Suffering without suffrage

Great work JP and Victoria! This will help explain to a lot of people what the political situation on Guam is.

@ Sara - no it won't - It will only inflame more uniformed opinions. Guam is infact NOT a colony. The US has NO colonies.

I am of Chamoru blood and I agree it is time that the US did grant our Congressional Representative a vote in the House. But that is where I diverge. As much as we’d like to participate, Guam, like Puerto Rico does not have a star on the flag and without a member in the senate, you have no electoral delegate (your delegates are equal to the number of senators and representatives a state has). They way the electoral system works anyways, Guam’s population is so small as to make our vote virtually irrelevant (just like Hawaii). I’d always understood that we don’t pay Federal Taxes and thus don’t vote. “NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.”

If we’re going to be able to vote in presidential elections then Guamanians would need a senator and to start paying federal taxes, and also to become a state. To liken this to an abusive marriage because many don’t understand the system is more like an ungrateful wife demanding jewelry her husband cannot afford. It’s for appearances, because the reality is we don’t need it. Guamanians (like me) who establish residency in any of the 50 states can vote, because they’re paying federal taxes. So where is the problem?

Guam enjoys great support and autonomy with the US, we live GREAT lives, better than most any Americans. Do we want our cake and to eat it too?

Listening to Lisa draw parallels between prison population and oppression seems to me, to ignore the fact that those prisoners got themselves into trouble without the aid of the US. It saddens me when I hear Guamanians talk as though they are oppressed when they have no appreciation for the meaning of the word. I’d like for her to speak with my Grandmother, who is still a living survivor of Japanese occupation. She married the very American who liberated the island. If we’ve grown fat and unhealthy it wasn’t uncle same who stuffed the spare ribs in our mouths.

The title of the video is grotesque. Suffering implies agony, torment and torture. My oh my how we Guamanians have grown soft if they call this suffering..

Hi Evmonk - Thank you for the thoughtful questions and interest.

I will try to provide you an objective (yet historical) response to the questions you raise, to keep things in perspective. I hope you and other readers will find answers as to why Guam is as it is today.

We have to appreciate that it's not so easy to find a solution that allows for an exception to Federal Law, allowing us to vote, due to the complexity of the electoral system as I previously explained. All rhetoric aside, we cannot castigate Washington for that, or fabricate analogies making is appear the victim at the hands of America. Her enemies are in the business of denigrating her image and manipulating a mostly ignorant public. I think that is shameful.

For a long time Chamorus lived in relative isolation and only fought wars between villages, our independence was undisputed. Although it was the Chamoru people who did find and settle this island, the Spanish Crown, and Imperial Japan have twice demonstrated that we are not guaranteed claim to it. Of the 3 encouters we had had with foreign powers, twice we had been brutally subjugated and twice liberated by the United States. It is the Spanish who raped and pilaged the island to which we owe our mostly spanish last names, catholicism and watered down bloodlines -- my grandmother is one of but a few Chamoru families who still have their original names. After relinquishing all their Pacific possessions to America at the conclusion of the Spanish-American War, the United States built schools and hospitals, and while the young nation was still coming to understand what being a global power was, America did treat us with dignity and trust, unlike the Spanish who had dubbed us an "Island of Thieves", going about burning homes and killing natives for sport.

During World War II, Guam was attacked and invaded by the Japanese armed forces shortly after December 8, 1941. Most U.S. military personnel evacuated prior to the invasion. The Japanese military occupation lasted from 1941 to 1944 and was a brutal experience for the Chamorro people, whose loyalty to the United States became a point of contention with the Japanese. Some American servicemen were still on the island and were hidden by the Chamorro people. Now when I say "point of contention", I mean murderous revenge, make no mistake about how evil and callous the Japanese were. They tried to exterminate Chamorus as though we were rodents. Those who were not beheaded or shot on sight were forced into labor washing clothes for Japense soldiers, or sex slaves, etc. Again it was America who came to our rescue. We truly have no rights or liberty that is guaranteed to us. It's America who provides us that guarantee. Guam is a promontory in the Pacific. There is little economic value to Guam aside from those military, and its deep water port. We are far too small to sustain any agricultural industry for export let alone to feed our own people. Everything we count on for our survival, down the the last can of Spam is imported into Guam. Frequent Typhoons assure that anything we plant will be uprooted, and most of our infrastructure is blown down on a regular basis. We have FEMA to thank mostly for being there helping us rebuild every single time mother nature knocks us down. US policies on the island have little to do with economic development, because if Guam wants to be able to go around making agreements with foreign powers for use of a port which hosts American warships, it is rather laughable to think we could sell rights to Russia or perhaps China to dock their own warships or spy-ships in our port. Also should we seek to sell real estate to such powers, they would undoubtedly seek legal and military right to defend such property from dispute, and we don't need America's enemies taking a foothold on our island. The truth is, without Uncle Sam all we have is tourism and fishing. We're just too small. (Cont. below)

Yes a good deal of this already tiny island is appropriated for military use. Their placement dates back to WW2 and has nothing to do with prime real estate, but stratgeic reasons. The north is a plateau which is essential for the Airforce base, and the Harbor is shared and mostly maintained by the US where they tend submarines, and employ local people. There used to be a large Naval Air station which was closed down and the entire base, and its housing, and structures were given to the local people, which the local government has largely mis-used. How long will these bases be there? Can we realistically place such a constraint in a world for which we do not know when and how often we shall once again be attacked, our people murdered and their homes burned? Children born during times of peace have little or no appreciation for the grim times that did befall our fathers and grandfathers. The people of Guam should be consulted in matters which do affect them, I completely agree. I am one of the first to champion our right to self determination, its just that we must understand the role of Guam in the world which we now live in.

This talk of disproportionate numbers of Chamorus in prison is sensationalism at best, and illness relates only to the Government of Guam being unable to fiscally provide for their well-being and not to any punitive action by the United States. Chamorus in prison are not political prisioners, but of every day felonies much as you see in any other city in America. Most other races are either deported or transfered off island to serve time in off-island prisions closer to their home states.

I would say that I do disagree strongly the the Compact-Impact Agreement the US made on our behalf, though I can understand why they felt they needed to do it. Under this agreement, The US gives out about US$30 million each year to Guam, Hawaii, the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa, to help offset the costs associated with migration from the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia and Palau. I'm not a big fan of uncontrolled immigration, but it seems to me America is faced with the same issue over Mexican border hoppers as well. It seems everyone wants to live on American soil.

I do no think that Guam shares the same core relationship as we did with the Spanish and Japanese because America never came upon the island with the intent to colonize, pacify or subjugate. They came as friends, in a very hostile world, and asked only for us to be partners against the forces of Darkness. I think when we start to believe we're safe and we dont need the US anymore and that we think that they can go and leave us alone, we are deluding ourselves into thinking that the world is safer than is really is without the US proping us up. I think that its time that they did recognize us as outstanding citizens of their great republic, and gave us a chance to participate in their system of government completely. But the only way to do that is to keep them talking about it, and as Ben Franklin himself said in the crafting of the American Constitution:

"When a broad table is to be made, and the edges of planks do not fit, the artist takes a little from BOTH, and makes a good joint. In like manner here, both sides must part with some of their demands."

I think the critical question here is not whether the people of Guam need ever consider complete independance from the US, but how long we must fight to be granted equal representation in the House, even if it is only a token of their appreciation. America MUST understand that it is a very important token for a people who truly see themselves as Americans. That is something that Washington should not squander or fail to capitalize on.

Prometheus – Thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response. Interesting points across the board, and I understand and agree with your perspective in most cases. It sounds like you took issue with my interpretation of the U.S. presence on the island as it relates to past occupations, but we agree that the people of Guam need a greater degree of self-determination than they have today. As you say, “The people of Guam should be consulted in matters which do affect them…. America MUST understand that [meaningful representation in the U.S. government] is a very important token for a people who truly see themselves as Americans.”

So there doesn’t appear to be much disagreement between you, the film-makers, and those interviewed in the film – at least on the substantive level. It sounds like you took issue with the tone of this piece more than the specific claims, and I think this raises some philosophical distinctions

Your worldview appears to (rightly) be shaped by past events, and I think vigilance in defending freedom is important. But I take exception with your characterization of those who strongly criticize American policy, including the people involved in this video, as America’s “enemies.” I’d call them critics.

You describe WWII-era Japan as “evil and callous,” and America and Guam as “partners against the forces of Darkness.” To brand entire nations filled with millions of individual human beings as “evil,” and to imply that America’s over 300 million citizens are immune from such evil, is an unsupported and dangerous generalization.

See the My Lai Massacre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_massacre, the 1973 C.I.A.-backed military coup in Chile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_FUBELT, and the current Iraq war for evidence of the capacity of Americans for evil, terrible decision-making, and deception. These are only a couple examples; there are many, many more.

While I agree, once again, that America has been probably the most benevolent superpower/empire in world history, this relative position should not shield us from criticism. There are surely some people out there who wish to see America wiped off the map, but I think her critics are, for the most part, well-intentioned individuals who see true freedom and justice as an ongoing journey, not a destination we’ve already reached.

Ultimately, it is the critics who will push America to achieve its full potential as a champion of individual rights and peace. You have yourself shown to be a critic of American policy, at least in the case of Guam, but your criticism is also embedded with a deep respect and appreciation for America’s role in the world. This is an important perspective.

Have you thought about making your own short documentary to articulate your view of events in Guam? I’m sure it would find quite a few viewers on this site and others, and inspire a more balanced debate.

Very intresting topic;
I agree that we are still colonial subjects of the United States; All these concerns of American Citizenship, voting in Presidential Elections, and having a voice in the US Congress can be resolved if the US Supreme Court can reverse its decision in the Dowes v. Bidwell 1901;
107 years ago - racism existed in the United States court system - anybody not white was subject to scrutiny; our court system has changed and evolved in a century - maybe if we challenged the decision 1901 something may change;

bastaraki

Please read the following information:

Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court decided whether United States territories were subject to the provisions and protections of the United States Constitution. This question is sometimes stated as "does the Constitution follow the flag?". The resulting decision narrowly held that the U.S. Constitution did not necessarily apply to territories. Instead, the United States Congress had jurisdiction to create law within territories in certain circumstances, particularly dealing with revenue, that would not be allowed by the U.S. Constitution for proper states within the union. It has become known as one of the "Insular Cases".

The U.S. Supreme Court decided, in a five to four decision, that newly annexed territories were not properly part of the United States for purposes of the U.S. Constitution in the matter of revenues, administrative matter, and the like. However, the court was careful to note that the Constitutional guarantees of a citizen's rights of liberty and property were applicable to all: such guarantees "... cannot be under any circumstances transcended ..." said Justice Edward Douglass White in his concurring opinion. Territories were only due the full protections of the Constitution when the U.S. Congress had incorporated them as an "integral part" of the United States.

The dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan held that the U.S. Congress was always bound to enact laws within the jurisdiction of the Constitution. In it, he said, "This nation is under the control of a written constitution, the supreme law of the land and the only source of the powers which our government, or any branch or officer of it, may exert at any time or at any place." He held that the Congress had no existence, and therefore had no authority, outside of the U.S. Constitution.

[edit] Consequences
The idea of territorial incorporation is generally agreed to have arisen from Justice White's concurring decision noted above. Note that incorporation in this case does not refer to the legal process whereby a company takes on certain of the characteristics of a person (for which, see incorporation). The concept of territorial incorporation is that the United States can be proprietor of a territory without having actually incorporated the territory into the United States. These unincorporated territories are not due the full benefits of the U.S. Constitution, as noted from Justice White's decision above.

This idea has been used in court cases ever since in affirming that the citizens of certain territories can be subject to laws and regulations that are not Constitutionally applicable to other citizens of the United States. Many citizens of territories that have been designated unincorporated have seen the principle of territorial incorporation as a form of oppression (see, for example, Román, Ediberto, "The Alien-Citizen Paradox and Other Consequences of U.S. Colonialism", Florida State University Law Review, 1998).

According to the UN Guam is considered to be a US colony. A colony not in traditional view like the brutal imperialism of the Dutch, Spanish, Japanese, or other industrialized nations but the island and its people suffer under neocolonialism which is the economic and political policies by which a great power indirectly maintains or extends its influence over other areas or people. And believe me a lot of scholars know and research such topics. If you look at some of the effects of said neocolonialism you will see a loss of traditional culture such as language, values, and beliefs which to me leaves me feeling lost and disillusioned with "US Culture." Denying the right to vote (for politicians who directly affect our sovereignty) to the people of Guam is disenfranchising a whole population that has dedicated itself to the US and it's interests. That is why "Suffering without suffrage" is a very great insight into one dynamic of Guam's complex status and situation.

I wish that someone can stand up and be a voice for this country in America.

Guam should be a state. It would probably fix the economy in Guam. The thing is, other countries will look at Guam as a target. i.e. Terrorist, North Koreans, Iranians.