Hawaii Statehood - August 21, 1959

It reminds me of how the United States government took over the lands of the Native Americans on the mainland. At least they got some recognition through the establishment by treaty of tribal "nations". The Hawaiians too were pushed aside and taken over by foreigners who moved in and ultimately outnumbered them. We brought disease, changed their culture, language, religion and forced out their leaders. And in the end America took away their sovereignty and made them the 50th state! Truly a dark spot on American history.

I remember studying about Hawaii in the second grade back in the 1970's. At the time textbooks never made any real mention of just how Hawaii ultimately became part of the United States.

The short-lived 49 Star Flag:

hmmmmm

I prefer to see the positive I guess.

Thanks Hawaii for inspiring the love for things tiki etc.

My family has been in Hawaii since the colonial days. They may have had a part in the move to statehood and the homogenization of Hawaii and I've tried to atone for this by studying and preserving the culture.

The Hawaii we know today is due largely to the mixing and blending of Pacific Rim races and cultures on the plantations of old Hawaii. The races were separated into different camps to discourage clashes, but this just deepened the cultural rift. When the races finally got together, watch out! Each one was desperately trying to hang on to traditions brought from the old country while simultaneously learning the cultures of the people around them. This mix would have happened sooner or later, but the plantations sped things up a bit.

The colonists brought disease and pests, but that happens any time two cultures meet. They brought imperialism, but it just replaced the local flavor of imperialism. Over time, they brought new crops, animals, medicine, schooling, and transportation. The modernized Hawaii with the rest of the world.

I would like to see the culture of Hawaii preserved and studied for future generations. Not just the culture of ancient Hawaii, but "rubbah slippah" Hawaii as well. I want people to see beyond the tourist side of the islands.

As far as statehood goes, follow the money. There are many folks who are supporting the sovereignty movement without thinking about the motives of those in charge. Those in power rarely give it up easily, and those who desire it rarely use it wisely. I don't want to see a bunch of casinos go up in the islands. We need the jobs and the income, but I'm not sure we can take much more crime.

Forgive me for going on, but this is a topic that is near and dear to my heart.

Aloha,
Yankee Air Pirate

Comparing Hawaii to the rest of Polinesia, it's held up pretty well.

Happy Isles of Oceania is a pretty good book on this topic (Paul Theroux)

The Hawaiian Islands are a group with considerable military importance. Had the US not taken them over, can you think of any dominant global forces that might have moved in? Certainly, the Japanese (and rightly so—it makes perfect sense). I'm glad it was us. Hawaii rocks (well... lavas and corals)!

Anybody, got the latest surf report for Makapu'u?

Of course we Tikiphiles might appear somewhat in denial of the crimes of our forefathers, but that IS the purpose of Tiki style, the escape from the depressing aspects of reality, ours and others. And by embellishing the positive side of a history and culture, we may be able to contribute a tiny bit to the healing of the wounds of the past. Yet that should not mean total ignorance and actual denial.

Hawaii was lucky, because it was big enough and useful enough for the Westerners. If you want to see the real horror of what happened to the the Polynesians, go back into the history of Easter Island and the Marquesas. There, slave raids and epidemics caused by the Westerners killed 10s of thousands of indigenous people, reducing the population (AND their culture!) to a pathetic heap of humanity, a shadow of what once was there.

Some difficult reading to spoil your Mai Tai :) :

On 2007-08-21 09:00, bigbrotiki wrote:
Of course we Tikiphiles might appear somewhat in denial of the crimes of our forefathers, but that IS the purpose of Tiki style, the escape from the depressing aspects of reality, ours and others. And by embellishing the positive side of a history and culture, we may be able to contribute a tiny bit to the healing of the wounds of the past. Yet that should not mean total ignorance and actual denial.

Sven, you articulated that so well. You really should write a book or something.

mzoltarp and YankeeAirPirate, I do agree with you. There are positives to keep in mind when looking at Hawai 'ian history.

I too cherish The Islands very much as I have cultural ties and family there. In my opinion, the Hawai 'ian people incurred some significant gains at the arrival of missionaries and foreign merchants. Hawai 'ians were able to receive an education and later an economy. If it were not for the help of missionaries, there would be no written language for the Hawai 'ian people. Don't get me wrong, there were losses that followed. Foreigners did bring with them their disease and germs which contributed to the decline of the Hawai 'ian population of 300k in 1778 to about 84k in the mid-1800s. It's unfortunate that such a precious land went through some unpleasant changes, but I believe the Western World would have have caught up with them eventually and they weren't going to be prepared for it. The sovereignty thing is a toss up in my family. I have mixed feelings about that.

I think it's good to preserve both the ancient and modern culture of The Islands. As in any nation, change happens and civilization should take what they've learned and make improvements for the future. Later, my kids can read up on the history as I did and formulate their own opinions.

Stimulating topic TC Ohana. I think some of us could go on and on about this one.

On 2007-08-22 05:52, hapa hawai 'i wrote:
I think some of us could go on and on about this one.

That's for sure. Most of my friends are split on this issue. My brother-in-law says that he'll vote for it as long as he gets some money. His tongue is firmly planted in his cheek, but his family has been doing well financially for a while. Hell, I'm just glad he and my sister are doing well.

I tend to look ahead more, so I'm all for making the islands work again rather than trying to get the government to fess up and hand over the keys to the kingdom. Like I said earlier, I atone for the past by preserving and studying it. But let's work for tomorrow.

Past wrong's aside. The future is bright. As framed by the brilliant men who wrote OUR constitution Hawaii enjoys sovereignty as a state but also benefits from being a part of the larger federal government. After all these years and the mixing of so many cultures (all of whom have contributed to the common good) who would have rights in an independent Hawaii anyway? Don't be bamboozeled by the promise of "easy money". Just like with Quebec in Canada it is the economic reallity of the true cost of being an independent nation that makes it look much less appealing. It is likely all about power anyway and for those of us who are just working stiffs does any of it matter in the big picture? As long as we have a place to be happy I am good with that. I agree with YAP that as long as the traditions of Hawaii (ancient and modern) are respected and preserved then we can all enjoy what a wonderful place it is.

Just my two cents, carry on drinking.

Speaking of sovereignty and maintaining Hawaiian culture, the island of Kaho`olawe was recently returned to the State of Hawaii by the Federal government. I understand the U.S. military once used this island as a practice bombing range during World War II. It's been unoccupied ever since due to unexploded ordinance. Apparently, the State of Hawaii is planning to bring the island back to life and make it a cultural park by removing the ordinance and reforesting. Sounds like an interesting project. Does anyone here know any more details about this?

I debated with myself whether to even respond to this thread, since I'm "over" the whole sovereignty thing, and I come from a background of having been a heavy supporter and active on this issue. It's easy to paint things as the "evil" Westerners vs. poor innocent "indigenous people" Not doubt, all sorts of injustices occured (as they have throughout all history)and we Americans have benefited and many natives have suffered. But as others have pointed out, it's not so simple. Plus, at some point, I'm sorry, but I'm through taking responsibility for something I didn't do. If you want something fixed YOU need to fix it...that's just the way the world works.
I've been hearing twenty different Hawaiian groups claiming to be the "legitimate" Hawaiian government argue amongst themselves for the past 30 years about what they want. There is great division amongst the native Hawaiian people on many issues concerning them and there doesn't seem to be any consensus. I was very excited over the Akaka Bill FINALLY getting this far, think it was EXACTLY what people have been asking for for 30 years..a bill to set in motion federal recognition and begin the development of some governing body yet to be determined. But, alas, the native population continues to against it for various reasons. I feel this opportunity may NEVER come again in our lifetimes and I'm am truly appalled at the native lack of support. It's very disheartening.But, for me, it's an ending...I'm "officially" over it.
Another bottom line that's an unpopular statement, but I think true. When the monarchy was overthrown, Queen Liliuokalani specifically told her people not to take up arms and fight. She felt the U.S. would reinstate her when they learned of the U.S. Navy's involvement, backing up the Hawaii "Committee of Safety.' Well, that was a big mistake. When you want your country, your rights..you fight and die for them. I don't hear about any Hawaiians willing to actually fight and die for their sovereignty....they can't even agree on a good bill.
Hawaiians were absolutely screwed over, as many peoples have been...Hawaii was too important of a location in an imperialistic world and if it hadn't been the U.S., it would have been U.K. or Japan. They both had interests. Hawaii's monarchy (notably King Kalakaua) put Hawaii in a dangerous position financially by wiping out the sandalwood altogether, building up an incredible national debt and eventually lead to U.S. financial/military interests predominating. He did great things for the culture, but very bad for the nation politically. And total he is heralded as a hero. He was a bit of an imperialist himself, wanting to unite several nations as a "South Sea Kingdom". which did not happen.
Obviously, it's up to the Hawaiians of today as far as any sovereignty movement goes and the way things have gone, I'm not holding my breath anymore or attending any more support marches, etc., etc. If it's to be, it's up to you.

I've always had a very hard time with the idea that somehow native cultures are superior to modern, homogenized cultures and that the present generation should atone for crimes of the past. From what little I know about the ancient Hawaiian culture, it was not paradise as some would have us believe. If looked at by today’s standards we would consider it a brutal theocracy. Absolute power was concentrated in the hands of a few and justice, if you can call it that, was often unfairly bloody. Many people only concentrate on the artistic elements of cultures without looking at the whole structure of the societies. Yes, much was lost with westernization, but I think more was gained. It is sad that things like disease came with foreigners, but how could that have been prevented in that time in history? Devastating diseases were a fact of life for the entire world. There was no way that contact with any visitors, East or West, could have been stopped. Even the native peoples of the first outside contact were eager to gain the technology and goods that were available to them. Yes, oppression, marginalization, and poverty came with outside contact, but that is changing as we speak. Even since statehood our country has made terrific gains in recognizing the rights of all peoples and that inequity is something that hurts everyone.

Sovereignty would do nothing to change present day Hawaii except stoke the fires of racism. The unspoken element in the discussion is the belief that having true Hawaiian blood should make one superior in the decisions about the islands destiny. This belief seems silly on many levels, not the least of which is the fact that there are only a handful of people who can claim a full Hawaiian pedigree. Most people who claim to be ‘real’ Hawaiians have a mixture of many nationalities and races in their family tree. I can trace my family tree back to Jamestown, but I’ll never be considered a Native American. How long is it supposed to take to become a native? It can even be argued that ancient Hawaiians are not really an ancient people. The migration of Polynesians to Hawaii took place between 300AD and 600AD. That is certainly within the time frame of recorded history, not ancient history. Should pre-Roman Anglos consider themselves more native than the present day English because of the mixing of people after the Viking conquests? We all came from somewhere else. We all can claim some sort of oppression in our past. Just ask the anthropologists who believe there was a ‘menehune’ race that was wiped out with the Polynesian migration.

I do believe in a people’s right to control their destiny and if Hawaii decides to become sovereign, they should be able to do that. But everyone, not just those that claim a certain blood line, should be a part of that process. I don’t believe we, meaning all of us, should feel guilty for the past. It’s what we do today that matters.

The world is getting smaller as we speak. There is no reason, nor any way, to turn back the clock of time. We are here, now. We should be working to make our future, as one people, the best it can be.

On 2007-08-22 12:09, Tikinaut wrote:
Speaking of sovereignty and maintaining Hawaiian culture, the island of Kaho`olawe was recently returned to the State of Hawaii by the Federal government. I understand the U.S. military once used this island as a practice bombing range during World War II. It's been unoccupied ever since due to unexploded ordinance. Apparently, the State of Hawaii is planning to bring the island back to life and make it a cultural park by removing the ordinance and reforesting. Sounds like an interesting project. Does anyone here know any more details about this?

http://www.kahoolawe.org/

http://www.sacredland.org/historical_sites_pages/kahoolawe.html

"...

Current Situation
...

Despite the government-funded clean-up and the legal return of the island, there are many environmental problems on the island.
Hawaiians must now work on revegetation and erosion control. The island has lost much of its topsoil in the last two centuries, from both ranching and military activities.
The destruction of forests on Haleakala (on Maui) has eliminated the cloud cover that used to stretch out to Kaho’olawe, making the island very dry.
The Navy’s activities also poisoned what little water exists underground with explosives and fuels and broke the capstone of the island’s water supply with a simulated A-bomb blast.
It is up to the Hawaiian people to revegetate the island and heal the soil, which in turn will bring rain to refill the aquifers.
...

And while the return of the island marks a major victory for government recognition of sacred land, the military has turned its attention to other islands.
The U.S. Army is now conducting bombing and live artillery exercises at Pohakuloa on Hawai’i island and in the Makua Valley on O’ahu and it continues to expand, leaving behind spent lands and occupying new sites.
A 1997 report said the army needs an additional 79,000 acres of training land.
There are plans to bring a Stryker Brigade onto the big island—a team of 300 urban assault vehicles which would occupy the same amount of land as the entire island of Kaho’olawe.
These occupations destroy fragile ecosystems, habitats for endangered species, and lands of spiritual and cultural significance.
As long as the Hawaiian islands remain a strategic location for the US military, these lands will not be safe and the dream of a sovereign Hawai’i remains remote.
Even if these lands were vacated, some argue that they are forever lost to Hawaiians because the buried explosives and toxics left behind make the land uninhabitable.
Hawaiian sacred sites are also impacted by the construction of telescopes on Mauna Kea and Haleakala mountains..."

[ Edited by: icebaer69 2007-08-22 17:14 ]