right whether we like it or not.

Full political independence: This isn’t an alternative for the immediate future. We must allow the political maturation process to play itself out.

Give the NMI some 25-50 more years before we even begin entertaining such political option, if it is an option by then. To start down this path is to prematurely force the political maturation process to bear ill-conceived fruits where corruption sets in and the rights of citizens relegated to “might is right!” The democratic process would have been suppressed and forced into dictatorship pre-preempting the role of governance participatory roles in the affairs of their government.

There’s also the option of semi-independence similar to the political arrangement reached between our mother country and that of the freely associated states of Micronesia. But this alternative too warrants careful review to ensure and their ramifications are understood and that the final decision is the product of thorough reasoning. We can’t simply change political status in whimsical fashion. It must be done with reasoned analysis. For nationalists, this may be fodder for future discussion.

Is there anything wrong with the current relationship or status quo?

Admittedly, a lot of what has gone sour centers on a highly intrusive federal government especially under the Clinton administration. The Clinton Boys have been duped by labor unions to push for a federal takeover under the guise of reform. It’s actually an economic issue where labor bosses had to employ intimidation and threats under the guise of unequal playing field, including the use of pet tigers in Congress to embark on a frivolous agenda even at the expense of derailing the democratic process. But we swallowed the smear campaign forged by the Pinto Boys at the US Department of Interior’s Office of Insolent Affairs.

On the flip side, I have the strangest feeling too that while we have accepted joining the American political family, we have equally and conveniently selected and honed self-serving protectionist measures far removed from the hard fought and well-earned scars of justice for all.

Herein lies the fallacy of the land alienation provision. Lest we forget, the strength of our country is in the family unit. As such, we too must work toward strengthening that unit. It’s culture and tradition where East meets West in harmony because each US Citizen has the right to land ownership as a family member. Si Yuus `!Maase