So in Sunday’s NY Times there is a story about a controversy brewing in post-9/11 Hawaii. It seems that as a gesture of respect, sympathy and solidarity the the organization that manages Iolani Palace flew the American flag over their “historic state building” (quote from the piece) for 30 days beginning in late September. Normally they fly a replica of the old Hawaiian kingdom’s flag. Apparently a number of Hawiian nativists took offense.
Now, I don’t really want to get into the flag issue. I want to discuss the concept of a Hawaii nationalist movement, which, I must confess, was news to me. How big is this movement and what’s their beef with belonging to the USA?
Well, my guess is that they believe that the US overthrew their government at the behest of some plantation owners and made Hawaii a territory of the US. Then they think that led to statehood eventually. The native Hawaiians would like their independence back.
Wow, the Australian Aborigines have been trying to get an apology for the Stolen Generation for years, from the Australian Government, without success.
So, is anyone in the US Federal Government taking this seriously?
It doesn’t sound like Hawaii is going to be joining the U.N. anytime soon, though I have heard that native Hawaiians tend to be contemptuous of outsiders.
I was under the impression that Japan, having failed to invade Hawai in the 40s, transformed itself into Japan Inc. and successfully bought Hawai bit by bit in the 80s.
Japan more than likely divested itself of a large part of the hawaiian real estate by now. They aren’t doing too well as of late, but hopefully things are turning around there. As a side note, I think the Brits are the largest landowners in the U.S., but…
I served in Hawaii for three years in the service, and the nationalist movement, near as I can tell, consists of a motley crew of rag tag surplus tents and the homeless on the public beaches (the beaches aren’t privately owned there, or weren’t) rendering late night walks on the beach in many areas somewhat of an iffy proposition.
So what are alternatives for Hawaii today - an independant nation or would they be made part of some other country in shoprt order? I know for the U.S. there is the strategic value (Naval base), but other than that I think the relationship is probably in Hawaii’s favor - protection from agressors and economic relationships.
What would Hawaii do for defence as an independant nation? Or maybe they simply would not be in any danger.
The nationalist movement has been underway for some time and gaining some momentum (the last 10-15 years). IIRC, many of the native Hawai’ians want autonomous rule of native lands a la Native Americans but still remain a state. As with the NA’s, native Hawai’ians have a high poverty rate, high unemployment, high alcoholism, etc. They lay the blame squarely on the haole (whitey), although during the Japanese boom of the 80’s, they got a lot of grief too, for buying a lot of prime real estate. There is a more radical faction that wants the US to revoke Hawai’i’s statehood, and get the frick off the island, we’ll take over from here, thank you very much. This is based on the perception that the Queen was illegally deposed and the islands stolen to benefit the white merchants. (Hmmm, where have we heard that before…)
There aren’t very many native Hawaiians left, so some of the ideas put forth aren’t very practical. If you listen to what happened in the history of Hawaii, it becomes obvious that they were treated as bad or worse than native Americans were treated. Part of their beef surely is that they want us to know their history and stop being so ignorant about it. It seems to me that the OP is an indication that we have a long way to go, just on that matter.
I gotta ask, why do people with legitimate greivances so damn often sabotage themselves by advocating crackpot theories that are secondary to their main point?
Prof. Trask seemed to be doing fine and dandy, if a bit extreme, until she claimed that native Hawaiians had been there forever, and fossil, etc., evidence that humans originated in Africa was a “Haole view of the world.” What a way to insult your entire race! “We Hawaiians don’t give a damn about truth and facts. Those are Haole concepts.”
I wish I knew how to directly link to bills, but I don’t. You can go to http://www.congress.gov and plug in these bill numbers to see the full text.
H.R. 617: To express the policy of the United States regarding the United States relationship with Native Hawaiians, to provide a process for the reorganization of a Native Hawaiian government… (Reported in the House)
Here’s the kicker:
Other Hawaiian autonomy bills are S.746 and S.81.
Those of us in Indian Affairs pricked up their ears at the use of the term “government-to-government.” This is the identical term now used to describe the unique autonomy of American Indian tribes.
This bill (and several similar versions of it out this year) would essentially grant a native Hawaiian government the same status as that of Indian tribes. They would no longer be beholden to the state government of Hawaii, but would instead deal directly with the feds, somewhat as if they were a miniature state.
It’s a giant leap in status for them, but for those who choose to be part of a native Hawaiian government it should also be known that it also has serious disadvantages as well. Their greatest enemy will very quickly become the State of Hawaii, and they’ll have to bust their asses to avoid being relegated to a merely ceremonial status by the buisness lobbies and the National Governor’s Association. From the moment any Hawaiian autonomy law is passed, the state will be hard at work trying to minimize native Hawaiian sovereignty while also profiting from the lack of necessity to provide them with state-run services any longer.
Personally, I hope they get it. It is well established that native peoples in America are accorded a special right of self-governance. In addition to the 150 laws mentioned above that work for native Hawaiians, there are literally thousands of them which exclude them from this special status, for no better reason than that of heartless pragmatism. It won’t be easy, or pretty, but the right to govern ones own affairs is also a matter of pride that I suspect many native Hawaiians still have. We as Americans would do well to encourage it.
Ha! Don’t you know anything!?!?! It is CANADA that ownes more of the US than any other country, according to CAnadian Bacon.
But seriously, I remember learning maybe 7 years back or so that some Hawaiian guy had taken a dislike to the American Invasion, so he slowly began buying all the land in one of the northern islands until he got all the land in the Island, then he closed it off to all people without Hawaiian blood. This was common doctrine in my school at the time, as I remember hearing it more than once by more than one teacher. True, or False?
There is an island that houses “pure” hawaiians. It has however become a great tourist attraction for those with enough money. You can hunt and fish and go diving there. You can not however interact with the natives. These natives are according to the guide books living as closely to the way their ancestors did as they can.
The other thing that I have seen in respect to the US government relationship with the state is that the government is very close to moving in and taking over the school system, they are so far out of compliance with federal standards that this has become a very hot topic of conversation there.
The beaches are still public. There is still a section of Hawaii where any “native” can claim land and live there, if they are willing to live as their ancestors, no electricity or running water, build your own hut…
So, from what I can tell, they want the technology without the government interference. I wonder how representation without taxation would pan out?
I’ve looked at their history, of which there is little since they didn’t have a writen language until the english loaned them the alphabet, I respect their culture of which they have much, I am impressed with the Polynesian ability to cross the pacific without so much as a compass.
I don’t know what would happen if the US pulled out which is what many of the movement want to happen.
I am glad that I had the opportunity to spend time there, it is a beautiful place with warm gentle breezes. I’m glad that we are done, after six months I saw all that I wanted to see and after a year of the public school system I saw more than enough.
(Would you eat from a table that had been “cleaned” by a first grader? and otherwise only scrubbed twice a year?)
The beaches are incredible but I’ll take the Washington school system over the Hawaiian one any day.
Are you thinking of Ni’ihau, which is just South of Kauai?
There was an interesting Supreme Court decision a couple of years ago involving some commission where only native Hawaiians could vote. The SCOTUS disallowed that. IIRC they rejected the idea that Native Hawaiians had a similar status to Native American Indians, because the Hawaiians didn’t have treaties they could turn to.
Ni’ihau is absolutely beautiful when viewed from Kaui. I can see why they tell all of the tourists that it’s off limits. Seeing it on the horizan through the mist or even better, on a clear day really makes you want to jump in a canoe and go check it out.
I guess I just don’t have a good feel for why someone would want to be seperate from the the rest of the stew which is the melting pot.
My lineage is such that I don’t have enough purity to ask to be seperate, it would be like saying, " I don’t like my left leg, I don’t want it to be a part of me any more."
