Holding the State of Hawaii Department of Education accountable for propagating the lie that Hawaiian language was banned.


by Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.

SUMMARY

The State of Hawaii Department of Education must be held accountable for propagating the lie that Hawaiian language was banned. Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Director of Hawaiian Studies, is responsible for a two-page webpage entitled "History of Hawaiian Education" which prominently proclaims the lie in three places, and which is cited as authority by news media when they repeat the lie and refuse to correct their publication of it. Thousands of children in the Hawaii Public Schools are undoubtedly being taught this racially inflammatory lie in the Hawaiian Studies curriculum that is compulsory in all grades K-12. A lengthy email was sent to Ms. Sang in mid-February 2016, with cc to her immediate supervisor Superintendent of Schools Kathryn Matayoshi, filled with proof that the statements are false. The email explained the importance of correcting the falsehoods. But Ms. Sang stonewalled, replying only "The Department appreciates your attention to the information provided on our website. We will review the website and make changes as deemed necessary." Later she never indicated that any progress was being made, despite a request for a progress report that was sent by email to her with cc to Superintendent Matayoshi. Meanwhile, in mid-March 2016, Director Sang engineered a resolution in the state legislature authorizing an expansion of her growing Hawaiian Studies empire; and the first "whereas" clause is the assertion that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools after the overthrow of the monarchy. Text of the resolution is provided along with Conklin's testimony in opposition. An email was then sent directly to Superintendent Matayoshi providing all the proof of falsity previously sent to Director Sang. On April 20 a letter was received by Ken Conklin through U.S. mail, signed by Superintendent Matayoshi on official letterhead, refusing to correct the falsehoods. On April 23, 2016 a Goebbels Award was issued jointly to Director Sang, Superintendent Matayoshi, and the Department of Education; and an email was sent to every member of the Board of Education providing a link to this webpage documenting the proof of falsehood and the steps that have been taken to hold Sang, Matayoshi, and DOE accountable; and asking the Board members to order Sang and Matayoshi to make appropriate corrections to the webpage and to the school curriculum. If there is any further activity on this matter, then this webpage will be promptly updated.

=================

INTRODUCTION

This webpage provides documented evidence of a single but very important example of the assertion of the falsehood that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools of Hawaii following the overthrow of the monarchy and continuing for many decades until recently.

Four factors make this particular example stand out above numerous other assertions of the same falsehood: (1) The assertion that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools is repeated prominently in three places in an official webpage of the State of Hawaii Department of Education, where the lie grabs attention because the entire webpage would be only two pages long if printed on paper; and (2) The largest circulation newspaper in Hawaii published the falsehood in the first sentence of a news report, and an editor refused to issue a correction despite detailed evidence that the assertion is false; and (3) The normally objective reporter whose news story included the falsehood in its first sentence replied to Ken Conklin's complaint (and probably replied to the editor's inquiry) by citing the Department of Education webpage as his source of authority (as though that webpage could somehow refute the irrefutable proof provided to the reporter by Ken Conklin); and (4) When Ken Conklin tracked down the Department of Education webpage which the reporter (and editor) had understandably relied upon, the Director of Hawaiian Studies at the Department of Education briefly acknowledged receiving Ken Conklin's complaint and evidence, but has otherwise refused to be accountable or to make corrections; and (5) Nearly 2 months after contacting the Director of Hawaiian Studies and the Superintendent of Schools, a reply from the Superintendent was received which said the webpage will not be corrected because "the information provided on our website is accurate and generally accepted in public policy and scholarship." (in other words, the lie has been repeated so often by so many in the Hawaiian grievance industry that we are going to continue teaching it to the kids and allowing news media to cite our website as authority for it). A Goebbels Award was issued jointly to Director of Hawaiian Studies Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Superintendent Kathryn Matayoshi, and the Hawaii Department of Education (see link in item #10 below), and was then sent to all current members of the Board of Education.

The Director of Hawaiian Studies, Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, is the daughter of a longtime Hawaiian sovereignty activist, the late Tony Sang who served both as President of the Waimanalo Hawaiian Homes Association and also President of the State Council of Hawaiian Homestead Associations. Thus it seems likely that Dawn Kau'ilani Sang has been politicizing the Hawaiian Studies empire within the state Department of Education, diverting it from its intended benevolent mission of teaching children about Hawaii's history and the beautiful native Hawaiian culture. The Hawaiian Studies component of the school curriculum is now a propaganda factory pushing a twisted view of Hawaii's history, softening up the minds of the general population to make them more amenable to creation of a Hawaiian tribe, and stirring up racial resentment among ethnic Hawaiians over false historical grievances like the alleged banning of Hawaiian language.

The Department of Education is by far the largest department in the state government, whose budget is about one-fourth of the entire state budget from general funds (i.e., taxpayer dollars). That's because there are no local school boards. Schools are funded from state income tax, not from local property taxes. All the public schools in the state are directly under the control of this department which hires all the public school teachers and staff, sets the curriculum, calendar, and graduation requirements, etc. So there is no local school board holding local schools accountable; there's only a state school board appointed by the Governor, meaning the Department of Education is a huge bureaucracy and it's very hard for citizens to get information or influence decisions about curriculum.

The Department of Education has a "Hawaiian Studies" program recently elevated to a top priority, whose Director, from a family of Hawaiian sovereignty activists, now has nobody supervising her except the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent. Thus it is nearly impossible to hold the Hawaiian Studies program accountable when it performs as a propaganda factory providing curriculum which teachers are forced to teach and thereby brainwashing Hawaii's children with false information about Hawaii's history -- falsehoods whose only purpose is to inflame racial hostility over an alleged historical grievance which never actually happened. The brainwashing of Hawaii's students with a twisted view of Hawaiian history focused on racial grievance is shown in a detailed book review of the most widely-used officially approved textbook for the course "Modern History of Hawaii" -- a one-semester course required for graduation in every public high school in the State of Hawaii. See "History of modern Hawaii as taught in Hawaii schools" at
http://www.angelfire.com/big09/HawnHistPublicSchools.html

The Hawaii Department of Education webpage entitled "History of Hawaiian education" as found from February 19 to at least March 14, 2016 on the DOE website is/was at

http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/TeachingAndLearning/StudentLearning/HawaiianEducation/Pages/History-of-the-Hawaiian-Education-program.aspx

and has been preserved on March 14 by Ken Conklin for future reference and for shaming of the Hawaiian Studies program and the Department of Education, on Conklin's website at

http://big09.angelfire.com/DOEWebpgHistHawnEdMarch2016.pdf

Although this present webpage is devoted to a single example where the falsehood alleging a Hawaiian language ban was asserted three times, two other webpages debunking the alleged banning of Hawaiian language are very important. Ken Conklin's lengthy letter of complaint regarding the DOE webpage drew heavily upon research documented in these webpages, especially the first one; and provided additional proof of specific points.

"Was Hawaiian Language Illegal? Did the Evil Haoles Suppress Hawaiian Language As A Way of Oppressing Kanaka Maoli and Destroying Their Culture?"
http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/hawlangillegal.html

"Examples of Some Angry or Bitter Published Articles Claiming That Ethnic Hawaiians Were Victimized by Having Their Language Made Illegal or Suppressed"
http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/hawlangpublvictclaims.html

See also a lengthy webpage "Hawaiian Language as a Political Weapon" with 16 detailed subpages dealing with topics such as Demanding that the names of places and streets must be Hawaiian; Demands that Hawaiian language as an "official language" of Hawaii be taken seriously by requiring that it must be used in government documents and that people must be allowed to use it when filing court documents or giving testimony before boards and commissions, or in court; Forcing the name of a person or place to be Hawaiianized through transliteration of its sound following Hawaiian grammatical rules or conceptual translation of its meaning into Hawaiian vocabulary; etc.
http://www.angelfire.com/big09/HawLangPolitWeapon.html

Repeatedly telling the lie that Hawaiian language was banned is one of the ways that the language is being used as a political weapon, just as political weapons are made from other falsehoods about Hawaiian history and falsehoods about alleged ethnic Hawaiian overrepresentation in the prison population or in victimhood data for low income and disease. Portraying ethnic Hawaiians as victims of oppression, colonization or assimilation is a way to garner public sympathy for political demands for money, land, and political power. All such falsehoods are racially divisive, stirring up resentment, anger, and sometimes violence. Repeatedly asserting them is comparable to falsely shouting "FIRE!!" in a crowded theatre.

=================

TABLE OF CONTENTS: scroll down to find each section

1. Honolulu Star-Advertiser article of Thursday February 18, 2016 whose first sentence mentioned in passing, as an established fact, that Hawaiian language was "... once banned in the public schools ..."

2. Thursday February 18 (early morning) email from Ken Conklin to newspaper reporter and editor requesting correction and providing proof of falsehood.

3. Reporter's very brief Thursday February 18 (late afternoon) reply citing the Department of Education webpage as authority.

4. Full text of detailed email from Ken Conklin to Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Department of Education Director of Hawaiian Studies on Monday morning February 22, 2016 with copies to DOE Superintendent, DOE Assistant Superintendent, newspaper editor and reporter.

5. 2-sentence acknowledgment from Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Department of Education Director of Hawaiian Studies emailed Wednesday night February 24, promising "We will review the website and make changes as deemed necessary."

6. Followup email from Ken Conklin to Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, on Monday morning March 14, 2016 with copies to DOE Superintendent, DOE Assistant Superintendent, newspaper editor and reporter. The email noted that it is 3 weeks after Ken Conklin's initial email to her, and 12 working days after her promise to "review the website and make changes as deemed necessary." The email asked to know what progress has been made, and asked for contact information for any subordinate who might have been assigned the task of reviewing the webpage and making changes.

7. On Thursday March 17 the Hawaii House committee that facilitates legislation focused on ethnic Hawaiian affairs held a hearing on a resolution engineered by DOE Director Sang that would expand her growing Hawaiian Studies empire. Other committees in both House and Senate will hold more hearings if the resolution moves forward. The resolution begins with a "whereas" clause stating as fact that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools following the overthrow of the monarchy. Full text of the resolution is provided along with Ken Conklin's testimony in opposition, and a link to the legislature's webpage tracking the resolution including files of all testimony in each committee, how each member of each committee voted, and the committee report.

8. On Monday March 28, 2016 Ken Conklin sent an email directly to Department of Education Superintendent Kathryn Matayoshi informing her that her subordinate Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Director of the Office of Hawaiian Education, who has no supervisor other than Superintendent Matayoshi, is refusing to correct the falsehoods on the Department webpage. The email asks Superintendent Matayoshi to exercise her authority and remove the falsehoods alleging that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools following the overthrow of the monarchy and that the language was not heard in the schools for four generations. The email provides the same proofs of falsity that were provided to Director Sang.

9. On Wednesday April 20, 2016 Ken Conklin received a letter from Superintendent Kathryn Matayoshi dated April 14, on official DOE letterhead, saying the webpage will not be corrected because "the information provided on our website is accurate and generally accepted in public policy and scholarship." (in other words, the lie has been repeated so often by so many in the Hawaiian grievance industry that we are going to continue teaching it to the kids and allowing news media to cite our website as authority for it).

10. Having exhausted all resources in an attempt to expunge a lie from the Department of Education website: Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Kathryn Matayoshi, and the Department of Education are jointly being given a Goebbels Award For Outstanding Use of Media for Propaganda Disguised As Fact. The award is issued on April 23, 2016 in honor of the 172nd birthday of Hawaii President Sanford B. Dole, who in 1896 signed the law which the Department of Education is lying about. The award is displayed on a webpage at
http://tinyurl.com/zm67fz7

11. The final event in holding the Department of Education accountable took place on Monday April 25, 2016 when the Goebbels Award and a link to this webpage was sent to every member of the Board of Education providing a link to this webpage documenting the proof of falsehood and the steps that have been taken to hold Sang, Matayoshi, and DOE accountable; and asking the Board members to order Sang and Matayoshi to make appropriate corrections to the webpage and to the school curriculum.

12. If there is any further activity on this matter, then this webpage will be promptly updated.

===================

1. HONOLULU STAR-ADVERTISER ARTICLE OF THURSDAY FEBRUARY 18, 2016 WHOSE FIRST SENTENCE MENTIONED IN PASSING, AS AN ESTABLISHED FACT, THAT HAWAIIAN LANGUAGE WAS "... ONCE BANNED IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS ..."
Headline and first 6 paragraphs in their entirety, to show context.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/hawaii-news/google-service-translates-hawaiian/

Google service translates Hawaiian

By Timothy Hurley

The Hawaiian language, once banned in the public schools and teetering on the edge of extinction two decades ago, is now being translated by Web giant Google.

The Internet services company announced Wednesday that Hawaiian and a dozen other languages have joined the ranks of those being translated by its online service Google Translate.

"Wow," said Lanakila Mangauil, founder and director of the Hawaiian Cultural Center of Hamakua on Hawaii island. "It's a testament to our movement and the reawakening of our people."

Despite a disappointing initial review Wednesday, Marvin Puakea Nogelmeier, University of Hawaii at Manoa Hawaiian language professor, said he is impressed by Google's willingness to embrace the language.

"I appreciate their awareness of Hawaiian as a living language," he said. "Most of the languages they added are spoken by millions."

Other languages added Wednesday were Amharic, Corsican, Frisian, Kyrgyz, Kurdish (Kurmanji), Luxembourgish, Samoan, Scots Gaelic, Shona, Sindhi, Pashto and Xhosa.

====================

2. THURSDAY FEBRUARY 18 (EARLY MORNING) EMAIL FROM KEN CONKLIN TO NEWSPAPER REPORTER AND EDITOR REQUESTING CORRECTION AND PROVIDING PROOF OF FALSEHOOD.

elynch@staradvertiser.com, thurley@staradvertiser.com

To: Ed Lynch, Department of Corrections, Honolulu Star-Advertiser
and Timothy Hurley, reporter

Aloha Gentlemen:

First, congratulations to Timothy Hurley, who has been doing excellent work producing fact-filled and well-written news reports on issues related to Hawaiian sovereignty and Hawaiian culture. What a tremendous improvement over the work of some previous reporters who focused on those areas!

There's an error of fact in the first sentence of Mr. Hurley's report on February 18 regarding the Google translate robot.

That sentence begins "The Hawaiian language, once banned in the public schools ..."

FALSE.

I'm hoping Mr. Lynch will publish a simple correction, so his part of this note is very brief; but I also want to take time to make sure Mr. Hurley understands the complex history regarding Hawaiian language and how it has been buffeted by the winds of political change in Hawaii. Because Mr. Hurley will keep running into this issue as future events unfold.

A correct opening phrase would be: The Hawaiian language, once replaced by English for many decades as the language in which all subjects must be taught in Hawaii schools, and teetering on the edge of extinction ..."

The correction is: Hawaiian language was NEVER banned in Hawaii schools, although a law was passed making English the language in which all subjects must be taught.

The situation in Hawaii was similar to the situation on the mainland where there are communities where the Spanish-speaking people, and especially the illegal immigrants, would like to use Spanish as the language of instruction but in some places (including Congress) there is a push to adopt laws requiring English to be the language of instruction. Such laws would NOT ban Spanish (or French or German etc) but would make such language courses elective subjects whereas History, Science, etc. must be taught in English.

Now for Mr. Hurley -- a lengthy explanation plus three webpages where you will find lots of analysis and footnotes proving what's true.

The truth is that Hawaiian language was NEVER banned in Hawaii government or private schools. What happened was that in 1896 the Republic of Hawaii changed the law that required all kids to attend school. They changed the definition of what a "school" is that would be eligible to be certified as meeting the requirements for being a school that would satisfy the compulsory attendance law. The new law applied to public schools and also to private schools. It said that any school (public or private) would be certified as satisfying the compulsory attendance law only if it used English as the language of instruction. That is, English must be the language used for teaching all the subjects such as science, math, history, etc. But the law explicitly stated that other languages could be taught as language courses. The phrase "Hawaiian language" was never mentioned in the law. The law was NOT directed against Hawaiian language. It was probably (my own speculation) directed against Japanese and Chinese which were being used as the language of instruction in the schools attended by the children of tens of thousands of sugar plantation workers. The purpose was to ensure that in the multicultural, multilingual society of Hawaii there would be one language which everyone would grow up knowing how to speak; and in view of the government policy of seeking annexation to the U.S., that language should be English. English was already the dominant language of business and commerce for all ethnic groups in Hawaii. And even on the street most Hawaiians were already speaking English more than Hawaiian. A scholar did the research showing that even during the Kingdom English was replacing Hawaiian in the government schools, by order of the monarchs. By 1892 (the year BEFORE the monarchy was overthrown) 95% of all the government schools were already using English as the language of instruction. The problem was the large number of Japanese and Chinese kids who were attending only plantation schools where Japanese or Chinese was the language of instruction. As you may know, there were Japanese language academies that continued throughout the 1900s, using Japanese as the language of instruction for all subjects -- even after the law mandating English was passed -- but those academies met after regular school hours and on weekends, while the kids attended regular school in English daytimes Monday through Friday. Native Hawaiian parents could have done the same thing to perpetuate Hawaiian language through evening and weekend academies using Hawaiian as the language of instruction. But they chose not to do it, because they wanted their kids to learn English; and many Hawaiian parents refused to speak Hawaiian to their kids even in the home, insisting they use English as their primary language because it was the pathway to success.

Mr. Hurley: I want you to understand that there is a very aggressive and flourishing Hawaiian grievance industry, portraying ethnic Hawaiians as having the worst statistics for all bad things, and used to justify hundreds of racial entitlement programs and demands for race-based political sovereignty. If Hawaiians can get themselves seen as poor downtrodden victims of racial oppression, then they can persuade Congress and the legislature to fork over billions of dollars in reparations and grant political power and racial fiefdoms. The claim that Hawaiian language was illegal is one of the most strongly defended lies in the arsenal of the Hawaiian grievance industry, which is why I'm making such a big deal about it.

Here are three webpages I recommend specifically focused on the language grievance:

"Was Hawaiian Language Illegal? Did the Evil Haoles Suppress Hawaiian Language As A Way of Oppressing Kanaka Maoli and Destroying Their Culture?"
At the top there's some personal history, but then, starting about 20% down the webpage, you'll find lots of quotes and references proving the main points.
http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/hawlangillegal.html

"Examples of Some Angry or Bitter Published Articles Claiming That Ethnic Hawaiians Were Victimized by Having Their Language Made Illegal or Suppressed"
The first sentence of Mr. Hurley's news report from February 18 will be added to the long list of examples when I get some time.
http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/hawlangpublvictclaims.html

"Hawaiian Language as a Political Weapon"
16 detailed subpages, enumerated in a list near the top. Item #14 might be of special interest because it focuses on the Hawaiian language weekly column in your newspaper (That column has become much less contentious recently)
http://www.angelfire.com/big09/HawLangPolitWeapon.html

Ken Conklin

Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.
46-255 Kahuhipa St. Apt. 1205
Kane'ohe, HI 96744-6083
tel/fax (808) 247-7942
e-mail Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com
Website: "Hawaiian Sovereignty: Thinking Carefully About It"
http://tinyurl.com/6gkzk
Book: "Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State"
http://tinyurl.com/2a9fqa

================

3. REPORTER'S VERY BRIEF THURSDAY FEBRUARY 18 (LATE AFTERNOON) REPLY CITING THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION WEBPAGE AS AUTHORITY.

Timothy Hurley
To Ken Conklin 2/18/16

Thanks for the kind words, Ken. I hear what you're saying but even the state Department of Education's own website describes the language as being "banned."

tim

Timothy Hurley
Reporter
Honolulu Star-Advertiser
Phone: (808) 529-4334
Cell: (808) 294-9647

================

4. FULL TEXT OF DETAILED EMAIL FROM KEN CONKLIN TO DAWN KAU'ILANI SANG, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION DIRECTOR OF HAWAIIAN STUDIES ON MONDAY MORNING FEBRUARY 22, 2016 WITH COPIES TO DOE SUPERINTENDENT, DOE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT, NEWSPAPER EDITOR AND REPORTER.

To: "Dawn Kau'i Sang, Director, Office of Hawaiian Education, Hawaii Department of Education"

CC: "Kathryn Matayoshi, Superintendent of Schools"
"Stephen Schatz, Deputy Superintendent of Schools"
"Ed Lynch, Department of Corrections, Honolulu Star-Advertiser"
"Timothy Hurley, reporter, Honolulu Star-Advertiser"

Re: Important correction to DOE webpage alleging that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools

Date: February 22, 2016

From:
Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.
46-255 Kahuhipa St. Apt. 1205
Kane'ohe, HI 96744-6083
tel/fax (808) 247-7942
e-mail Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com

Aloha Director Sang,

I know it's a Hawaiian custom when meeting someone to tell a little about one's background and perhaps to look for any prior relationship between families.

Here's an autobiographical webpage about me and my credentials:
http://www.angelfire.com/bigfiles90/ConklinBio.html

Although I have not had prior contact with you, I do recall your father because of his assertions in an environmental impact statement regarding Bellows Air Force Base in Waimanalo, where he maintained that the U.S. lacks jurisdiction in Hawaii and that the land belongs to the Native Hawaiian people collectively.

I'm writing today to urge you to correct two statements found on a "History of Hawaiian Education" webpage sponsored by the Office of Hawaiian Education, where your name and email address appear as the contact person:
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/TeachingAndLearning/StudentLearning/HawaiianEducation/Pages/History-of-the-Hawaiian-Education-program.aspx

At the top of your webpage is a 4-line introductory paragraph whose second sentence says "After the language was banned in 1896, it would not be heard in schools for four generations."

Both parts of that sentence are false. The language was NOT banned in 1896, and it WAS heard in schools from then until now continuously.

In the timeline, the year 1896 says "Hawaiian Language banned as medium of instruction in the public education system"

That sentence is technically correct, but is what we might call a half-truth. In this case more like a tenth-truth. One of the things that makes it only partly true is that (I'm sure you'll be happy to know) whatever was true about the public schools was also true about the private schools, which should not be ignored for reasons explained below. The 1896 law applied to ALL schools, public or private, throughout Hawaii. However, Hawaiian language was not singled out or mentioned at all. The law's only application was that English must be the medium of instruction in all the schools of Hawaii which wanted to be certified as meeting the compulsory attendance law; but other after-school or weekend academies were perfectly free to use any language (including Hawaiian) as the medium of instruction; and indeed the ethnic Japanese community did that bigtime although the ethnic Hawaiian community chose not to do so even though Hawaiians could have afforded it because Hawaiian plantation workers were by law paid higher wages than Japanese or Chinese workers. Furthermore, the language law specifically said that languages other than English (including Hawaiian) could be taught as language courses in the schools. And there were DOE expenditures during the territorial period for Hawaiian language dictionaries and for instruction in Hawaiian language in schools serving the Hawaiian homestead communities.

So I hope you will see that the sentence at the top of the page is false and scurrilous, while the timeline entry for 1896 tells only a very badly skewed small portion of the truth and, if left standing as written, would create a nasty feeling (which perhaps is the intention).

I became aware of that webpage because on Friday February 18 there was an article in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, about the Google Translate robot now being able to handle Hawaiian language.

The article began this way: "The Hawaiian language, once banned in the public schools ..."

That half-sentence sentence is completely false.

I wrote to the reporter who authored that February 18 article, and to the newspaper editor responsible for making corrections, providing proof of its falsity and requesting a correction. But my request for a correction was denied, and the reporter cited your webpage as his authority. That's why I'm writing to you, Director Sang, to ask you to correct not only the webpage but also to change any similar falsehoods in the Hawaiian Studies curriculum of the Hawaii public schools.

I have a detailed webpage irrefutably disproving the falsehood that Hawaiian language was banned or suppressed in society at large, or was banned in the schools
http://tinyurl.com/6zrka
And in case anyone doubts that such absurd statements continue to be made, I have a sub-page compiling numerous examples since 2003 (with my refutations) where those assertions were made in print:
http://tinyurl.com/83xmb

The two false statements on your DOE webpage, alleging that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools, will soon be added to my webpage compilation.

The reason why I devote so much effort to stopping the propagation of this falsehood is that the most significant effect it has is to stir up bitter resentment and racial hatred which are completely unwarranted by the facts surrounding the 1896 law and its implementation over the decades in the Republic, Territory, and State of Hawaii. (resentment and racial hatred like "Ooh I'm so angry, I read that those evil haoles made the Hawaiian language illegal right here in my own homeland!") I am a civil rights activist and a seeker of peace through truth; so among the things I do is to publicly debunk false statements about Hawaii's history which are used for political purposes to assert victimhood as part of demands for reparations including race-based sovereignty.

But for the remainder of this message I want to set aside politics and focus on facts, to explain exactly what's wrong with two statements on the "History of Hawaiian Education" webpage in the hope that you will delete or correct them.

Unfortunately, those two statements are extremely brief, while any corrected version of them would need to be considerably more lengthy, which would be difficult to accommodate on your webpage. So perhaps a simple deletion would be best.

Nevertheless here are some possible improvements:

Leading paragraph at the top of the webpage (proof of accuracy is provided below):

History of Hawaiian education

In 1841 the government of King Kamehameha III created the Department of Education and implemented a compulsory school attendance law. At first all schools used Hawaiian language as the medium of instruction. But as British and American interests grew larger, more government schools switched to English than Hawaiian. By 1892, under Queen Lili'uokalani, 95% of all the government schools and the Native Hawaiian children were already using English as the medium of instruction. As Asian business owners and plantation workers became a majority of the population, nearly all the private plantation schools used Japanese or Chinese. In 1896, to ensure all children would grow up having one language they could all speak, and anticipating annexation to the U.S., a law made English the language of instruction for all public and private schools that would satisfy the compulsory attendance law, although after-school and weekend ethnic academies could use whatever language they wished. There were numerous Japanese language/culture academies throughout the Territorial period, but Hawaiian language nearly died out for lack of interest. The Hawaiian renaissance of the 1970s provided the spark to re-establish Hawaiian language and culture programs in all schools, including Hawaiian culture-focus public charter schools and Hawaiian language-immersion public schools.

Timeline: [You will not like some proposed entries, but proof for them is provided below]

1841: Public education system established by King Kamehameha III including compulsory attendance law.

1860-1890: The number of government schools using English as medium of instruction gradually became larger than the number of Hawaiian-language schools, in accord with government policy and parental wishes, as British and American individuals and companies came to dominate the economy.

1892: 95% of all government schools used English as medium of instruction. Most private schools were sponsored by sugar plantations, charging tuition paid by workers, using Japanese as medium of instruction.

1893: Hawaiian monarchial system of government overthrown

1894: Republic of Hawaii replaced revolutionary Provisional Government

1896: Law adopted saying all schools, both public and private, must use English as the medium of instruction to be certified as fulfilling compulsory attendance law; but other languages (including Hawaiian) could be taught as language courses, and other languages (such as Hawaiian or Japanese) could be used as medium of instruction in after-school or weekend academies.

1898: Hawaii annexation to United States as Territory of Hawaii, implemented by Organic Act of 1900.

[remainder of timeline as you wish]

-------

OK. Here we go with the further analysis and the proof that the two statements on the DOE webpage are false and that my facts are correct.

Since I know you might not believe my facts, for the remainder of this message I'll take you step by step.

After the Department of Education was created in 1841, Hawaiian was the language of instruction in nearly all the government schools. But as the years went by, with British and American individuals and businesses becoming increasingly dominant, Hawaiian ali'i and parents of schoolkids increasingly demanded that the government schools use English as the medium of instruction. Each school owned and operated by the government of Hawaii (public schools) could use either English or Hawaiian as its medium of instruction, but by 1892 (under Queen Lili'uokalani), 95% of all the government schools were already using English as the medium of instruction, according to two separate books by scholars Reinecke and Schutz, described below. Nearly all Native Hawaiian kids attended the government schools, so nearly all Native Hawaiian kids were already using English all day long in school, several years before the 1896 law was passed. Furthermore they were also speaking English even in the home, because their parents insisted on it. So the 1896 law had almost no practical effect on the decline of Hawaiian language. Finally, today we notice that kids in the Hawaiian immersion program use Hawaiian as the language of instruction. You might say English language is banned in their classrooms. Yet they nevertheless speak English fluently. Why does that happen? Because English is the dominant language of everyday use in Hawaii. So if Hawaiian had been the dominant language in the streets and homes of Hawaii in the 1890s then the 1896 law for the schools could not have stopped them from being fluent in Hawaiian anyway. Clearly Hawaiian language was already dying of natural causes; it was not murdered by the 1896 law.

What the law actually said

Here's a quote of what the law said, in its entirety. This is not an excerpt -- it's the entire law:

1896 Laws of the Republic of Hawaii, Act 57, sec. 30: "The English Language shall be the medium and basis of instruction in all public and private schools, provided that where it is desired that another language shall be taught in addition to the English language, such instruction may be authorized by the Department, either by its rules, the curriculum of the school, or by direct order in any particular instance. Any schools that shall not conform to the provisions of this section shall not be recognized by the Department." [signed] June 8 A.D., 1896 Sanford B. Dole, President of the Republic of Hawaii.

There are three essential elements in this law.

1. Please notice: "all public AND PRIVATE schools" (that's important in understanding the purpose of the law, as I'll explain below).

2. Please notice: "where it is desired that another language shall be taught in addition to the English language, such instruction may be authorized by the Department" (that proves that the law was not intended to suppress or "BAN" any language; and on the contrary, the DOE had official permission to teach Hawaiian (or Japanese or Chinese etc) as language courses; thus Hawaiian language was NOT BANNED in the schools. Also, as you'll see proof below, by 1892, the year before the overthrow, 95% of all government schools [where nearly all native kids were attending] were already using English as medium of instruction by policy of the monarchs and requests of parents; thus, the 1896 law made very little practical difference to the natives. The 1896 law was primarily aimed at assimilating the Japanese plantation kids by forcing them to learn English in day school even though they were free to, and did in fact, attend after-school and weekend academies using Japanese as medium of instruction and focusing on Japanese culture.

3. Please notice: "Any schools that shall not conform to the provisions of this section shall not be recognized by the Department." (Why does the law talk about a school being "recognized by the Department"? Because the Department had the job of recognizing or certifying which schools satisfied the compulsory attendance law).

Furthermore, that same law was reasserted during the Territorial period and also improved to make it clear that the teaching of Hawaiian language as a course was encouraged (thus Hawaiian was heard in the schools, contrary to the opening sentence at the top of your DOE webpage).

The following information comes from The American Law Review, Volume 54 (Little, Brown, and Company, 1920), page 67, and can be found on the internet at
https://books.google.com/books?id=Jk8ZAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA67&lpg=PA67&dq=%22The+English+Language+shall+be+the+medium%22&source=bl&ots=lmXRYljWBZ&sig=ZfIfPtCaVL9eJRigxojfhrG01jw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwju0JK39YnLAhWDKWMKHTFHCcMQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22The%20English%20Language%20shall%20be%20the%20medium%22&f=false

The law as it was reaffirmed in 1915 was identical with the 1896 law and is copied in full on page 67 of the American Law Review.

"Hawaii, Rev. Laws 1915, sec. 277; Laws 1896, ch. 57, sec. 30. The English Language shall be the medium and basis of instruction in all public and private schools, provided that where it is desired that another language shall be taught in addition to the English language, such instruction may be authorized by the Department, either by its rules, the curriculum of the school, or by direct order in any particular instance. Any schools that shall not conform to the provisions of this section shall not be recognized by the Department."

The law as amended in 1919 is on that same page 67, as follows:

"Hawaii, Laws 1919, page 259, act 191, amending Rev. Laws 1915, sec. 277. The English language shall be the medium and basis of instruction in all public and private schools within the Territory, and any school where English is not the medium and basis of instruction shall not be recognized as a public or private school within the provisions of this chapter, and attendance thereat shall not be considered attendance at school in compliance with law; Provided, however, That the Hawaiian language shall be taught in addition to the English in all normal and high schools of the Territory; and that, where it is desired that another language shall be taught in addition to the English language, such instruction may be authorized by the department by direct order in any particular instance: Provided further, That instruction in such courses shall be elective."

Let me emphasize this portion of the 1919 law: "the Hawaiian language shall be taught in addition to the English in all normal and high schools of the Territory". "Normal" schools refers to schools that trained teachers, so clearly the government believed it was important for teachers to understand and speak Hawaiian because they would be dealing with children who might speak Hawaiian to them or to other children during the school day. It was accepted as a matter of course that Hawaiian would be heard and spoken in school, which is why the law required teachers to be trained to at least a moderate level of fluency in Hawaiian. And of course the law also says that Hawaiian language courses must be taught in all the high schools, even aside from the teacher-education schools.

Thus the statement at the top of your webpage is false when it says "it [Hawaiian language] would not be heard in schools for four generations." What a bitter, nasty, terrible lie that is!

Now let's look at the historical context.

Beginning in 1841 the Kingdom of Hawaii had a law requiring that all children between 4-14 years of age MUST attend school (the compulsory attendance law).
Source: Hawaiian National Bibliography 1780-1900: [the volume focusing on years] 1831-1850 By David W. Forbes, University of Hawaii Press, 1998, 599 pages

page 249:
"Title: Laws for the regulation of schools.
The act by which the Board of Education was established. The text consists of 16 numbered regulatory paragraphs, which were scheduled to take effect on January 1, 1841. This law was signed by Kamehameha III and Kekauluohi at Lahaina, October 5, 1840, but printed in Honolulu. By this law, any village having 15 or more school-age children was to be provided with a teacher, ... School attendance between the ages of four and fourteen was compulsory."

The fact that the 1896 law is part of the definition of what makes a school considered a "school" for compliance with the compulsory attendance law is clearly stated in the 1919 version of the law quoted above. "... any school where English is not the medium and basis of instruction shall not be recognized as a public or private school within the provisions of this chapter, and attendance thereat shall not be considered attendance at school in compliance with law."

It's one thing to say all kids MUST attend school. It's something else to specify what requirements any so-called "school" must meet in order to be considered a "school" for purposes of the compulsory attendance law. We continue to refine those specifications constantly. How many days of instruction in a year? How many hours per day? What subjects must be taught? How many years of each subject required for a diploma? Who can be a teacher or principal? What about homeschooling? Etc. Would it be satisfactory to say a kid is attending school if the "school" curriculum consisted of packing pineapples into cans, or if the "school" curriculum consisted of working in a taro patch and pounding poi?

Between the lines is lengthy, detailed proof of what's above:

-----------

A scholarly study of the history of language in Hawaii was done as a dissertation by John Reinecke at the University of Hawaii in 1935. The dissertation was improved and published as a book. John E. Reinecke, "Language and Dialect in Hawaii: A Sociolinguistic History to 1935." Edited by Stanley M. Tsuzaki. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1969. Reprinted 1988. Paperback edition February, 1995.

Mr. Reinecke says the shift from Hawaiian language to English began under the Kingdom and was very far along by the time the monarchy was overthrown (see Table 8, pp. 70-73). Reinecke's chart summarizes the number of schools and students operating in Hawaiian and English based on Education Department reports from 1847 to 1902. The number of students in Hawaiian language schools falls continuously through this period while the number in English-language schools rises; likewise the numbers of schools operating in the respective languages. The number of students in Hawaiian-language schools dropped below 50% in 1881 or 1882. By 1892 (the year before the overthrow), only 5.2% of students were in Hawaiian language schools and there were only 28 such schools in the Kingdom; at the same time, 94.8% of students were in the 140 English-language schools.

According to Reinecke, there were several factors accounting for this switch from Hawaiian to English as the favored language even before the overthrow.

(A) as early as the late 1840s, the Kingdom government had a policy of gradually increasing education in English because the government saw that as the more valuable language for developing the country in the long run (see factor C). They probably figured that parents could teach their children Hawaiian at home but the schools should teach English as much as possible to open up opportunities.

(B) English language schools were considered better schools by almost everyone and initially charged extra while the Hawaiian schools were free. A lawsuit was actually filed over the the extra charge for English-language schools! Naone v. Thurston 1 Haw. 220 (1856) Asa Thurston (father of revolutionary Lorrin Thurston) unsuccessfully argued that he was being discriminated against by having to pay about $5 extra to educate little Lorrin and his siblings). Later, when the government got enough tax revenue to be able to afford to stop charging extra, people of all ethnicities (including Hawaiian) rapidly shifted their children to the free English language schools. But even before the extra fee was abolished, people of all ethnicities, including native Hawaiians, were switching schools in favor of the English-language ones as soon as they could afford to pay the extra fee.

(C) Immigrants to the Kingdom, especially the Portuguese who brought their families, wanted to have their children educated in English. The Portuguese had no cultural reasons to prefer one language foreign to themselves (English) over another language foreign to themselves (Hawaiian); but all the practical reasons favored learning English rather than Hawaiian. English was already the language of business in Hawaii and certainly of the international business in the Pacific at that time. English was increasingly the language of government, even before Annexation. English (at least pidgin English) was the lingua franca that allowed immigrant Chinese, Japanese, Portuguese, Filipinos (who started coming in 1906), etc. to communicate with each other; so the better their children learned English the more opportunities they would have. There may be a few immigrant families who chose Hawaiian as the language for their children's assimilation -- I know of one case where a Japanese man married a Portuguese woman, started a rice farm, and the entire family spoke Hawaiian as their primary language in their home in Wai'alua, O'ahu. But "the exception proves the rule": most immigrant families chose English as their language of assimilation to Hawaii, because English was clearly becoming the language for economic and social advancement.

(D) Reinecke also stresses another factor in the shift from Hawaiian to English: intermarriage between Hawaiians and others. The hapa (mixed-race) Hawaiian children picked up English rather than learning either or both of their parents' original languages fluently. Reinecke cites statistics showing that, at any given time, hapa-Hawaiians were more fluent in English and relatively less fluent in Hawaiian than "pure" Hawaiians. One explanation might be that at any given time the median age of hapa people is lower than the median age of "pure" anything because intermarriages have become steadily more common, leading to a growing number of hapa children in each new generation. Since the overall trend is towards English, English fluency is positively correlated with youth.

Sovereignty activists who don't know John Reinecke's background might routinely try to discredit his findings by accusing him of being a running dog of the haole capitalist imperialists -- the activists like to attack opposing scholars this way. But Reinecke was an activist in the union movement in Hawaii, accused of being a Communist in the late 40s and early 50s. He was a school teacher for decades and active in Democratic party politics. His wife, a Nisei (second-generation Japanese), was also active in political life, and was a highly respected schoolteacher. Mr. Reinecke's approach is scholarly and he seems to have been trying to show that public education was used intentionally to level out the economic and ethnic hierarchy of plantation-era Hawaii. For example, he spends considerable effort looking at the ways the varieties of pidgin and standard English were used as social class markers. If everyone were to grow up speaking good English, such markers would vanish and it would be harder to discriminate against people of lower ethnic or social class by immediately recognizing their dialect.

Another book confirms that the transition from Hawaiian to English as the medium of instruction was well underway voluntarily by the midpoint of the Kingdom, and was nearly complete before the monarchy was overthrown. See Albert J. Schutz, "The Voices of Eden: A History of Hawaiian Language Studies," (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1994). It was an official policy of the Kingdom's schools to promote English-language instruction, because learning English opened the door to the outside world both commercially and culturally. Many ethnic Hawaiian families preferred English-language schools to Hawaiian language schools. As first-gereration Asian immigrants began producing children who reached school age, especially after the overthrow and during the Territorial period, very few of them showed any interest in Hawaiian language and were glad to have their children educated through the medium of English. During the Territorial period, Hawaiian language was taught as a second language in the public schools, and enrollments in Hawaiian were greater than enrollments in Japanese. Hawaiian language studies at the University of Hawaii go as far back as the 1920s. By contrast, Kamehameha School (exclusively for ethnic Hawaiian children by a policy decision of its board of trustees although not required by the Will of Princess Pauahi) prohibited Hawaiian language from 1887 up to about 1923, when the school began teaching Hawaiian as a second language. Pauahi was the highest ranking and wealthiest ali'i, who could have specified that Kamehameha School use Hawaiian as the medium of instruction; but instead she chose English and the trustees of her school wanted the kids to learn English! It's also worthwhile to note that Kamehameha was teaching Hawaiian as a second language at a time when today's sovereignty activists like to say that the 1896 English-language law would ban Hawaiian language in any school, public or private.

-------------

There is irrefutable evidence that the transition from Hawaiian to English in the schools, including a prohibition against children speaking Hawaiian in school, was a carefully thought-out policy of the native leadership of the Kingdom during the period 1860-1890, and that it was done by policy of the Kings and ali'i for the benefit of native children, not for the purpose of oppressing them.

Helena G. Allen published a book whose title clearly shows her political views: "The Betrayal of Liliuokalani" (Glendale CA, Arthur H. Clark Co., 1982). On page 111 she says the following in the context of discussing Lot Kamerhameha V and the early 1860s: "Verbal battles were raging throughout the islands of whether Hawaii should be bilingual or only English speaking. There was no thought that the language, official or otherwise, should be Hawaiian. With the loss of a language, as [Lorenzo] Lyons pointed out, comes the destruction of cultural connotations and denotations. It was, however, becoming fairly obvious that a non-English speaking person could have no important government post. The country people began to cry to have English taught in their schools, 'Or,' they said, 'we will be nothing.'"

A remarkable booklet "Ha'ilono 2008" was produced by the staff of the Ho'olaupa'i Hawaiian Newspaper project under the auspices of Bishop Museum. On page 20 the booklet says: "We often hear that the decline of the Hawaiian language resulted from a law banning its use, passed by the Republic of Hawaii in 1896. The newspapers, however, tell a different story. In 1845, S.M. Kamakau petitions Kamehameha III, questioning the merit of appointing non-native over native Hawaiians for government positions. Kauikeaouli responds that he sees the importance of the old ways, but times are changing and he needs in office people trained in the Western ways to deal with foreign nations. 'I however hope that the time will come when these positions will be again placed among our own, once the young chiefs are educated.' To the right [photo of newspaper clipping from Ka Hoku O Ka Pakipika, May 8, 1862, p.2], Kamehameha IV addresses the legislature in 1862, '... I stated previously my opinion to you, that it is important to change all Hawaii's schools to English speaking schools, and I once again put this forth to all.' Wai'ohinu, in 1875, sees English as the way for Hawaii to hold on to its independence. He states, 'Kamehameha III was greatly admired for his establishing the English language schools for the young chiefs to learn English. His foresight that English would be the means through which we would survive, was like that of a prophet."

The document below from 1882 makes that policy of using English language as the medium of instruction crystal clear. It explicitly says "... it will be advisable to make it a rule that in all select schools, taught in English, the pupils be forbidden during school hours from conversing in Hawaiian. It is thought that the enforcement of such a rule would be of great value in aiding the scholars to master and familiarize themselves with the strange tongue." Thus, if forbidding children to speak Hawaiian in school is regarded as an act of suppressing Hawaiian language, then it was King Kalakaua himself who was already suppressing Hawaiian language in 1882!

This material is taken from Hawaii. Kingdom, Legislature. Education Committee — Report of the Committee on Public Education. [Honolulu, 1882], Archives of Hawai'i.

"The subject of English-language instruction is, in fact, central to this report. The committee express general approval of a plan to introduce English into all the schools, but with some reservations: "It is a good measure, doubtless, to turn all our schools into English schools, and yet it is contrary to rule and precedent in any nation to bring in a new and strange language, and proceed to force it upon the young, in order that they shall forget their mother tongue. A feeling of regret arises in considering the possibility that we, and the nation of the future, are to talk only in English, and that we are no more to hear the familiar accents and smooth-flowing speech that has come down to us from our ancestors." With respect to English instruction in government select schools, "the committee beg to say that in their opinion it will be advisable to make it a rule that in all select schools, taught in English, the pupils be forbidden during school hours from conversing in Hawaiian. It is thought that the enforcement of such a rule would be of great value in aiding the scholars to master and familiarize themselves with the strange tongue."

On April 29, 2004 the Honolulu Advertiser published a short notice regarding the 120th anniversary celebration of Kuhio Elementary School. This item is noteworthy because it mentions that the school was founded as a government school in 1884 using Hawaiian language as the medium of instruction, and then changed to English as the medium of instruction just four years later, in 1888 (all during the reign of King Kalakaua). "Kuhio Elementary School will celebrate its 120th anniversary with a lu'au and fair at the school from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. May 15. The school was founded in 1884 as Kamo'ili'ili School and renamed Mo'ili'ili School in 1888 when it converted from a Hawaiian language to English language government school. It was renamed again in 1923 for Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalaniana'ole, who died the previous year."

English has become the primary language for international diplomacy and commerce, by voluntary choice of people of all nations, most of whom do not use English as their native language. So it turns out that ethnic Hawaiians made a wise choice to abandon Hawaiian in favor of English (and not some other language such as French, German, Russian, Japanese, or Cantonese, any of which would have been pleasing to some portions of the population). Seeing how people throughout the world seem to prefer English as a universal language makes it easier to understand why Hawaiians felt that way. In fact there are a few places in the modern world where indigenous or local languages are being banned or suppressed by action of the indigenous government leadership for the purpose of forcing people to adopt one of the world's "major" languages as a common language in a multiracial, multicultural, multilingual society.

The newspaper "The National" in Papua New Guinea reported on February 5, 2013 "Assistance will be provided to all elementary and primary schools in Papua New Guinea to use English as the language of instruction, according to the Education Department. Starting yesterday, all elementary and primary schools in the national education system started using English as language of instruction ... The new policy replaces the use of vernacular (lingua franca) including Tok Pisin and Motu as the language of instruction. The change in language is to address the concerns of parents, teachers, students, academics and political leaders that vernacular in elementary schools created a poor standard of spoken and written English." [Article republished in the East-West Center's "Pacific Islands Report" of February 6, 2013]

--------------

In 1881 King Kalakaua traveled around the world, including China and Japan. One reason for the trip was to solicit Asian men to immigrate to Hawaii, and to form marriages with Hawaiian native women in order to "ho'oulu ka lahui"; i.e., increase the population of ethnic Hawaiians. He regarded Japanese as a "cognate race" to Hawaiians, so their intermarriage was especially desirable. Kalakaua felt so pleased at the prospect of relations with Japan that he offered his niece Ka'iulani to be betrothed to the Crown Prince of Japan, but that offer was politely refused. Kalakaua also acted as a recruiter for the sugar plantations, hoping to bring lots of Asians to work here -- a mission in which he was wildly successful.

The Hawaiian Kingdom census of 1890 counted Japanese and Chinese combined, whether immigrants or Hawaii-born, at 29,362 when the total population of Hawaii was 89,900. But in the first U.S. Census of Hawaii (Territory) in 1900, there were 25,767 Chinese and 61,111 Japanese, together comprising 86,878 out of a total population of 154,001 which equals 56% of all the people in Hawaii. (Sources: Native Hawaiian Data Book; also Robert C. Schmitt, Demographic Statistics of Hawaii: 1778-1965, Honolulu,1968).

The point is that by the time the law mandating English as the language of instruction was passed in 1896 it was very clear that tens of thousands of Japanese were immigrating to Hawaii at an increasing rate, some with children already and many who would be producing children here. And the Japanese were very insistent on raising their children to be fluent in Japanese language as well as knowledgeable about Japanese culture. So they established private schools on the sugar plantations where Japanese was the language of instruction in all subjects, and neither Hawaiian nor English were heard very much.

That's the main reason why the law of 1896 was passed, and especially the reason why that law explicitly applied to private schools as well as government schools. When the DOE webpage mentions only the public schools, that is technically correct but really less than a half-truth because it conceals the main reason for passing the law, which was directed at assimilating Asian children by forcing them to learn English. To ensure that the children of Asian plantation workers, attending private plantation schools, would assimilate to Hawaii and have a chance for personal and professional advancement, even their private school must use English as the language of instruction, although they were free to learn the language and culture of their parents by attending after-school or weekend academies where the Asian languages were used. Most Native Hawaiian parents felt the same way. Many of them refused to speak Hawaiian with their children, punishing them for speaking Hawaiian even in the home (although the parents did continue speaking Hawaiian with each other).

Ethnic Hawaiian plantation workers were legally free to do what the Japanese actually did. The Hawaiians were also being paid at a higher wage rate than the Chinese or Japanese, who were at the bottom of the scale (until Filipinos started coming to Hawai'i in 1906 and occupied the bottom). The Japanese felt it was important to invest their time and money to perpetuate their culture and language; while the Hawaiians, to the contrary, could have afforded it better than the Asians but felt it was important to demand that their children speak English and assimilate to Euro-American cultural values.

Here are a few items taken from the indicated pages of Rich Budnick, "Hawaii's Forgotten History 1900-1999" (Honolulu: Aloha Press, 2005). The reason for presenting these quotes is to show that the primary purpose for the 1896 law was to force Asian children to grow up speaking English (along with the language of their parents) -- it was not directed at suppressing Hawaiian language and had almost no effect on the usage of Hawaiian language because, as shown above, English was already the language of instruction in 95% of the government schools (where nearly all Native Hawaiians attended school) by the year 1892, BEFORE the overthrow of the monarchy.

p.22: 4/08/04: Reverend Takie Okumura establishes Makiki Christian Church with 24 members. Rev. Okumura is warmly supported by Hawaii's Caucasian elite, yet many Japanese Buddhists reject him. He supports "Americanism" values ... supports Hawaii's 1920 foreign language law because he wants to eliminate American distrust of Japanese. He established the first Japanese YMCA on April 28, 1900, Hawaii's first Japanese language school, Central Institute on April 6, 1896, and opened a Boy's Home.

p. 49: 11/24/20: Governor Charles McCarthy signs a law to require the Department of Public Instruction to regulate private foreign language schools, limit instruction to one hour per day, and to issue licenses to such schools and their teachers. All foreign language school teachers must pass an English test and possess the "ideals of democracy ... promote Americanism." There are 163 such schools -- 9 Korean, 7 Chinese and 147 Japanese -- with 300 teachers and 20,000 students. Many schools file a lawsuit to protest the law.

p. 58: 12/31/26: Superintendent of Public Instruction reports that a majority of Hawaii's 29,546 Asian students attending foreign language schools are U.S. citizens, not aliens.

p. 58: 2/21/27: The U.S. Supreme Court rules unanimously that Hawaii's 1920, 1923, and 1925 laws regulating Japanese language schools are unconstitutional.

p. 58: 4/23/27: Governor Wallace Farrington signs a law to allow the Department of Public Instruction to establish English standard schools ... Governor Lawrence Judd signs a similar law on April 30, 1931. ... By 1947, a majority of the standard school students are AJAs.

Reinecke, on pages 127-129, mentions that despite efforts by the Territorial government to suppress Japanese-language schools, there were a great many such schools. These Japanese schools, of course, were not certified by the government of Hawaii as meeting the compulsory attendance laws. Children of Japanese ethnicity went to learn Japanese language and culture at these private schools after already spending the day in the regular government-certified English-language schools. About 5 out of every 6 ethnic Japanese children in Hawaii attended these after-school Japanese language and culture schools -- In 1931 the figure was 87%.

Many thanks to two friends of mine for their expert research which helped bolster my webpage about the alleged Hawaiian language ban: The late Patrick Hanifin, attorney and adjunct Professor of Law at UH Manoa, who was a founding partner of the law firm of Im, Hanifin, and Parsons, who helped me with legal research; and attorney Wendell Marumoto, son of Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Masaji Marumoto (who was also a director of Ewa Plantation), for sharing research on a book Wendell wrote about the history of Japanese immigration and assimilation to Hawaii and the Japanese plantation schools.

====================

5. 2-SENTENCE ACKNOWLEDGMENT FROM DAWN KAU'ILANI SANG, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION DIRECTOR OF HAWAIIAN STUDIES EMAILED WEDNESDAY NIGHT FEBRUARY 24, PROMISING "WE WILL REVIEW THE WEBSITE AND MAKE CHANGES AS DEEMED NECESSARY."

Dawn_Kaui_Sang/CIB/HIDOE@notes.k12.hi.us
To Ken Conklin 2/24/16 at 9:23 PM

Aloha Mr. Conklin,

The Department appreciates your attention to the information provided on our website. We will review the website and make changes as deemed necessary.

D. Kau'ilani Sang
Director
Office of Hawaiian Education
(808) 305-9653
475 22nd Avenue, Room 212
Honolulu, HI 96816

=====================

6. FOLLOWUP EMAIL FROM KEN CONKLIN TO DAWN KAU'ILANI SANG, ON MONDAY MORNING MARCH 14, 2016 WITH COPIES TO DOE SUPERINTENDENT, DOE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT, NEWSPAPER EDITOR AND REPORTER. THE EMAIL NOTED THAT IT IS 3 WEEKS AFTER KEN CONKLIN'S INITIAL EMAIL TO HER, AND 12 WORKING DAYS AFTER HER PROMISE TO "REVIEW THE WEBSITE AND MAKE CHANGES AS DEEMED NECESSARY." THE EMAIL ASKED TO KNOW WHAT PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE, AND ASKED FOR CONTACT INFORMATION FOR ANY SUBORDINATE WHO MIGHT HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED THE TASK OF REVIEWING THE WEBPAGE AND MAKING CHANGES.

TO: "Dawn Kau'i Sang, Director, Office of Hawaiian Education, Hawaii Department of Education"

CC:
"Kathryn Matayoshi, Superintendent of Schools"
"Stephen Schatz, Deputy Superintendent of Schools"
"Ed Lynch, Department of Corrections, Honolulu Star-Advertiser"
"Timothy Hurley, reporter, Honolulu Star-Advertiser"

Re: Progress report about DOE webpage alleging that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools

Date: March 14, 2016

From:
Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.
46-255 Kahuhipa St. Apt. 1205
Kane'ohe, HI 96744-6083
tel/fax (808) 247-7942
e-mail Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com

Aloha Director Sang,

I'm writing to find out what progress has been made in correcting falsehoods on your short "History of Hawaiian Education" webpage that would run 2 pages if printed.
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/TeachingAndLearning/StudentLearning/HawaiianEducation/Pages/History-of-the-Hawaiian-Education-program.aspx

On Monday February 22, I sent you an email requesting correction of falsehoods on that webpage alleging there had been a ban on Hawaiian language in the schools. I provided very detailed proof that the allegation is false and explained what is true.

I also explained that the often-repeated falsehood about a ban on Hawaiian language is a source of great harm because it causes bitter resentment and racial hostility not warranted by the facts. Also, its presence on your webpage is cited by news reporters and others who refuse to make corrections because they can point to your webpage as authority.

On Wednesday February 24 you replied, promising "We will review the website and make changes as deemed necessary."

It has now been 3 weeks after my initial email, and 12 working days after your promise to review the webpage, but the falsehoods have not been corrected. If you have delegated the task of reviewing the webpage and making corrections to a subordinate or outside contractor, I'd appreciate having that person's name and email address to facilitate obtaining further progress reports and perhaps providing assistance.

Here are the three places where the webpage makes false statements alleging a ban on Hawaiian language:

(1) The second sentence of the top (header) paragraph says "After the language was banned in 1896, it would not be heard in schools for four generations." But the language was never banned, and it did continue to be heard in the schools throughout the Territorial period, as I proved.

(2) In the main body of the webpage, the second paragraph next to the picture of Kauikeaouli includes this sentence: "After the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893, teaching and learning through the medium of Hawaiian was banned in 1896." But as I proved, teaching and learning through the medium of Hawaiian was never banned; the law of 1896 only established English as the language of instruction in schools (government and private) which could be certified as meeting the compulsory schooling law, but the law did not single out Hawaiian at all; it explicitly allowed for the teaching of other languages than English as language courses in the day schools; it did not in any way interfere with after-school and weekend academies where Hawaiian, Japanese, etc. could be used as the medium of instruction for all subjects; its primary purpose was to ensure that the private plantation weekday schools for the children of Asian laborers must use English rather than Japanese as the language of instruction; and it had almost no effect on the Hawaiian kids, nearly all of whom were already attending government schools where English was the language of instruction in 95% of all the government schools by 1892 when Lili'uokalani was Queen (the year before the monarchy was overthrown).

(3) The timeline says
"1896 Hawaiian Language banned as medium of instruction in the public education system" But that's incorrect because: the 1896 law applied to all schools both public and private which were allowed to be certified as meeting the requirements of the compulsory school attendance law; it did not ban Hawaiian language from being used as the medium of instruction in after-school or weekend academies; and it did not ban courses teaching Hawaiian language as the subject matter.

So, bottom line: What progress is being made in correcting those three falsehoods on that very short webpage? And if you have delegated the making of corrections to a subordinate or outside contractor, please send me that person's name and email address so I can help with the corrections and so I can receive future progress reports.


================

7. ON THURSDAY MARCH 17 THE HAWAII HOUSE COMMITTEE THAT FACILITATES LEGISLATION FOCUSED ON ETHNIC HAWAIIAN AFFAIRS HELD A HEARING ON A RESOLUTION ENGINEERED BY DOE DIRECTOR SANG THAT WOULD EXPAND HER GROWING HAWAIIAN STUDIES EMPIRE. OTHER COMMITTEES IN BOTH HOUSE AND SENATE WILL HOLD MORE HEARINGS IF THE RESOLUTION MOVES FORWARD. THE RESOLUTION BEGINS WITH A "WHEREAS" CLAUSE STATING AS FACT THAT HAWAIIAN LANGUAGE WAS BANNED IN THE SCHOOLS FOLLOWING THE OVERTHROW OF THE MONARCHY. FULL TEXT OF THE RESOLUTION IS PROVIDED ALONG WITH KEN CONKLIN'S TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION, AND A LINK TO THE LEGISLATURE'S WEBPAGE TRACKING THE RESOLUTION INCLUDING FILES OF ALL TESTIMONY IN EACH COMMITTEE, HOW EACH MEMBER OF EACH COMMITTEE VOTED, AND THE COMMITTEE REPORT.

Bill text (including all amended versions), history, committee hearings, pdf of all testimony submitted to each committee, YEAs and NAYs, committee reports:
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=HCR&billnumber=190&year=2016

Here is the text of HCR 190 [a House Concurrent Resolution, meaning that it is a resolution introduced in the House and, after it passes the House, it will be forwarded to the Senate for its concurrence or amendment.] at the time of its first hearing on Thursday March 17, 2016:

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES H.C.R. NO. 190
TWENTY-EIGHTH LEGISLATURE, 2016
STATE OF HAWAII

HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
REQUESTING THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN EDUCATION TO CONDUCT A STUDY ON HOW TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO INSTRUCTION IN THE HAWAIIAN LANGUAGE IN ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS STATEWIDE.

WHEREAS, the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893 led to a ban on teaching and learning through the medium of the Hawaiian language beginning in 1896, thereby eradicating the Hawaiian language from all formal education for the next four generations; and

WHEREAS, at the turn of the century, native speakers of Hawaiian amounted to under 0.1 per cent of the statewide population leading linguists to worry about the fate of the language going forward, even going so far as to ponder its extinction; and

WHEREAS, in the late 1960's and early 1970's, a resurgence in cultural pride and identity led to significant increase in the interest in and practice of Hawaiian culture, along with a growing alarm that the Hawaiian language could be lost with the passing of the few native speakers remaining; and

WHEREAS, the Hawaiian Studies Program, a K-12 program that provides curriculum support and resources in the instruction and learning of Hawaiian culture, history, and language, was established by the Department of Education in 1980 to implement the 1978 State Constitution's mandate to promote "the study of Hawaiian culture, history and language" by providing a Hawaiian education program and using community expertise "as a suitable and essential means in furtherance of Hawaiian education;" and

WHEREAS, Hawaiian language instruction in Hawaii's public schools has been limited in that it occurs only at select grade levels and within specific subject areas, with the result that the school system provides instruction in Spanish in more of Hawaii's public schools than Hawaiian, despite Hawaiian being one of the State's two official languages; and

WHEREAS, recently, efforts such as the introduction of Kaiapuni immersion schools and the Na Hopena A'o ("HA") policy have been made to expand Hawaiian language education throughout the State. However, implementation of the State's pledge within the 1978 Constitution to promote "the study of Hawaiian culture, history, and language" have been found lacking; and

WHEREAS, 'Olelo Hawai'i represents a keystone of our keiki's understanding of these islands, their unique culture, and heritage; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED by the House of Representatives of the Twenty-eighth Legislature of the State of Hawaii, Regular Session of 2016, the Senate concurring, that the Department of Education's Office of Hawaiian Education is requested to conduct a study to determine:
(1) How the teaching of Hawaiian language can be restructured to best promote the expansion of K-12 Hawaiian language curriculum to serve the needs of the State;
(2) How the expansion of Hawaiian language instruction throughout the public school system in Hawai'i can best be accomplished; and
(3) Whether Hawaiian language instruction would be best conducted through the Hawaiian Studies program or by different means; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the study should include research on the following topics:
(1) The current structure and pedagogy of the Hawaiian language courses offered in public schools throughout the State;
(2) What resources are necessary to provide access to Hawaiian language study in all public schools statewide;
(3) Recent and current trends in student-driven initiatives to learn Hawaiian; and
(4) Specific strategies to enhance and expedite Hawaiian language instruction on different campuses throughout the public school system in the State; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Department of Education's Office of Hawaiian Education is requested to submit a report of its study including findings, recommendations, and any proposed legislation, to the Legislature no later than twenty days prior to the commencement of the 2017 Regular Session; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copies of this Concurrent Resolution be transmitted to the Superintendent of Education, the Director of the Office of Hawaiian Education, the Administrator of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Kamehameha Schools, The Chairperson of the Board of Education, ‘Ahahui ‘Olelo Hawai‘i, and the Head of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs.

----------------

Here is Ken Conklin's testimony:

[Letterhead]
Center for Hawaiian Sovereignty Studies
46-255 Kahuhipa St. Suite 1205 Kane'ohe, HI 96744
Tel/Fax (808) 247-7942
Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D. Executive Director
e-mail Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com
Unity, Equality, Aloha for all
[U.S. and Hawaiian flags side by side]

To: HOUSE COMMITTEE ON OCEAN, MARINE RESOURCES, & HAWAIIAN AFFAIRS
For hearing Thursday, March 17, 2016
Re: HCR 190
REQUESTING THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN EDUCATION TO CONDUCT A STUDY ON HOW TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO INSTRUCTION IN THE HAWAIIAN LANGUAGE IN ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS STATEWIDE.

TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION

PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THIS TESTIMONY.

THE OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN EDUCATION IN THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IS PROCLAIMING TO THE PUBLIC, AND TEACHING TO OUR STUDENTS, FALSEHOODS ABOUT HAWAII'S HISTORY, AND SPECIFICALLY ABOUT HAWAIIAN LANGUAGE. THE FIRST "WHEREAS" PARAGRAPH IN THIS RESOLUTION HCR190 IS A PRIME EXAMPLE. THE OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN EDUCATION IS REFUSING TO CORRECT THE FALSEHOODS EVEN AFTER BEING PROVIDED WITH IRREFUTABLE PROOF THAT THEY ARE FALSE. THE OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN EDUCATION, AND ITS DIRECTOR, MUST NOT BE GIVEN FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY OR FUNDING UNTIL RACIALLY INFLAMMATORY FALSEHOODS ARE CORRECTED AND REMOVED FROM PUBLISHED INFORMATION AND FROM THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM.

IF THIS LEGISLATURE UNWISELY CHOOSES TO PASS HCR190, PLEASE DELETE THE FIRST "WHEREAS" PARAGRAPH TO AVOID THE RIDICULE YOU WILL SO RIGHTLY INCUR FOR INCLUDING A BLATANT FALSEHOOD EVEN AFTER YOU HAVE SEEN THE PROOF THAT IT IS FALSE.

Let me explain further. The Office of Hawaiian Education has publicly proclaimed falsehoods on its webpage about the history of Hawaiian education. I sent a lengthy, detailed message filled with irrefutable evidence, including quotes from historical documents and citations to scholarly books about the history of Hawaiian language, proving that the statements are false. The Director of the Office sent a brief reply acknowledging receipt of my message, but is stonewalling on making corrections and probably will never correct the falsehoods because, I am confident, she is personally invested in propagating those falsehoods for political purposes. By continuing to proclaim and teach falsehoods after being provided proof they are false, the Director is now knowingly LYING. She is from a family of Hawaiian sovereignty activists, which leads me to suspect that she is working to use her recently upgraded power and influence in the Department of Education to harness DOE as a propaganda factory, filling the minds of our children and the general public with a twisted version of Hawaii's history.

The particular item at issue in this testimony concerns a single topic -- the very first paragraph in this resolution HCR190 -- which might seem small and unimportant but is in fact racially inflammatory, arousing bitter resentment and racial hatred over a historical grievance which never happened. It is one of the most thoroughly entrenched and strongly defended lies told by the Hawaiian grievance industry in a propaganda campaign to arouse public sympathy for political sovereignty and reparations for alleged colonial oppression.

The alleged banning of Hawaiian language in the schools is not the only falsehood being taught in the Hawaiian Studies component of the DOE curriculum. Five years ago I wrote a detailed book review of the two textbooks authorized by DOE which are supported by curriculum guides showing how the books satisfy the "standards" for the 11th grade course "History of Modern Hawaii" which is required for a high school diploma. The book review shows numerous examples of the history- twisting and victimhood mentality spawned by this course, causing thousands of teenagers and young adults to feel rising levels of anti-Americanism and anti-Caucasian racial resentment. See "History of modern Hawaii as taught in Hawaii schools" at
http://www.angelfire.com/big09/HawnHistPublicSchools.html

Here's the lie being loudly proclaimed in the first paragraph in HCR190:
"WHEREAS, the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893 led to a ban on teaching and learning through the medium of the Hawaiian language beginning in 1896, thereby eradicating the Hawaiian language from all formal education for the next four generations;"

There are actually two subsidiary lies told there: the allegation that there was "a ban on teaching and learning through the medium of the Hawaiian language beginning in 1896"; and the allegation that Hawaiian language was "eradicated from all formal education for the next four generations." Both are lies. I have provided detailed proof that they are false (see below). Despite being provided with irrefutable proof more than three weeks ago that those are lies, the Director of the Office of Hawaiian Education, which was recently elevated to a top priority in DOE with no higher entity in the DOE organization chart other than the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent, has incorporated the lie into this resolution HCR190. I'm guessing she authored and asked for HCR190 to be introduced into the legislature to provide legislative authority for her to expand her growing bureaucratic fiefdom. I'm guessing that she can easily recruit Hawaiian language experts to affirm the lie about the alleged Hawaiian language ban -- experts whose careers are built on the money and political power created by a growing Hawaiian language industry founded in part on asserting the lie, and the heroism of overcoming the alleged ban that never was.

News reporters and editors feel confident about repeating the lie in print -- they cite the Office of Hawaiian Education webpage on the history of Hawaiian education as an authority. And relying on that authority they refuse to publish a correction even when shown irrefutable proof that it is a lie. The lie has been taught in our public and private schools for several decades, spurring feelings of anger and hatred by ethnic Hawaiians against "those evil haoles who invaded our nation, overthrew our Queen, imprisoned her in her own Palace, stole our land, and banned our beloved language right here in our own ancestral homeland where my grandmother was beaten for speaking Hawaiian in school"

I love Hawaiian culture and language. That's why the first thing I did after moving permanently to Kane'ohe in 1992 was to enroll in courses in Hawaiian language and culture taught at Windward School for Adults, for three years, followed by additional study through various resources, achieving a moderate level of fluency sufficient to enhance my appreciation of the Kamehameha Song Contest and the Merry Monarch hula festival, and to read some of the old newspapers (with the aid of my well-worn Pukui/Elbert dictionary). And that's why I demand that Hawaiian history and language be taught with fidelity to what is true, and not be used in our schools as vehicles to promote racial hatred or establishment of a race-based government. The schools should be a safe place where students of all races can learn what is true and what helps us all feel unified in the Aloha Spirit, and not to be subjected to racially divisive propaganda.

The "History of Hawaiian Education" webpage would run 2 pages if printed. Its URL is
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/TeachingAndLearning/ StudentLearning/HawaiianEducation/Pages/History-of-the-Hawaiian- Education-program.aspx
and its content on March 15 has been preserved (in case of future changes) at
http://big09.angelfire.com/DOEWebpgHistHawnEdMarch2016.pdf

Here are the three places where the very short DOE webpage makes false statements alleging a ban on Hawaiian language:

(1) The second sentence of the top (header) paragraph says "After the language was banned in 1896, it would not be heard in schools for four generations." But the language was never banned, and it did continue to be heard in the schools throughout the Territorial period, as I proved.

(2) In the main body of the webpage, the second paragraph next to the picture of Kauikeaouli includes this sentence: "After the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893, teaching and learning through the medium of Hawaiian was banned in 1896." But as I proved, teaching and learning through the medium of Hawaiian was never banned; the law of 1896 only established English as the language of instruction in schools (government and private) which could be certified as meeting the compulsory schooling law, but the law did not single out Hawaiian at all; it explicitly allowed for the teaching of other languages than English as language courses in the day schools; it did not in any way interfere with after-school and weekend academies where Hawaiian, Japanese, etc. could be used as the medium of instruction for all subjects; its primary purpose was to ensure that the private plantation weekday schools for the children of Asian laborers must use English rather than Japanese as the language of instruction; and it had almost no effect on the Hawaiian kids, nearly all of whom were already attending government schools where English was the language of instruction in 95% of all the government schools by 1892 when Lili'uokalani was Queen (the year before the monarchy was overthrown).

(3) The timeline says
"1896 Hawaiian Language banned as medium of instruction in the public education system" But that's incorrect because: the 1896 law applied to all schools both public and private which were allowed to be certified as meeting the requirements of the compulsory school attendance law; it did not ban Hawaiian language from being used as the medium of instruction in after-school or weekend academies; and it did not ban courses teaching Hawaiian language as the subject matter. A law of the Territory required that the teacher-training school curriculum must include a course in Hawaiian language (presumably because it was expected that teachers would need to understand when they heard Hawaiian being spoken by some students, contrary to the bitter assertion that Hawaiian language was not heard in the schools for 4 generations).

I have compiled a webpage "Holding the State of Hawaii Department of Education accountable for propagating the lie that Hawaiian language was banned" at
http://tinyurl.com/z77ogbq

The table of contents is displayed below. Items 4 and 6 in that webpage provide detailed proof, with citations to historical documents and scholarly books published by UH Press, that the statements on the DOE webpage are false. Please treat the information in my webpage as being incorporated as part of this testimony.

1. Honolulu Star-Advertiser article of Thursday February 18, 2016 whose first sentence mentioned in passing, as an established fact, that Hawaiian language was "... once banned in the public schools ..."
2. Thursday February 18 (early morning) email from Ken Conklin to newspaper reporter and editor requesting correction and providing proof of falsehood.
3. Reporter's very brief Thursday February 18 (late afternoon) reply citing the Department of Education webpage as authority.
4. Full text of detailed email from Ken Conklin to Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Department of Education Director of Hawaiian Studies on Monday morning February 22, 2016 with copies to DOE Superintendent, DOE Assistant Superintendent, newspaper editor and reporter.
5. 2-sentence acknowledgment from Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Department of Education Director of Hawaiian Studies emailed Wednesday night February 24, promising "We will review the website and make changes as deemed necessary."
6. Followup email from Ken Conklin to Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, on Monday morning March 14, 2016 with copies to DOE Superintendent, DOE Assistant Superintendent, newspaper editor and reporter. The email noted that it is 3 weeks after Ken Conklin's initial email to her, and 12 working days after her promise to "review the website and make changes as deemed necessary." The email asked to know what progress has been made, and asked for contact information for any subordinate who might have been assigned the task of reviewing the webpage and making changes.

Further sections will be added to this webpage as events unfold. One purpose of this webpage is to document the stonewalling and lack of accountability of the Hawaiian Studies division of the Department of Education -- its persistent unwillingness to correct a falsehood despite repeated reminders about what is false, why it's important, and requests for progress reports at reasonable intervals.


=================

8. On Monday March 28, 2016 Ken Conklin sent an email directly to Department of Education Superintendent Kathryn Matayoshi informing her that her subordinate Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Director of the Office of Hawaiian Education, who has no supervisor other than Superintendent Matayoshi, is refusing to correct the falsehoods on the Department webpage. The email asks Superintendent Matayoshi to exercise her authority and remove the falsehoods alleging that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools following the overthrow of the monarchy and that the language was not heard in the schools for four generations. The email provides the same proofs of falsity that were provided to Director Sang.

To:
"Kathryn Matayoshi, Superintendent of Schools"
CC: "Stephen Schatz, Deputy Superintendent of Schools"
"Ed Lynch, Department of Corrections, Honolulu Star-Advertiser"
"Timothy Hurley, reporter, Honolulu Star-Advertiser"

Re: Important correction to DOE webpage alleging that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools

Date: March 28, 2016

From:
Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.
46-255 Kahuhipa St. Apt. 1205
Kane'ohe, HI 96744-6083
tel/fax (808) 247-7942
e-mail Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com

Aloha Superintendent Matayoshi,

I'm writing to you because you are the only person with authority to correct a problem which a direct subordinate of yours refuses to correct. Indeed, that subordinate, Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Director of the Office of Hawaiian Education, has taken further action which worsens the harm.

The problem is a falsehood prominently displayed in three places on the two-page-long "History of Hawaiian Education" webpage at
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/TeachingAndLearning/StudentLearning/HawaiianEducation/Pages/History-of-the-Hawaiian-Education-program.aspx

The falsehood, in three iterations, is copy/pasted below. The falsehood is that Hawaiian language was banned in the schools of Hawaii following the overthrow of the monarchy, and the language was not spoken in the schools for four generations. Both parts of that are false, as I have proved. See below. It seems like a harmless and obscure statement about Hawaiian history, so you might wonder: What's all the fuss about?

The harm is that this falsehood serves to stir up racial hatred and feelings of victimhood over a historical grievance which has no basis in fact. The falsehood has been published so often in recent years that even a normally objective news reporter and editor have come to accept it as true; and after they included it in a published news report, they cited the DOE webpage as their reason for refusing to correct it. I have an entire webpage which compiles some of the assertions of this falsehood published in the last 15 years, including statements in letters to editor by schoolkids who were brainwashed by their teachers to believe it and cited it in their letters as evidence of historical grievance warranting drastic political action.
http://tinyurl.com/83xmb

The further harm is that Director Sang or a surrogate has caused a resolution to be introduced in the state legislature in which the first "whereas" clause is the falsehood displayed on the DOE webpage; and the first committee that heard the resolution refused to amend it despite my testimony with indisputable proof that it is false. Superintendent Matayoshi submitted testimony on this resolution on a different issue but failed to make objection to the false "whereas" clause about alleged banning of Hawaiian language. See Resolution text, history, committee hearings, pdf of all testimony submitted to each committee, YEAs and NAYs, committee reports:
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=HCR&billnumber=190&year=2016

The remedy is for you, the Superintendent of Schools, to take responsibility and promptly correct the falsehoods in the DOE webpage on the History of Hawaiian Education. The further remedy is for you to examine the Hawaiian Studies curriculum to ensure that the falsehood is removed from what our children are taught. I'm sure you will agree that our schools should teach children what is true, and refrain from using our school curriculum as a vehicle for political propaganda or incitement to racial hostility.

I have tried my best to get this problem corrected without your intervention, but have been stonewalled. To show you the procedure I have followed to no avail, please see this webpage containing a compilation of my efforts to get this matter resolved, including: the newspaper report which asserts the falsehood, my correspondence with the reporter and editor requesting a correction, their citation of your DOE webpage as authority for what they printed, my correspondence with Director Sang, the legislature resolution HCR190 and my testimony explaining how the first "whereas" clause is false. See webpage "Holding the State of Hawaii Department of Education accountable for propagating the lie that Hawaiian language was banned." at
http://tinyurl.com/z77ogbq

To ensure you are aware of the facts, I have provided the following information for your perusal:
(1) The three assertions of the falsehood on the webpage "History of Hawaiian Education" which I am requesting should be deleted;
(2) Some of the indisputable proof I provided to Director Sang, and to the legislature, showing that those statements are false. My proof is lengthy and detailed -- perhaps boring -- because it's easy to quickly tell a lie but difficult and complex to provide an accurate description of what happened historically.

I want you to see that the evidence is indisputable so that you will take action promptly to remove the falsehoods from the webpage and from the school curriculum. This is the same proof provided to Director Sang, who is stonewalling and even pushing the falsehood further in the political arena. You are the only person who can make things pono.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

---------

Here are the three places where the webpage makes false statements alleging a ban on Hawaiian language:
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/TeachingAndLearning/StudentLearning/HawaiianEducation/Pages/History-of-the-Hawaiian-Education-program.aspx

(1) The second sentence of the top (header) paragraph says "After the language was banned in 1896, it would not be heard in schools for four generations." But the language was never banned, and it did continue to be heard in the schools throughout the Territorial period, as I proved.

(2) In the main body of the webpage, the second paragraph next to the picture of Kauikeaouli includes this sentence: "After the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893, teaching and learning through the medium of Hawaiian was banned in 1896." But as I proved, teaching and learning through the medium of Hawaiian was never banned; the law of 1896 only established English as the language of instruction in schools (government and private) which could be certified as meeting the compulsory schooling law, but the law did not single out Hawaiian at all; it explicitly allowed for the teaching of other languages than English as language courses in the day schools; it did not in any way interfere with after-school and weekend academies where Hawaiian, Japanese, etc. could be used as the medium of instruction for all subjects; its primary purpose was to ensure that the private plantation weekday schools for the children of Asian laborers must use English rather than Japanese as the language of instruction; and it had almost no effect on the Hawaiian kids, nearly all of whom were already attending government schools where English was the language of instruction in 95% of all the government schools by 1892 when Lili'uokalani was Queen (the year before the monarchy was overthrown).

(3) The timeline says
"1896 Hawaiian Language banned as medium of instruction in the public education system" But that's incorrect because: the 1896 law applied to all schools both public and private which were allowed to be certified as meeting the requirements of the compulsory school attendance law; it did not ban Hawaiian language from being used as the medium of instruction in after-school or weekend academies; and it did not ban courses teaching Hawaiian language as the subject matter.

-----------

Proof that the falsehoods are false, including proof of what was true.

After the Department of Education was created in 1841, Hawaiian was the language of instruction in nearly all the government schools. But as the years went by, with British and American individuals and businesses becoming increasingly dominant, Hawaiian ali'i and parents of schoolkids increasingly demanded that the government schools use English as the medium of instruction. Each school owned and operated by the government of Hawaii (public schools) could use either English or Hawaiian as its medium of instruction, but by 1892 (under Queen Lili'uokalani), 95% of all the government schools were already using English as the medium of instruction, according to two separate books by scholars Reinecke and Schutz, described below. Nearly all Native Hawaiian kids attended the government schools, so nearly all Native Hawaiian kids were already using English all day long in school, several years before the 1896 law was passed. Furthermore they were also speaking English even in the home, because their parents insisted on it. So the 1896 law had almost no practical effect on the decline of Hawaiian language. Finally, today we notice that kids in the Hawaiian immersion program use Hawaiian as the language of instruction. You might say English language is banned in their classrooms. Yet they nevertheless speak English fluently. Why does that happen? Because English is the dominant language of everyday use in Hawaii. So if Hawaiian had been the dominant language in the streets and homes of Hawaii in the 1890s then the 1896 law for the schools could not have stopped them from being fluent in Hawaiian anyway. Clearly Hawaiian language was already dying of natural causes; it was not murdered by the 1896 law.

What the law actually said

Here's a quote of what the law said, in its entirety. This is not an excerpt -- it's the entire law:

1896 Laws of the Republic of Hawaii, Act 57, sec. 30: "The English Language shall be the medium and basis of instruction in all public and private schools, provided that where it is desired that another language shall be taught in addition to the English language, such instruction may be authorized by the Department, either by its rules, the curriculum of the school, or by direct order in any particular instance. Any schools that shall not conform to the provisions of this section shall not be recognized by the Department." [signed] June 8 A.D., 1896 Sanford B. Dole, President of the Republic of Hawaii.

There are three essential elements in this law.

1. Please notice: "all public AND PRIVATE schools" (that's important in understanding the purpose of the law, as I'll explain below).

2. Please notice: "where it is desired that another language shall be taught in addition to the English language, such instruction may be authorized by the Department" (that proves that the law was not intended to suppress or "BAN" any language; and on the contrary, the DOE had official permission to teach Hawaiian (or Japanese or Chinese etc) as language courses; thus Hawaiian language was NOT BANNED in the schools. Also, as you'll see proof below, by 1892, the year before the overthrow, 95% of all government schools [where nearly all native kids were attending] were already using English as medium of instruction by policy of the monarchs and requests of parents; thus, the 1896 law made very little practical difference to the natives. The 1896 law was primarily aimed at assimilating the Japanese plantation kids by forcing them to learn English in day school even though they were free to, and did in fact, attend after-school and weekend academies using Japanese as medium of instruction and focusing on Japanese culture.

3. Please notice: "Any schools that shall not conform to the provisions of this section shall not be recognized by the Department." (Why does the law talk about a school being "recognized by the Department"? Because the Department had the job of recognizing or certifying which schools satisfied the compulsory attendance law).

Furthermore, that same law was reasserted during the Territorial period and also improved to make it clear that the teaching of Hawaiian language as a course was encouraged (thus Hawaiian was heard in the schools, contrary to the opening sentence at the top of your DOE webpage).

The following information comes from The American Law Review, Volume 54 (Little, Brown, and Company, 1920), page 67, and can be found on the internet at
https://books.google.com/books?id=Jk8ZAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA67&lpg=PA67&dq=%22The+English+Language+shall+be+the+medium%22&source=bl&ots=lmXRYljWBZ&sig=ZfIfPtCaVL9eJRigxojfhrG01jw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwju0JK39YnLAhWDKWMKHTFHCcMQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22The%20English%20Language%20shall%20be%20the%20medium%22&f=false

The law as it was reaffirmed in 1915 was identical with the 1896 law and is copied in full on page 67 of the American Law Review.

"Hawaii, Rev. Laws 1915, sec. 277; Laws 1896, ch. 57, sec. 30. The English Language shall be the medium and basis of instruction in all public and private schools, provided that where it is desired that another language shall be taught in addition to the English language, such instruction may be authorized by the Department, either by its rules, the curriculum of the school, or by direct order in any particular instance. Any schools that shall not conform to the provisions of this section shall not be recognized by the Department."

The law as amended in 1919 is on that same page 67, as follows:

"Hawaii, Laws 1919, page 259, act 191, amending Rev. Laws 1915, sec. 277. The English language shall be the medium and basis of instruction in all public and private schools within the Territory, and any school where English is not the medium and basis of instruction shall not be recognized as a public or private school within the provisions of this chapter, and attendance thereat shall not be considered attendance at school in compliance with law; Provided, however, That the Hawaiian language shall be taught in addition to the English in all normal and high schools of the Territory; and that, where it is desired that another language shall be taught in addition to the English language, such instruction may be authorized by the department by direct order in any particular instance: Provided further, That instruction in such courses shall be elective."

Let me emphasize this portion of the 1919 law: "the Hawaiian language shall be taught in addition to the English in all normal and high schools of the Territory". "Normal" schools refers to schools that trained teachers, so clearly the government believed it was important for teachers to understand and speak Hawaiian because they would be dealing with children who might speak Hawaiian to them or to other children during the school day. It was accepted as a matter of course that Hawaiian would be heard and spoken in school, which is why the law required teachrs to be trained to at least a moderate level of fluency in Hawaiian. And of course the law also says that Hawaiian language courses must be taught in all the high schools, even aside from the teacher-education schools.

Thus the statement at the top of your webpage is false when it says "it [Hawaiian language] would not be heard in schools for four generations." What a bitter, nasty, terrible lie that is!

Now let's look at the historical context.

Beginning in 1841 the Kingdom of Hawaii had a law requiring that all children between 4-14 years of age MUST attend school (the compulsory attendance law).
Source: Hawaiian National Bibliography 1780-1900: [the volume focusing on years] 1831-1850
By David W. Forbes, University of Hawaii Press, 1998, 599 pages
page 249:
"Title: Laws for the regulation of schools.
The act by which the Board of Education was established. The text consists of 16 numbered regulatory paragraphs, which were scheduled to take effect on January 1, 1841. This law was signed by Kamehameha III and Kekauluohi at Lahaina, October 5, 1840, but printed in Honolulu. By this law, any village having 15 or more school-age children was to be provided with a teacher, ... School attendance between the ages of four and fourteen was compulsory."

The fact that the 1896 law is part of the definition of what makes a school considered a "school" for compliance with the compulsory attendance law is clearly stated in the 1919 version of the law quoted above. "... any school where English is not the medium and basis of instruction shall not be recognized as a public or private school within the provisions of this chapter, and attendance thereat shall not be considered attendance at school in compliance with law."

It's one thing to say all kids MUST attend school. It's something else to specify what requirements any so-called "school" must meet in order to be considered a "school" for purposes of the compulsory attendance law. We continue to refine those specifications constantly. How many days of instruction in a year? How many hours per day? What subjects must be taught? How many years of each subject required for a diploma? Who can be a teacher or principal? What about homeschooling? Etc. Would it be satisfactory to say a kid is attending school if the "school" curriculum consisted of packing pineapples into cans, or if the "school" curriculum consisted of working in a taro patch and pounding poi?

Between the lines is lengthy, detailed proof of what's above:

-------

A scholarly study of the history of language in Hawaii was done as a dissertation by John Reinecke at the University of Hawaii in 1935. The dissertation was improved and published as a book. John E. Reinecke, "Language and Dialect in Hawaii: A Sociolinguistic History to 1935." Edited by Stanley M. Tsuzaki. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1969. Reprinted 1988. Paperback edition February, 1995.

Mr. Reinecke says the shift from Hawaiian language to English began under the Kingdom and was very far along by the time the monarchy was overthrown (see Table 8, pp. 70-73). Reinecke's chart summarizes the number of schools and students operating in Hawaiian and English based on Education Department reports from 1847 to 1902. The number of students in Hawaiian language schools falls continuously through this period while the number in English-language schools rises; likewise the numbers of schools operating in the respective languages. The number of students in Hawaiian-language schools dropped below 50% in 1881 or 1882. By 1892 (the year before the overthrow), only 5.2% of students were in Hawaiian language schools and there were only 28 such schools in the Kingdom; at the same time, 94.8% of students were in the 140 English-language schools.

According to Reinecke, there were several factors accounting for this switch from Hawaiian to English as the favored language even before the overthrow.

(A) as early as the late 1840s, the Kingdom government had a policy of gradually increasing education in English because the government saw that as the more valuable language for developing the country in the long run (see factor C). They probably figured that parents could teach their children Hawaiian at home but the schools should teach English as much as possible to open up opportunities.

(B) English language schools were considered better schools by almost everyone and initially charged extra while the Hawaiian schools were free. A lawsuit was actually filed over the the extra charge for English-language schools! Naone v. Thurston 1 Haw. 220 (1856) Asa Thurston (father of revolutionary Lorrin Thurston) unsuccessfully argued that he was being discriminated against by having to pay about $5 extra to educate little Lorrin and his siblings). Later, when the government got enough tax revenue to be able to afford to stop charging extra, people of all ethnicities (including Hawaiian) rapidly shifted their children to the free English language schools. But even before the extra fee was abolished, people of all ethnicities, including Native Hawaiians, were switching schools in favor of the English-language ones as soon as they could afford to pay the extra fee.

(C) Immigrants to the Kingdom, especially the Portuguese who brought their families, wanted to have their children educated in English. The Portuguese had no cultural reasons to prefer one language foreign to themselves (English) over another language foreign to themselves (Hawaiian); but all the practical reasons favored learning English rather than Hawaiian. English was already the language of business in Hawaii and certainly of the international business in the Pacific at that time. English was increasingly the language of government, even before Annexation. English (at least pidgin English) was the lingua franca that allowed immigrant Chinese, Japanese, Portuguese, Filipinos (who started coming in 1906), etc. to communicate with each other; so the better their children learned English the more opportunities they would have. There may be a few immigrant families who chose Hawaiian as the language for their children's assimilation -- I know of one case where a Japanese man married a Portuguese woman, started a rice farm, and the entire family spoke Hawaiian as their primary language in their home in Wai'alua, O'ahu. But "the exception proves the rule": most immigrant families chose English as their language of assimilation to Hawaii, because English was clearly becoming the language for economic and social advancement.

(D) Reinecke also stresses another factor in the shift from Hawaiian to English: intermarriage between Hawaiians and others. The hapa (mixed-race) Hawaiian children picked up English rather than learning either or both of their parents' original languages fluently. Reinecke cites statistics showing that, at any given time, hapa-Hawaiians were more fluent in English and relatively less fluent in Hawaiian than "pure" Hawaiians. One explanation might be that at any given time the median age of hapa people is lower than the median age of "pure" anything because intermarriages have become steadily more common, leading to a growing number of hapa children in each new generation. Since the overall trend is towards English, English fluency is positively correlated with youth.

Sovereignty activists who don't know John Reinecke's background might routinely try to discredit his findings by accusing him of being a running dog of the haole capitalist imperialists -- the activists like to attack opposing scholars this way. But Reinecke was an activist in the union movement in Hawaii, accused of being a Communist in the late 40s and early 50s. He was a school teacher for decades and active in Democratic party politics. His wife, a Nisei (second-generation Japanese), was also active in political life, and was a highly respected schoolteacher. Mr. Reinecke's approach is scholarly and he seems to have been trying to show that public education was used intentionally to level out the economic and ethnic hierarchy of plantation-era Hawaii. For example, he spends considerable effort looking at the ways the varieties of pidgin and standard English were used as social class markers. If everyone were to grow up speaking good English, such markers would vanish and it would be harder to discriminate against people of lower ethnic or social class by immediately recognizing their dialect.

Another book confirms that the transition from Hawaiian to English as the medium of instruction was well underway voluntarily by the midpoint of the Kingdom, and was nearly complete before the monarchy was overthrown. See Albert J. Schutz, "The Voices of Eden: A History of Hawaiian Language Studies," (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1994). It was an official policy of the Kingdom's schools to promote English-language instruction, because learning English opened the door to the outside world both commercially and culturally. Many ethnic Hawaiian families preferred English-language schools to Hawaiian language schools. As first-gereration Asian immigrants began producing children who reached school age, especially after the overthrow and during the Territorial period, very few of them showed any interest in Hawaiian language and were glad to have their children educated through the medium of English. During the Territorial period, Hawaiian language was taught as a second language in the public schools, and enrollments in Hawaiian were greater than enrollments in Japanese. Hawaiian language studies at the University of Hawaii go as far back as the 1920s. By contrast, Kamehameha School (exclusively for ethnic Hawaiian children by a policy decision of its board of trustees although not required by the Will of Princess Pauahi) prohibited Hawaiian language from 1887 up to about 1923, when the school began teaching Hawaiian as a second language. Pauahi was the highest ranking and wealthiest ali'i, who could have specified that Kamehameha School use Hawaiian as the medium of instruction; but instead she chose English and the trustees of her school wanted the kids to learn English! It's also worthwhile to note that Kamehameha was teaching Hawaiian as a second language at a time when today's sovereignty activists like to say that the 1896 English-language law would ban Hawaiian language in any school, public or private.

-------------

There is irrefutable evidence that the transition from Hawaiian to English in the schools, including a prohibition against children speaking Hawaiian in school, was a carefully thought-out policy of the native leadership of the Kingdom during the period 1860-1890, and that it was done by policy of the Kings and ali'i for the benefit of native children, not for the purpose of oppressing them.

Helena G. Allen published a book whose title clearly shows her political views: "The Betrayal of Liliuokalani" (Glendale CA, Arthur H. Clark Co., 1982). On page 111 she says the following in the context of discussing Lot Kamerhameha V and the early 1860s: "Verbal battles were raging throughout the islands of whether Hawaii should be bilingual or only English speaking. There was no thought that the language, official or otherwise, should be Hawaiian. With the loss of a language, as [Lorenzo] Lyons pointed out, comes the destruction of cultural connotations and denotations. It was, however, becoming fairly obvious that a non-English speaking person could have no important government post. The country people began to cry to have English taught in their schools, 'Or,' they said, 'we will be nothing.'"

A remarkable booklet "Ha'ilono 2008" was produced by the staff of the Ho'olaupa'i Hawaiian Newspaper project under the auspices of Bishop Museum. On page 20 the booklet says: "We often hear that the decline of the Hawaiian language resulted from a law banning its use, passed by the Republic of Hawaii in 1896. The newspapers, however, tell a different story. In 1845, S.M. Kamakau petitions Kamehameha III, questioning the merit of appointing non-native over native Hawaiians for government positions. Kauikeaouli responds that he sees the importance of the old ways, but times are changing and he needs in office people trained in the Western ways to deal with foreign nations. 'I however hope that the time will come when these positions will be again placed among our own, once the young chiefs are educated.' To the right [photo of newspaper clipping from Ka Hoku O Ka Pakipika, May 8, 1862, p.2], Kamehameha IV addresses the legislature in 1862, '... I stated previously my opinion to you, that it is important to change all Hawaii's schools to English speaking schools, and I once again put this forth to all.' Wai'ohinu, in 1875, sees English as the way for Hawaii to hold on to its independence. He states, 'Kamehameha III was greatly admired for his establishing the English language schools for the young chiefs to learn English. His foresight that English would be the means through which we would survive, was like that of a prophet."

The document below from 1882 makes that policy of using English language as the medium of instruction crystal clear. It explicitly says "... it will be advisable to make it a rule that in all select schools, taught in English, the pupils be forbidden during school hours from conversing in Hawaiian. It is thought that the enforcement of such a rule would be of great value in aiding the scholars to master and familiarize themselves with the strange tongue." Thus, if forbidding children to speak Hawaiian in school is regarded as an act of suppressing Hawaiian language, then it was King Kalakaua himself who was already suppressing Hawaiian language in 1882!

This material is taken from Hawaii. Kingdom, Legislature. Education Committee — Report of the Committee on Public Education. [Honolulu, 1882], Archives of Hawai'i.

"The subject of English-language instruction is, in fact, central to this report. The committee express general approval of a plan to introduce English into all the schools, but with some reservations: "It is a good measure, doubtless, to turn all our schools into English schools, and yet it is contrary to rule and precedent in any nation to bring in a new and strange language, and proceed to force it upon the young, in order that they shall forget their mother tongue. A feeling of regret arises in considering the possibility that we, and the nation of the future, are to talk only in English, and that we are no more to hear the familiar accents and smooth-flowing speech that has come down to us from our ancestors." With respect to English instruction in government select schools, "the committee beg to say that in their opinion it will be advisable to make it a rule that in all select schools, taught in English, the pupils be forbidden during school hours from conversing in Hawaiian. It is thought that the enforcement of such a rule would be of great value in aiding the scholars to master and familiarize themselves with the strange tongue."

On April 29, 2004 the Honolulu Advertiser published a short notice regarding the 120th anniversary celebration of Kuhio Elementary School. This item is noteworthy because it mentions that the school was founded as a government school in 1884 using Hawaiian language as the medium of instruction, and then changed to English as the medium of instruction just four years later, in 1888 (all during the reign of King Kalakaua). "Kuhio Elementary School will celebrate its 120th anniversary with a lu'au and fair at the school from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. May 15. The school was founded in 1884 as Kamo'ili'ili School and renamed Mo'ili'ili School in 1888 when it converted from a Hawaiian language to English language government school. It was renamed again in 1923 for Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalaniana'ole, who died the previous year."

English has become the primary language for international diplomacy and commerce, by voluntary choice of people of all nations, most of whom do not use English as their native language. So it turns out that ethnic Hawaiians made a wise choice to abandon Hawaiian in favor of English (and not some other language such as French, German, Russian, Japanese, or Cantonese, any of which would have been pleasing to some portions of the population). Seeing how people throughout the world seem to prefer English as a universal language makes it easier to understand why Hawaiians felt that way. In fact there are a few places in the modern world where indigenous or local languages are being banned or suppressed by action of the indigenous government leadership for the purpose of forcing people to adopt one of the world's "major" languages as a common language in a multiracial, multicultural, multilingual society.

The newspaper "The National" in Papua New Guinea reported on February 5, 2013 "Assistance will be provided to all elementary and primary schools in Papua New Guinea to use English as the language of instruction, according to the Education Department. Starting yesterday, all elementary and primary schools in the national education system started using English as language of instruction ... The new policy replaces the use of vernacular (lingua franca) including Tok Pisin and Motu as the language of instruction. The change in language is to address the concerns of parents, teachers, students, academics and political leaders that vernacular in elementary schools created a poor standard of spoken and written English." [Article republished in the East-West Center's "Pacific Islands Report" of February 6, 2013]

--------------

In 1881 King Kalakaua traveled around the world, including China and Japan. One reason for the trip was to solicit Asian men to immigrate to Hawaii, and to form marriages with Hawaiian native women in order to "ho'oulu ka lahui"; i.e., increase the population of ethnic Hawaiians. He regarded Japanese as a "cognate race" to Hawaiians, so their intermarriage was especially desirable. Kalakaua felt so pleased at the prospect of relations with Japan that he offered his niece Ka'iulani to be betrothed to the Crown Prince of Japan, but that offer was politely refused. Kalakaua also acted as a recruiter for the sugar plantations, hoping to bring lots of Asians to work here -- a mission in which he was wildly successful.

The Hawaiian Kingdom census of 1890 counted Japanese and Chinese combined, whether immigrants or Hawaii-born, at 29,362 when the total population of Hawaii was 89,900. But in the first U.S. Census of Hawaii (Territory) in 1900, there were 25,767 Chinese and 61,111 Japanese, together comprising 86,878 out of a total population of 154,001 which equals 56% of all the people in Hawaii. (Sources: Native Hawaiian Data Book; also Robert C. Schmitt, Demographic Statistics of Hawaii: 1778-1965, Honolulu,1968).

The point is that by the time the law mandating English as the language of instruction was passed in 1896 it was very clear that tens of thousands of Japanese were immigrating to Hawaii at an increasing rate, some with children already and many who would be producing children here. And the Japanese were very insistent on raising their children to be fluent in Japanese language as well as knowledgeable about Japanese culture. So they established private schools on the sugar plantations where Japanese was the language of instruction in all subjects, and neither Hawaiian nor English were heard very much.

That's the main reason why the law of 1896 was passed, and especially the reason why that law explicitly applied to private schools as well as government schools. When the DOE webpage mentions only the public schools, that is technically correct but really less than a half-truth because it conceals the main reason for passing the law, which was directed at assimilating Asian children by forcing them to learn English. To ensure that the children of Asian plantation workers, attending private plantation schools, would assimilate to Hawaii and have a chance for personal and professional advancement, even their private school must use English as the language of instruction, although they were free to learn the language and culture of their parents by attending after-school or weekend academies where the Asian languages were used. Most Native Hawaiian parents felt the same way. Many of them refused to speak Hawaiian with their children, punishing them for speaking Hawaiian even in the home (although the parents did continue speaking Hawaiian with each other).

Ethnic Hawaiian plantation workers were legally free to do what the Japanese actually did. The Hawaiians were also being paid at a higher wage rate than the Chinese or Japanese, who were at the bottom of the scale (until Filipinos started coming to Hawai'i in 1906 and occupied the bottom). The Japanese felt it was important to invest their time and money to perpetuate their culture and language; while the Hawaiians, to the contrary, could have afforded it better than the Asians but felt it was important to demand that their children speak English and assimilate to Euro-American cultural values.

Here are a few items taken from the indicated pages of Rich Budnick, "Hawaii's Forgotten History 1900-1999" (Honolulu: Aloha Press, 2005). The reason for presenting these quotes is to show that the primary purpose for the 1896 law was to force Asian children to grow up speaking English (along with the language of their parents) -- it was not directed at suppressing Hawaiian language and had almost no effect on the usage of Hawaiian language because, as shown above, English was already the language of instruction in 95% of the government schools (where nearly all Native Hawaiians attended school) by the year 1892, BEFORE the overthrow of the monarchy.

p.22: 4/08/04: Reverend Takie Okumura establishes Makiki Christian Church with 24 members. Rev. Okumura is warmly supported by Hawaii's Caucasian elite, yet many Japanese Buddhists reject him. He supports "Americanism" values ... supports Hawaii's 1920 foreign language law because he wants to eliminate American distrust of Japanese. He established the first Japanese YMCA on April 28, 1900, Hawaii's first Japanese language school, Central Institute on April 6, 1896, and opened a Boy's Home.

p. 49: 11/24/20: Governor Charles McCarthy signs a law to require the Department of Public Instruction to regulate private foreign language schools, limit instruction to one hour per day, and to issue licenses to such schools and their teachers. All foreign language school teachers must pass an English test and possess the "ideals of democracy ... promote Americanism." There are 163 such schools -- 9 Korean, 7 Chinese and 147 Japanese -- with 300 teachers and 20,000 students. Many schools file a lawsuit to protest the law.

p. 58: 12/31/26: Superintendent of Public Instruction reports that a majority of Hawaii's 29,546 Asian students attending foreign language schools are U.S. citizens, not aliens.

p. 58: 2/21/27: The U.S. Supreme Court rules unanimously that Hawaii's 1920, 1923, and 1925 laws regulating Japanese language schools are unconstitutional.

p. 58: 4/23/27: Governor Wallace Farrington signs a law to allow the Department of Public Instruction to establish English standard schools ... Governor Lawrence Judd signs a similar law on April 30, 1931. ... By 1947, a majority of the standard school students are AJAs.

Reinecke, on pages 127-129, mentions that despite efforts by the Territorial government to suppress Japanese-language schools, there were a great many such schools. These Japanese schools, of course, were not certified by the government of Hawaii as meeting the compulsory attendance laws. Children of Japanese ethnicity went to learn Japanese language and culture at these private schools after already spending the day in the regular government-certified English-language schools. About 5 out of every 6 ethnic Japanese children in Hawaii attended these after-school Japanese language and culture schools -- In 1931 the figure was 87%.

Many thanks to two friends of mine for their expert research which helped bolster my webpage about the alleged Hawaiian language ban: The late Patrick Hanifin, attorney and adjunct Professor of Law at UH Manoa, who was a founding partner of the law firm of Im, Hanifin, and Parsons, who helped me with legal research; and attorney Wendell Marumoto, son of Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Masaji Marumoto (who was also a director of Ewa Plantation), for sharing research on a book Wendell wrote about the history of Japanese immigration and assimilation to Hawaii and the Japanese plantation schools.


=================

9. On Wednesday April 20, 2016 Ken Conklin received a letter from Superintendent Kathryn Matayoshi dated April 14, on official DOE letterhead, saying the webpage will not be corrected because "the information provided on our website is accurate and generally accepted in public policy and scholarship." (in other words, the lie has been repeated so often by so many in the Hawaiian grievance industry that we are going to continue teaching it to the kids and allowing news media to cite our website as authority for it).

The entire body of the letter reads as follows:

Dear Dr. Conklin:

Thank you for your message regarding the accuracy of information about Hawaiian Education. After careful consideration of your points and the multiple resources available on the topic, the Hawaii State Department of Education (HIDOE) is satisfied that the information provided on our website is accurate and generally accepted in public policy and scholarship.

We acknowledge the assertion of your opinion on the work of the HIDOE and are confident that through shared kuleana, we are all able to fulfill educational experiences fitting of all the students we serve.

Very truly yours,
[signature]
Kathryn S. Matayoshi
Superintendent


====================

10. Having exhausted all resources in an attempt to expunge a lie from the Department of Education website: Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Kathryn Matayoshi, and the Department of Education are jointly being given a Goebbels Award For Outstanding Use of Media for Propaganda Disguised As Fact. The award is issued on April 23, 2016 in honor of the 172nd birthday of Hawaii President Sanford B. Dole, who in 1896 signed the law which the Department of Education is lying about. The award is displayed on a webpage at
http://tinyurl.com/zm67fz7


====================

11. The final event in holding the Department of Education accountable took place on Monday April 25, 2016 when the Goebbels Award and a link to this webpage was sent to every member of the Board of Education providing a link to this webpage documenting the proof of falsehood and the steps that have been taken to hold Sang, Matayoshi, and DOE accountable; and asking the Board members to order Sang and Matayoshi to make appropriate corrections to the webpage and to the school curriculum.

-------------------

"Board of Education", "Lance Mizumoto, Chairperson", "Brian De Lima, Vice Chairperson, Hawaii County", "Amy Asselbaye, Member, City and County of Honolulu", "Grant Chun, Member, Maui County", "Maggie Cox, Member, Kauai County", "Patricia Halagao, Member, At Large", "Donald Horner, Member, At Large", "Hubert Minn, Member, City and County of Honolulu", "Jim Williams, Member, City and County of Honolulu", "Brennan Lee, Student Representative"

From:
Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.
46-255 Kahuhipa St. Apt. 1205
Kane'ohe, HI 96744-6083
tel/fax (808) 247-7942
e-mail Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com

To: Members, Hawaii Board of Education

Re: Refusal by Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Director, Office of Hawaiian Education; and Kathryn Matayoshi, Superintendent; to correct falsehoods on DOE webpage "History of Hawaiian Education"

Date: April 23, 2016

Aloha Board of Education members. I'm writing to ask you to take action to demand that two top-level DOE administrators correct a racially inflammatory falsehood that is repeated three times on a two-page DOE webpage. The administrators have refused to make the correction despite being given massive irrefutable proof of falsehood. I believe their refusal is for the purpose of using DOE for political propaganda in support of Hawaiian sovereignty.

Dawn Kau'ilani Sang, Director, Office of Hawaiian Education; and Kathryn Matayoshi, Superintendent; have been notified repeatedly about the falsehood and have been given massive irrefutable proof that the statements are false. The falsehood stirs bitter resentment and racial hatred over a historical grievance that never happened. Its strongly worded assertion on an official DOE webpage puts DOE in the position of teaching a racially incendiary lie to children and also enabling mass media to cite the webpage as authority when publishing the falsehood and then refusing to make corrections.

The offending DOE webpage is at
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/TeachingAndLearning/StudentLearning/HawaiianEducation/Pages/History-of-the-Hawaiian-Education-program.aspx

The falsehood has three iterations on that webpage. In the main body of the webpage, the second paragraph next to the picture of Kauikeaouli includes this sentence: "After the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893, teaching and learning through the medium of Hawaiian was banned in 1896." The second sentence of the top (header) paragraph says "After the language was banned in 1896, it would not be heard in schools for four generations." The timeline says "1896 Hawaiian Language banned as medium of instruction in the public education system"

I have provided detailed, well-documented, irrefutable proof that all elements of the falsehood are false. I sent that proof first to Director Sang, who stonewalled; and then to Superintendent Matayoshi, who finally sent me a formal letter refusing to correct the falsehoods. Full details of the correspondence, including the proof and my messages to Director Sang and Superintendent Matayoshi, is available on a webpage "Holding the State of Hawaii Department of Education accountable for propagating the lie that Hawaiian language was banned" at
http://tinyurl.com/z77ogbq

It's bad that DOE is teaching falsehoods to the kids and providing a webpage which news media can cite as authority when they republish the falsehoods. What makes it especially awful is that the main effect of this particular lie is to arouse resentment and racial hatred over a historical grievance which never happened.

Having received Superintendent Matayoshi's final refusal to correct the falsehoods, I have no further recourse except to publicly embarrass DOE, and have issued a Goebbels Award posted at
http://tinyurl.com/zm67fz7

If you are as troubled by this matter as I am, please demand of Director Sang and Superintendent Matayoshi that they make appropriate corrections on the offending webpage, notify the reporter and editor at the Honolulu Star-Advertiser about the removal of the falsehoods, and make corresponding corrections to the school curriculum. Individual Board of Education members might accomplish this by informally contacting Director Sang and Superintendent Matayoshi; but if they still refuse to make the corrections then an item might be placed on the agenda for the Board to formally send a letter ordering Director Sang and Superintendent Matayoshi to comply.

Thanks for your concern.

Ken Conklin


================

12. If there is any further activity on this matter, then this webpage will be promptly updated.

==================

Send comments or questions to:
Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com

You may now

GO BACK TO OTHER TOPICS ON THIS WEBSITE