Landlocked Islanders

December 22, 2015 4:55 AM

Can Marshall Islanders whose lives are tied to the sea maintain their culture in Oklahoma?
posted by ellieBOA (7 comments total)

Really interesting article. Reminds me of early concepts for Jewish states in upstate New York, Alaska, the Kimberly region of Australia, and the like.

Are there other precedents for the voluntary en masse relocation of an entire nation -- as opposed to a forced removal -- to another distant location?
posted by elmwood at 5:07 AM on December 22, 2015

elmwood: "Are there other precedents for the voluntary en masse relocation of an entire nation -- as opposed to a forced removal -- to another distant location?"

The Huns, I guess.

Anyway, I'd question exactly how voluntary this relocation is. If you're interested in the Marshall Islands and read German, Süddeutsche Zeitung recently ran a long-form article in four chapters. Chapter 1 is called Wo die Welt gerade untergeht.
posted by brokkr at 6:37 AM on December 22, 2015

Between 1946 and 1958, the United States detonated 67 atomic bombs on the Marshall Islands—the equivalent power of 1.6 Hiroshimas a day for 12 years straight.

As reparations for this, the US should be doing a whole lot more for Marshall Islanders than just letting them into the country sans green card. Holy shit.

"One in five jobs in Oklahoma is supported—directly or indirectly—by the oil and natural gas industries, and as of last year, roughly 55 percent of adults in Enid, Oklahoma believed global warming is real. The national average is 63 percent."

It..it...wa...flames. Flames...on the... side of my face...
posted by mrjohnmuller at 8:35 AM on December 22, 2015 [1 favorite]

It's obvious the Marshallese should have the right to migrate to the US, but would it not have made more sense to cut a deal with New Zealand for them? They'd be among cousins, still near the sea, and that would make it easier for them to hold on to their identity.
posted by ocschwar at 9:02 AM on December 22, 2015 [1 favorite]

I have to think that whatever the reasons are that more Marshallese have chosen to move to Arkansas than Hawaii, and these are obviously reasons that are good enough for the Marshallese that have done so, would also argue against moving to New Zealand even if it were easy.

Are there other precedents for the voluntary en masse relocation of an entire nation -- as opposed to a forced removal -- to another distant location?

There have been small ethnic groups that were either forced out of their homeland or sufficiently shat upon by other local ethnicities that they ended up being moved more or less en masse to the US. Presumably other countries have taken in similar groups.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:28 AM on December 22, 2015

Are there other precedents for the voluntary en masse relocation of an entire nation -- as opposed to a forced removal -- to another distant location?

I recall that the entire population of Tristan da Cunha (an isolated island in the South Atlantic, governed from Britain and populated by the descendants of seven families) were relocated to somewhere in rural England sometime in the 1960s or so when a volcano erupted. Apparently they didn't like it there and returned at the nearest possible opportunity.
posted by acb at 9:49 AM on December 22, 2015 [2 favorites]

Here's a recent update on Tristan da Cunha: The Most Isolated Town on Earth Wants a Radical Redesign .
posted by Nelson at 11:41 AM on December 22, 2015 [1 favorite]