Talk:Fijian Polynesia

This is QSS, although the exact form of Fijian Polynesia is not QSS as far as I understand. It may be not a unified entity but rather an umbrella term for a collection of entities (colonies of Fiji), such as "Channel Islands" which includes both Jersey and Guersney for example. Abdul-aziz 11:17, 5 March 2008 (PST)

I've read some of Joe's old Conculture posts on the topic. They said differing things, but I know one of them says, "They have autonomy, but only as a unit." In my news updates on Tokelau I've used that as a model. Indeed, it was Tokelau's entire reason for wanting to secede-- with its small population, Tokelau was under-represented in the FP assembly. [EDIT] I remember using French Polynesia *here* as a model, in particular for News/20071114. Benkarnell 12:33, 6 March 2008 (PST)

Fiji versus Aotearoa

I've seen that Fijian Polynesia is sharing some territories with Aotearoa. The Cook Islands, Samoa and Niue have their own articles listing them as aotearoan dependencies while they are also listed as fijian in Fijian Polynesia article. Honestly after reading the history of both Fiji and Aotearoa it seems to me that Fiji is a better candidate to hold those islands due to its past expansionism across the Pacific.

Below some sugestions for flags from Kuke, Samoa and Niue. I took the nice aotearoan flags basic idea and made them yellow ensigns as Tokelau's flag. Just mere sugestions for the case these islands are taken from Aotearoa.

• 

  Kuke

• 

  Niue

• 

  Samoa

--Pedromoderno 15:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Oo, the status of Western and Central Polynesia is so convoluted that I had sort of hoped the topic would never come up! I'll do some digging, so expect a long comment.

OK, the earliest material I can find on Conculture regarding the region is Post 4427, from Marc in 2001. He proposed a "Pacific Island Province" of Australia consisting of most of the islands in question; actually, most of the Pacific Ocean. This seems to have been discarded over a year later in Post 5827, when Marc revised the basic plan for Australasia, giving up most of the Pacific.

Hmm... Fijian Polynesia itself came from Joe, who wrote the skeletal outline of the Pacific currently archived at Australasia and the Pacific. The earliest Post was 11898. He said: "The Phoenix Islands, Tokelau, Samoa, Tonga, Niue, and the Cook Islands are all dependencies of Fiji. However, they have a great degree of Autonomy, but only as a unit." That's the framework I've been using in my year's worth of news from Tokelau, and indeed, it's the whole basis for the secession: the Tokelauans wanted Autonomy, but Fiji wasn't willing to agree to a restructuring of Fijian Polynesia in order to do that.

Fijian Polynesia got its name in this post: 11972, although it seems to be non-QSS and only a suggestion. Wayne responded in 11992 that FP was "likely a group of dependent kingdoms/principalities." This has been suggested from time to time, but I've sort of gone with the idea of a single unitary dependency.

Then, in the Wiki and on his Australasia website, Marc put Tokelau, Niue, Kuke, and Samoa in the Aotearoan sphere. A year ago he pointed out the discrepancy in Post 28186. Augustinias replied (28192) with the history of Fiji, including the Brooke family rule, that this article is based on.

It finally came up again during my ill-advised attempt to get some colonies for Germany, when it was pointed out that many of the islands were claimed by Fiji, Aotearoa, and in some cases Kiripati (22848). In Posts 28856, 28891 and 28890 I suggested that Fiji gets Tokelau, the Cooks, western Samoa, and the Phoenix Islands; while Aotearoa gets Niue and eastern Samoa (Pago Pago). Then I started the Tokelau news cycle (28892) and we forgot about the whole issue.

In a short e-mail exchange, Marc and I discussed the possibility of Aotearoa having dependancies elsewhere in the Pacific, including, for example, Rapa Iti, a remote islant south of Tahiti.

Here's what I think:

• It's QSS that Fiji has a large dependency in the Pacific.
• It is proposed, not QSS, that the island groups are not self-governing. However, the fact that Tokelau had no self-government is QSS. Perhaps it was grouped as part of Samoa. I would expect these flags not to exist if Fijian Polynesia is a unitary state, but rather a single flag for the whole thing. The Cook Islands flag might work for that.
• It is QSS that Aotearoa has dependant islands somewhere, and that those dependencies are linked by agreements among the kings and chiefs, not institutional integration.
• Neither the dependencies of Fiji nor Aotearoa are Commonwealth members.
• Both you and Marc have designed some really great flags.

Phew! Benkarnell 18:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conculture/message/11972

OK, the Cooks' flag could be the one in use along the whole Fijian Polynesia. On the other hand the flag made for aotearoan Samoa could be for the eastern Samoa archipelago if it remains as a dependency from Aotearoa.

About the dependencies from Aotearoa I sugest they could be many of the nearer islands such as the Chatham Islands (which could be named *there* just with its native name: Warekauri), the Kermadec Islands, Norfolk Island (which could be known *there* by its norfuk creole language as Norfuk Ailen) and Lord Howe Island. About Rapa Iti island, it could be called by its old name, Otaro, just to make things different from *here*.--Pedromoderno 14:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Hm, now that I looked closer, the Kuke flag has 15 stars for its 15 islands, not just a bunch of stars that could represent anything. I think Marc and others should weigh in, since this is something that's been uncertain for a while. Benkarnell 17:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)