(c) Copyright 2005, Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D. All rights reserved
The racism of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement is different from historic racism by whites against blacks; and far more dangerous. The Hawaiian sovereignty movement presents an outward appearance of multiracial partnership; but it is racist to the core. Hawaiian metaphysical racism is a fundamental religious belief that possession of even a small amount of Hawaiian native ancestry carries a genetically encoded racial supremacy based on a family relationship among the gods, the land, and ethnic Hawaiian people. Such a belief logically justifies the existing institutional racism, where racially exclusionary private and government agencies comprise the bricks in Hawai'i's growing wall of apartheid. To expand Hawai'i's institutional racism and defend it against legal attacks, politicians have introduced legislation in Congress (the Akaka bill) to authorize a phony new Indian tribe to be created out of thin air, whose only rule for membership is possession of a drop of Hawaiian blood. Hawai'i's politicians overwhelmingly favor this bill, to keep federal dollars flowing to Hawai'i through the established racially exclusionary institutions. Some people with no native ancestry support metaphysical and institutional racism, and support either total independence for Hawai'i, or the Akaka bill. They support these things partly to ensure job security; but also because they admire Hawaiian culture, consider ethnic Hawaiians an endangered species, and feel compassion in the face of victimhood propaganda. The Hawaiian sovereignty movement is anti-American and anti-white for historic reasons. Ethnic Hawaiian activists also try to build solidarity with Asians to create a large majority of Hawai'i's people who will see the Hawaiian sovereignty movement as a struggle of dark-skinned people against oppression by whites and by the U.S. government. 52 footnotes occupying more than 60% of the space for this essay provide both content and references. Some footnotes are quite lengthy, and are cited more than once.
TOPICS IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE
INTRODUCTION -- HAWAIIAN RACISM IS OF A DIFFERENT KIND FROM HISTORIC WHITE RACISM
PERSONAL RACISM (ESPECIALLY AGAINST WHITES)
HAWAIIAN METAPHYSICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL RACISM (IN GENERAL)
HOW HAWAIIAN METAPHYSICAL RACISM TRANSLATES INTO ALREADY-ESTABLISHED INSTITUTIONAL RACISM IN THE STATE OF HAWAI'I (Examples of housing, healthcare, education, social and vocational training, legal services)
THE VELVET SOFTNESS OF HAWAIIAN RACISM -- HAWAIIAN VICTIMHOOD CLAIMS ARE POWERFUL WEAPONS ENSLAVING WHITES AS A DEBTOR RACE WHOSE DEBTS CAN NEVER BE PAID
THE VELVET GLOVES ARE STARTING TO BE PULLED OFF, REVEALING THE BRASS KNUCKLES UNDERNEATH
HOW THE AKAKA BILL FACILITATES THE VICIOUSNESS OF RACISM AND ANTI-AMERICANISM
INTRODUCTION -- HAWAIIAN RACISM IS OF A DIFFERENT KIND FROM HISTORIC WHITE RACISM
The racism of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement is different from historic racism by whites against blacks. Hawaiian metaphysical and institutional racism are far more dangerous than personal racism. The brass knuckles of Hawaiian racism are usually hidden under a velvet glove of profound cultural beauty and sincere personal warmheartedness. Passage of the Akaka bill would remove the velvet glove, allowing the brass knuckles to pulverize the face of Hawai'i's multiracial harmony.
Some people think it's absurd to imagine there could be racism in the Hawaiian sovereignty movement, or that racism might be directed against whites. At least three kinds of "evidence" are commonly offered to show that racism in the sovereignty movement is unlikely or very rare; but all three can easily be dismissed.
(a) Ethnic Hawaiians are well known for their high rates of intermarriage with other races. It's generally assumed that 75% of all persons with any Hawaiian native ancestry have less that 25% native blood quantum. Thus three-fourths of all people identifying themselves as "Native Hawaiian" each have more than 75% Asian, European, or American blood. How could anyone who is overwhelmingly white (or Asian) be filled with racist attitude against whites (or Asians)? Yet, an essay by Chief Maui Loa of the Hou Hawaiians (Note #1), and a widely circulated e-mail from Eric Po'ohina (Note #2), illustrate such racism. Public rhetoric and published essays by Professor Haunani-Kay Trask are filled with vicious anti-white racism (Note #3), despite the obvious fact that she has a substantial amount of white ancestry and that her long-time boy-toy is white. Racism against a portion of one's own racial ancestry is not confined to Hawai'i. For example, Hitler was reported to be very worried that one of his grandfathers might have been Jewish; and Reinhard Heydrich, Chief of SS Intelligence and boss of Adolf Eichman, was haunted by a similar fear (Note #4).
(b) Frequently-heard victimhood claims say that ethnic Hawaiians are at the bottom of the economic and social pecking order. Thus it seems impossible for them to wield power unfairly against other races. But in fact the wealthiest private institution in Hawai'i is the Bishop Estate, kown also by its benign-sounding name Kamehameha Schools, which has maintained a racially exclusionary admissions policy for many decades and is vigorously defending it against court challenges. The state government has racially exclusionary agencies OHA and DHHL funded with hundreds of millions of government dollars and holding hundreds of thousands of acres of racially restricted land.
(c) Many whites and Asians are made welcome and actively participate in the Hawaiian sovereignty movement. Even Governor Lingle (a Jewish woman) and some white and Asian Legislators and business leaders participate in the "red shirt" marches (Note #5) to support "Native Hawaiian rights"; along with the usual assortment of leftists, hippies, and "save-the whale" white and Asian activists who support any anti-establishment cause-du-jour. Among the people with no Hawaiian native ancestry who are activists in the Hawaiian sovereignty movement are "pure" Japanese, "pure" Chinese, and "pure" whites.
But it is not new in history that intelligent and powerful people sometimes actively support racist institutions which currently exclude them and in the future will probably persecute them. For example, there were powerful Jewish businessmen who actively supported and financed Hitler's rise to power, because they expected him to revitalize German industry and bring Germany out of the economic slump attributed to the Treaty of Versailles. A recently published book has thoroughly documented that there were about 150,000 Jews who voluntarily served in Hitler's military forces, including high-ranking officers reaching all the way up to two field marshalls. (Note #6) Presumably the high-ranking officers had read "Mein Kampf" and knew what was in store for them; and clearly some of them continued their military service knowing what was happening in the extermination camps.
PERSONAL RACISM (ESPECIALLY AGAINST WHITES)
Hawaiian racism is not like historic racism by whites against blacks. Ethnic Hawaiians do not wear sheets and pointy hats while burning a cross on someone's lawn. They do not lynch people of other races, or drag them through the street while chained to a pickup truck. For the most part Hawaiian racism is not directly expressed as disgust or hatred for other races generally, or against individuals merely on account of their race.
Of course there are some purveyors of blatant racial hatred, like Professor Haunani-Kay Trask -- her powerful language stirs the admiration of far more ethnic Hawaiians than care to admit it publicly. (See Note #3)
There have been occasional racial hate-crimes or hate-speech against whites in Hawai'i, especially against white tourists or white politicians singled out for abuse by Hawaiians who do not similarly abuse Japanese tourists or politicians. For decades every school had a day in May or June known half-jokingly as "kill haole day" when white children would be beaten up or at least harassed. "Dumb haole" and "fucking haole" are commonly used epithets, at a time when "nigger", "kike", "chink", "jap", "flip" or "spic" are no longer tolerated. Many whites, including myself, do not object to the word "haole" and even use it as a label to tell who we are when replying to the question Hawai'i's racially mixed people often ask each other when first getting acquainted: "What are you?" But when Haunani-Kay Trask complains about Ken Conklin or Bill Burgess, she describes them as HOW-lee with a drawn-out sarcastic sing-song of the first syllable making the word sound like it has five syllables and leaving no doubt that it is an insult (See her vicious attack, published in the student newspaper, against an individual white undergraduate student in her own department, solely on account of his race, at Note #3).
Leftist students and professors (many of them white) like to say that whites in Hawai'i are hypersensitive to racial abuse against them. The claim is made that whites on the mainland are accustomed to white privilege, whereby they are automatically given deference and status because they are in the majority and because white people are clearly in control. But when a white person comes to Hawai'i and suddenly finds himself in the minority, surrounded by a sea of brown faces, he feels threatened. Accustomed to being treated as a member of the ruling class on the mainland, a white person in Hawai'i bristles when treated condescendingly or arrogantly by powerful brown-skinned businessmen, politicians, bureaucrats or bus drivers. Such "culture shock" may indeed be a factor for some newly-arrived whites. But the "culture shock" of not being automatically the privileged race clearly does not explain the racism perceived by whites who are born and raised in Hawai'i, or whose lengthy residence would make them no longer accustomed to whatever "white privilege" a mainlander might expect. Ignoring or discounting white complaints of racism, by ascribing such complaints to hypersensitivity caused by the loss of white privilege, is a form of demeaning racial stereotyping, and arrogance that white complaints are not worthy of being heard respectfully. Asserting such a convoluted theory of loss of white privilege, as an explanation of alleged white hypersensitivity, is actually a way for the person making such an assertion to feel smug and superior at his own profound level of comprehension and, if he is white, to take pride in his own liberation from the chains of white privilege. (Note #7)
Racism in the Hawaiian sovereignty movement is mostly of two kinds: metaphysical, and institutional. Personal racism -- feelings of disgust, unworthiness, filthiness, or hatred toward individuals merely on account of having white skin -- is not an obvious factor in most personal interactions in Hawai'i. There have been a few high-profile racist anti-white attacks, such as the case of Ben Finney's experience with Hokule'a and the Polynesian Voyaging Society, described later. Most anti-white personal racism is low-key and non-violent. For example I, Ken Conklin, am often attacked verbally in the mass media or in e-mails or letters; but the attacks are almost always on account of my political views. Verbal attacks against me are rarely primarily on account of my whiteness, although my whiteness is often cited as a negative factor to explain why I am allegedly anti-Hawaiian. My whiteness is held against me in a way that Earl Arakaki's Okinawan (Japanese) ancestry and dark skin are not held against him, even though both of us have high profiles in the media in opposition to ethnic Hawaiian institutional racism. Mr. Arakaki is the lead plaintiff in the most highly publicized lawsuit to dismantle Hawaiian racially exclusionary institutions, and he is a frequent writer of letters to the editor. Arakaki's leadership of a legal attack on Hawaiian racially exclusionary institutions is potentially far more dangerous to Hawaiian sovereignty than Conklin's scholarly verbal jousting; yet Conklin receives Hawaiian racist attacks on his whiteness while Arakaki escapes Hawaiian racism against his Asian-ness.
Hawai'i state Senator Fred Hemmings, who is white, was verbally attacked on account of his race, on the floor of the Senate during public debate, by ethnic Hawaiian Senator Clayton Hee who proudly reminded listeners of his own Hawaiian heritage and used Hawaiian language to make his racist attack. (Note #8) Such racist attacks are almost never made by Hawaiians against ethnic Japanese, Chinese, or Filipinos. For example, Sandra Puanani Burgess is 25% Hawaiian, 25% Filipina, and 50% Chinese. She publicly cites her Hawaiian ancestry to oppose race-based programs exclusively for ethnic Hawaiians, saying that her Chinese and Filipino cousins should be entitled to the same government benefits she is entitled to. OHA founding mother Frenchy Desoto criticized Mrs. Burgess in a radio broadcast, saying that Mrs. Burgess is not really Hawaiian because she was raised Filipino. But regardless of the truth or falsity of that assertion, it is not an attack on Filipinos; rather, it is an attack on Mrs. Burgess' right to assert her Hawaiian heritage when she is allegedly "not really Hawaiian" in cultural upbringing.
HAWAIIAN METAPHYSICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL RACISM (IN GENERAL)
Hawaiian metaphysical racism is a fundamental belief that possession of even a small degree of Hawaiian native ancestry carries a genetically encoded racial supremacy based on a family relationship among the gods, the land, and the ethnic Hawaiians. A large webpage describes this religious/metaphysical theory and how it is used as a basis for political claims to racial supremacy. (Note #9)
Hawaiian racism is so deeply entrenched in some people that a small percentage of Hawaiian native ancestry outweighs all other components of one's genealogy. Hawaiian ancestry is traced for a hundred generations and some Hawaiian ancestors are deified as 'aumakua (guardian spirits); while non-Hawaiian components of one's ancestry are routinely ignored.
There are probably fewer than 3,000 people who are "pure" Hawaiian. Nobody knows for sure. But in Census 2000, when everyone was allowed to identify their racial heritage by marking as many races as they cared to mark, approximately one out of every three people having any degree of Hawaiian native ancestry marked ONLY the box for "Native Hawaiian." That happened despite the fact that most of Hawai'i's people of mixed races are very proud to recite the laundry-list of all their heritages -- the longer the list, the prouder they are. There was a campaign among Hawaiian activists to get ethnic Hawaiians to mark only the one box for "Native Hawaiian" because "that's the one that really matters." As a result, in Census 2000, there were 80,137 people living in Hawai'i who marked themselves as being only Hawaiian; while nationwide, 140,652 marked themselves as being only Hawaiian. (Note #10)
Metaphysical racism in private is relatively harmless, leading only to feelings of racial pride and solidarity. However, racial pride can easily turn to implied or overt racial prejudice. (For an philosophic analysis of racial pride and racial prejudice, see Note #11)
Metaphysical racism can produce feelings of superiority, or personal entitlement -- pride not based on personal accomplishment but only on racial identity. It can be reflected in an elitist attitude that anyone lacking a drop of the magic blood is fundamentally "other" and simply not worthy of the closest degrees of friendship. Such personal feelings might then translate into public assertions about the special relationship Hawaiians have with the land and the gods -- assertions which are emotionally hurtful to listeners (especially children) who do not share the sacred genealogy and are made to feel they don't really belong. Thus metaphysical racism can lead to personal racism.
Metaphysical racism transformed to personal racism is expressed in the seemingly harmless phrase "host culture" which carries a subtle but devastating message that people who lack the magic blood are merely guests in an ethnic Hawaiian homeland. (Note #12) Metaphysical racism also leads to devastating personal racism in the public schools (especially the "host culture" charter schools) when children who lack the magic blood are told repeatedly that their ethnic Hawaiian playmates have a special relationshp to the gods and to the land. A child with no native ancestry in such a school might well wonder, "Well what does that make ME, chopped liver?" (Note #13)
Real damage from metaphysical racism occurs when it is translated into demands for race-based political power. Claims are made that because ethnic Hawaiians are fundamentally different from everyone else; therefore they have genetically programmed unique ways of learning and knowing. An ethnic Hawaiian professor of teacher education at the University of Hawai'i at Hilo wrote her Ph.D. dissertation at Harvard on the topic of Hawaiian epistemology, and has published books and journal articles on that topic. (Note #14) Claims are made that because ethnic Hawaiians have genetically programmed unique ways of learning and knowing; therefore they need and are entitled to special curriculum and special teaching methods. Ethnic Hawaiians are thus entitled to a racially separate school system which can set its own standards for teacher certification and for testing student achievement. Such legislation for an apartheid school system was actually introduced in the Hawai'i state Legislature and made varying degrees of progress and passed various committees over a period of several years, and on-going. (Note #13 again)
The argument here is similar to the argument made in recent years by homosexual activists. Years ago homosexuals were considered morally deviant and sinful; and many of them internalized such harsh judgments, felt inferior, and hid their sexual preference "in the closet." But then came the "gay pride" movement, when homosexuals not only came out of the closet, but began openly flaunting their homosexuality and carrying banners proclaiming "I'm gay and I'm proud of it." (The pride was more a matter of defiance than actual pride -- a claim that someone should not be made to feel he must hide his identity). The gay pride movement has more recently been bolstered with the argument that being gay is not freely chosen, but is hard-wired into the brain and nervous system either by genetics or by enculturation in the formative stages of growth. Thus, nobody should be blamed for being gay; and furthermore, gays have a right to openly behave in accord with their inborn nature. The analogy is that Hawaiians have inborn, genealogical predispositions to learn, understand, think, feel, and behave in certain unique ways. Therefore they have a right to be treated by society in accord with their inborn predispositions; they have a right to social institutions which cater to their needs; and ultimately they have a right to sovereignty because their inborn natures are so fundamentally different from everyone else's that they need unique laws and political control over their own separate institutions.
Claims are made that ethnic Hawaiians are entitled to racial supremacy in the political life of Hawai'i, especially on issues related to the way land is used. That's because Hawaiians have a family relationship to the land and the gods. Hawaiian activists are sometimes heard saying the self-contradictory statement "It's not about race, it's about genealogy." The U.S. Supreme Court, in Rice v. Cayetano, took account of this distinction, saying that "ancestry can be a proxy for race" and indeed was being used that way in Hawai'i in relation to the restriction of voting rights based on ancestry. (Note #15)
The history of the Polynesian Voyaging Society is especially interesting as an illustration of profound metaphysical racism and how it got translated into both personal and institutional racism. Ben Finney, a white anthropologist from the mainland, with no Hawaiian native ancestry, suffered what would today be called "racial hate crimes" and severe institutional discrimination in his work to revive Polynesian voyaging. As an anthropologist, Finney was interested in the history of Polynesian voyaging canoes. He constructed his own 40 foot double hull canoe, Nalehia, in 1965. He spent time in Hawai'i, and became founding president of the Polynesian Voyaging Society in 1973. He organized construction of the voyaging canoe Hokule'a in 1975 (Hokule'a has now voyaged hundeds of thousands of miles during its 30 years of life, and remains the flagship of a fleet of Hawaiian voyaging canoes). He recruited Hokule'a's first crew, supervised a year-long training program, and led the canoe's first voyage in 1976, to Tahiti. (Tahiti was chosen because it was the place of origin for the last great wave of Polynesian voyagers who invaded Hawai'i, overthrew the older Marquesan civilization, and established the religious and cultural system we now think of as "Native Hawaiian.") Finney's book contains valuable information about the history of PVS and the many voyages of Hokule'a (and other Polynesian voyaging canoes) from 1973 to 2003.
But the primary focus of Finney's book, and more than half its actual content, is devoted to political, cultural, and philosophical issues. He describes theories of racial memory, and provides numerous footnotes to scholarly literature defending the concept that ethnic Hawaiians can "remember" the celestial navigation knowledge of their ancestors even after centuries when it had been forgotten. Finney graphically describes the physical violence against himself and other non-Hawaiian crew members, and how he was forced to resign as head of the PVS solely because he is white. Nevertheless, Finney vigorously defends the "politically correct" view that ethnic Hawaiians are entitled by genealogy to exercise leadership in building canoes, navigating them, and running the PVS organization; just as ethnic Hawaiians are entitled by genealogy to exercise leadership in building an independent nation of Hawai'i, navigating the political waters toward sovereignty, and running the nation once it is operational.
According to Finney, people like himself, with no native ancestry, can contribute expertise, money, time, and political support. But they must always know their place in the canoe is to paddle, raise the sails, and swab the decks; not to be steersman or captain. Finney's view is that people with no native ancestry are rightfully relegated to second-class citizenship in the Polynesian Voyaging Society, on its canoe voyages, and also in a future sovereign nation of Hawai'i (where 80% of the population have no native ancestry).
Finney's book is perhaps the best single source easily available to the public that provides an in-depth philosophical justification of Hawaiian metaphysical racism. The book also illustrates how that metaphysical racism gets translated into both personal racism (hate crimes against Finney and other whites) and institutional racism (the insistence on Hawaiian racial supremacy in the Polynesian Voyaging Society institution and in the daily operation of the voyages themselves). (Note #16)
A sad side story to the racism of the Polynesian Voyaging Society is the death of Eddie Aikau and the way he is remembered today. The first voyage of Hokule'a to Tahiti in 1976 was so overwhelmed by ethnic nationalism and anti-white racism that Ben Finney resigned from the crew and also as head of the PVS. A second voyage to Tahiti was attempted in 1978 with a "politically correct" but inexperienced "pure" Hawaiian crew. The canoe capsized six hours after leaving Honolulu. Eddie Aikau, a master surfer, heroically tried to use his surfboard to paddle twenty miles to Lana'i through rough seas to get help, but was never seen again. (Thus today's bumper-sticker slogan "Eddie would go.") An hour-long TV documentary on the life of Eddie Aikau was broadcast on April 19, 2005. The Aikau documentary portraying him as an ethnic Hawaiian hero followed hard on the heels of the April 15 broadcast of Edgy Lee's OHA/Kamehameha funded informercial movie "The Hawaiians" and the April 18 broadcast of a PBS documentary on the Massie case. The broadcast was timed perfectly to raise Hawaiian racial pride and solidarity in the context of the anti-white Massie case documentary. The Aikau TV biography was all-Hawaiian all the time. Whites simply did not get mentioned except rarely as surfing competitors whom Aikau eventually bested. No mention was made about Ben Finney or the first voyage of Hokule'a which made it all the way to Tahiti with a racially mixed crew and non-Hawaiian leadership. No mention was made of the fact that the whole purpose of the second voyage just two years later to the same destination, which cost Eddie Aikau his life, was to do ethnic cleansing of the Hokule'a. (Note #17)
The demotion of white people to second-class status, or their total exclusion, is illustrated not only in the Polynesian Voyaging Society as described above, but also in the way today's Hawaiian sovereignty independence activists are reviving celebrations of Kingdom holidays in which they systematically ignore and exclude heroes of the Hawaiian Kingdom who had no native blood. By removing whites like John Young, the Rev. Dr. Gerrit Judd, and the Rev. William Richards from the pantheon of Hawaiian national historical heroes, today's Hawaiian activists show their intentions for the future. They say their movement is about a nation, not a race. They say people of all races will be welcome as citizens in the newly re-established nation. But their clear intention is to make second-class citizens of everyone lacking native blood, giving them only voting rights restricted to certain topics and property rights restricted to certain areas. (Note #18)
HOW HAWAIIAN METAPHYSICAL RACISM TRANSLATES INTO ALREADY-ESTABLISHED INSTITUTIONAL RACISM IN THE STATE OF HAWAI'I (Examples of housing, healthcare, education, social and vocational training, legal services)
Before describing how racism is practiced in the structural arrangements of various institutions, we should take note of the way Hawaiian language and a Christianized version of Hawaiian religion are used for ceremonial purposes to assert ethnic Hawaiian hegemony throughout all institutions in Hawai'i, including the Legislature. It is customary in Hawai'i for meetings to open with a prayer, often delivered entirely or partly in Hawaiian language. Hawaiian language is often used in political activity to lend an aura of respect for "indigenous rights" and to provide a sense of mystery and solemnity. The situation is comparable to the way the Roman Catholic mass 50 years ago was performed in Latin despite the fact that very few members of the congregation understood Latin (most ethnic Hawaiians today do not understand or speak Hawaiian). The use of Latin made everything seem especially sacred, dealing with mysteries beyond the ability of most parishioners to comprehend; and it gave the congregation confidence in the divine authority of the priest. Likewise, many cultural and political events in Hawai'i begin with Christian prayer, often delivered in whole or in part in Hawaiian language, which most of Hawai'i's people, including most ethnic Hawaiians, do not understand. For a good example of this, see a transcript of a hearing at the Hawai'i Legislature on March 31, 2005 at which Senator Inouye, Congressman Abercrombie, and Congressman Case presented testimony and answered questions on the progress of the Akaka bill. The hearing was opened by state Representative Ezra Kanoho leading the "congregation" in singing the Christian Doxology in Hawaiian language, followed by a prayer in English calling upon the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to watch over the proceedings and to help bring people together to support the Akaka bill. (Note 18.5)
Institutional racism is found in numerous already-existing government and private institutions that forcibly exclude anyone who lacks a drop of the magic blood. There are many bricks in Hawai'i's growing wall of apartheid.
The most visible examples of Hawaiian institutional racism in government are OHA (the Office of Hawaiian Affairs) and DHHL (the Department of Hawaiian Homelands). Both are agencies of the State of Hawai'i, funded through revenues from government lands and through Legislative appropriations of tax dollars.
The Department of Hawaiian Homelands uses tens of millions of state government dollars every year to build infrastructure and subsidized houses in a collection of about 70 communities on 203,000 acres of government land. Getting a lease for a house on that land requires a 50% native blood quantum, recently reduced to 25% under certain limited circumstances. These Hawaiian Homelands can be thought of as comparable to mainland gated communities with restrictive racial covenants, plus the added twist that, in order to ensure racial apartheid forever, homeowners can only lease their land to anyone who lacks the required blood quantum, but cannot buy or sell the land or pass it through a will.
OHA is a state government agency created in the Hawai'i 1978 Constitutional Convention. The Constitutional amendment that created OHA established three pillars of racial segregation for OHA. (a) Only ethnic Hawaiians could vote for OHA trustees. But this requirement was invalidated by the Rice v. Cayetano decision in February 2000. (Note #15, from before) (b) Only ethnic Hawaiians could run for trustee, or be appointed to fill a vacancy. But this requirement was invalidated by the Arakaki#1 decision in August 2000. (Note #19) (c) Only ethnic Hawaiians can receive benefits from OHA. But this requirement is being attacked in the Arakaki#2 lawsuit. (Note #20)
OHA and DHHL have cost the State of Hawai'i treasury over one Billion dollars to date, and will cost an additional two Billion over the next ten years unless they are stopped. (Note #21) Although the government money comes from all Hawai'i's people, the beneficiaries are restricted by law to racially-defined "Native Hawaiians." The Arakaki#2 lawsuit, filed March 4, 2002, seeks to dismantle both agencies. (Note #20, from before) The threat posed by that lawsuit is used by those agencies for propaganda purposes to rally support for the Akaka bill (Note #22) and to encourage ethnic Hawaiians to sign up on a list whose sole criterion for membership is race. People who signed up on an earlier version of the racial roster actually received photo identification cards resembling drivers licenses, which allowed them to claim benefits from various agencies and receive discounts in stores and restaurants. They were literally "playing the race card." The current racial register is also intended to be used as an enrollment list for charter membership in a future Akaka tribe.
Metaphysical racism is used as the justification for institutional racism. The claim that ethnic Hawaiians are fundamentally different from everyone else due to their genealogy of being descended from the gods, leads to the logical conclusion that Hawaiians need separate institutions to accommodate their unique way of learning and knowing. The creation story Kumulipo says that the gods gave birth to the Hawaiian islands as living beings, and later the gods gave birth to the ancestor of all ethnic Hawaiians. The logical conclusion is that Hawaiians are entitled to exercise racial supremacy in controlling the political life and institutions of their indigenous homeland where they have a genealogical connection as younger siblings to the land itself and where their parents -- the gods and ancestral spirits -- watch over and guide them.
Claims are made that a racially separate system of healthcare research and delivery is needed. Surprisingly, this need for separate medical study and treatment is NOT usually asserted on grounds that there are large biological or genetic differences. For example, studies to date show correlational relationships between "being Hawaiian" and "having diabetes", but nobody has found a "Hawaiian gene" which predisposes or causes diabetes. Even Dr. Kekuni Blaisdell, Hawaiian independence activist who is a research medical doctor specializing in hematology (the study of blood!), does not claim there is anything like a Hawaiian gene. The claim for separate medical study or treatment is made on metaphysical grounds -- something in the genealogy of being descended from the Hawaiian gods creates a hard-wired style of thinking and learning. Thus ethnic Hawaiians need unique ways of having medical information explained to them; for example, an explanation to an entire family rather than to an individual patient. Ethnic Hawaiians need unique ways of receiving treatment; for example, herbal medicine with an accompaniment of prayers to the ancient gods for whom the herbs are body-forms. Without the prayers the herbs alone might not be effective. A belief that the gods are present in the herbs and should be invoked through prayer at the time the medicine is administered, is metaphysically or spiritually respectable throughout the world -- it is not very different from the Roman Catholic infallible doctrine of trans-substantiation, which says that the bread and wine are actually transformed (in their "essential nature") through the ceremony of the mass into the body and blood of Christ before they are consumed. A loaf of bread and jug of wine purchased in the supermarket are spiritually inert and cannot by themselves produce a miracle.
A large, powerful institution known as Papa Ola Lokahi was created in 1988 through an act of Congress. This institution is federally funded, and racially exclusionary -- it focuses on studying the health problems of ethnic Hawaiians. Papa Ola Lokahi gathers large amounts of data for the purpose of proving that ethnic Hawaiians are at the bottom of Hawai'i's ethnic groups in having the worst statistics for diabetes, breast cancer, etc. Then Papa Ola Lokahi uses that data to apply for grants to study these problems further, gather more data, apply for more grants, and provide services to ethnic Hawaiian agencies that might provide medical services to ethnic Hawaiians. (Note #23) The issue, of course, is breast cancer and not race. The government should provide money to do research on breast cancer and to provide services to any needy women who have that disease, regardless of race. If it is true that ethnic Hawaiians are more likely than others to have this disease, then of course ethnic Hawaiians would receive benefit from government-funded race-neutral research, and more government assistance than other racial groups -- not because the assistance is earmarked by race, but because that racial group has a higher incidence of the disease and/or a larger number of financially needy victims. Race-based medical research focusing on ethnic Hawaiians has become very lucrative because of federal appropriations secured by Hawai'i's powerful Senators Dan Inouye and Dan Akaka. An entire new department of Native Hawaiian medicine was established at the University of Hawai'i John Burns School of Medicine, where more research will be used to generate more grants to build a bigger racial bureaucracy.
Another race-based institution with money and power is Alu Like. The public perceives its niche to be vocational training for ethnic Hawaiians. But in fact the organization's mission also includes assistance to ethnic Hawaiian businesses, an ethnic-focused library, childcare, and the sponsorship of Hawaiian-language research and teaching programs including translation of Hawaiian-language newspapers from the Kingdom and Territorial periods. (Note #24)
Another example is the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, partially funded by the state Legislature's annual appropriation of tax dollars, whose purpose is to file lawsuits against individuals, companies, and the state and local governments on behalf of ethnic Hawaiian individuals or to protect the interests of the racial group as a whole. During the legislative session of 2005 an attempt was made to require the NHLC to stop hiring preferred contractors (attorneys) without a bidding process. Legislation was written to withdraw government funding completely from NHLC, or to require NHLC to put its legal services contracts out to public bid. Ethnic Hawaiian Senator Clayton Hee, formerly Chairman of OHA, became involved in the dispute, along with white Senator Fred Hemmings. Clayton Hee made remarks on the Senate floor attacking Senator Hemmings as a possessor of white privilege and, in effect, challenging Hemmings' right as a white man to participate in making decisions about an ethnic Hawaiian institution. After the 2005 Legislative session ended, Hemmings published a blistering letter defending himself from those racist attacks, pointing out that Hemmings' ancestors were (non-native) citizens of the Hawaiian Kingdom, and that Hemmings has a personal history of character development profoundly shaped by Hawai'i's sacred environment. Hemmings' letter is copied in Note #25. The 30-year history of NHLC, and the 2005 dispute over how the state Legislature should exercise control over its funding and contracting procedures, is portrayed in a commentary by the long-time executive director of NHLC, Mahealani Kamauu. (note #25)
There are numerous other examples of race-based government institutions in Hawai'i, or private tax-exempt corporations formed for the specific purpose of receiving government grants to provide services exclusively to one racial group. Two of them are education programs at opposite ends of the age spectrum. Native Hawaiian Leadership Project headquartered at University of Hawai'i (Manoa) receives federal grants of many millions of dollars per year to provide scholarships racially restricted to ethnic Hawaiians for undergraduate and graduate college tuition in any college in the United States, and for ethnic Hawaiian professors to travel to scholarly conventions. Na Pua No'eau supports gifted and talented young ethnic Hawaiian children by funding racially exclusionary enrichment programs or by paying tuition costs for individual ethnic Hawaiians to attend non-segregated programs.
An obvious example of institutional racism on the private side is the racially exclusionary Kamehameha Schools. Formerly known as Bishop Estate, it is Hawai'i's largest private landowner with assets valued somewhere between 6 to 15 Billion dollars. This tax-exempt "charitable trust" is extremely powerful in Hawai'i's political system and even in the U.S. economic system -- at one time it owned 10% of Goldman-Sachs brokerage firm, and kept Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin on retainer. The schools have ruthlessly maintained a racially exclusionary admissions policy which has come under court challenge in recent years. (Note #26) One of the main reasons for the red-shirt marches (Note #5 from before) was to flaunt alumni and student support for the racist admissions policy.
The extreme limit of institutional racism would be to create a race-based government. Such a government might create an apartheid regime for Hawai'i -- a racial separatist government controlling all or a large part of the ceded lands (95% of all the public lands of Hawai'i). The Akaka bill would authorize the creation of such a government. (Note #22 from before) Presumably Kamehameha Schools, including its vast wealth and landholdings, would choose to re-incorporate itself under the auspices of the new ethnic Hawaiian government, along with other race-based institutions.
An alternative model of extreme institutional racism would be the restoration of the entire archipelago of Hawai'i as an independent nation, coupled with ethnic Hawaiian racial supremacy based on a theory of "indigenous rights." Ethnic Hawaiians would have full voting rights while everyone else would be limited to certain topics; and ethnic Hawaiians would have full property rights while everyone else would be limited to land ownership only in certain restricted areas and/or limited to leasehold. The government of Fiji is an example of what Hawaiian sovereignty independence activists have in mind. On several occasions in recent years, when Asian Fijians actually won control of the government through free and democratic elections, the native Fijians staged military coups and rewrote the Constitution to guarantee native supremacy. For a comparison of the actual situation in Fiji with the situation in Hawai'i as envisioned by Hawaiian independence activists, see Note #27.
THE VELVET SOFTNESS OF HAWAIIAN RACISM -- HAWAIIAN VICTIMHOOD CLAIMS ARE POWERFUL WEAPONS ENSLAVING WHITES AS A DEBTOR RACE WHOSE DEBTS CAN NEVER BE PAID
The fact that white and Asian politicians and businessmen with no native ancestry enthusiastically cooperate with institutions or legislation that are racist against them, does not make those things any less racist. As explained earlier, the racism in Hawai'i is different from historic white racism against blacks. The racism in Hawai'i is more likely to be institutional rather than individual. It is more likely to be non-violent. It is likely to be subtle, but all-pervasive. Perhaps it is analogous to the "Stockholm syndrome" in which a hostage held for a long period of time becomes sympathetic toward his captor and may even enthusiastically help the captor. Imagine an auto collision at two miles per hour where the "victim" claims to have suffered whiplash so severe he is crippled for life; and the guilty driver feels so guilty he spends his whole life paying damages and cleaning house for the victim, and talks his children into doing the same thing for the victim's children. In such a scenario it's debatable just who is the real victim.
The Hawaiian grievance industry spends an enormous amount of time and money creating and "documenting" victimhood claims. That's because such claims are used as weapons in extorting compassion and political concessions from all who lack a drop of the magic blood; and because such claims on topics of health, education, housing, and poverty can be used to demand money for powerful race-based institutions. Most of the money to pay for research to gather data to support victimhood claims comes from government or philanthropic institutions which then are expected to provide huge grants to support bureaucracies to study the problems further and perhaps, along the way, to deliver some social services.
Victimhood claims are very easy to assert in just a few words, and astonishingly difficult to disprove through time-consuming research and lengthy documentation. Here are five victimhood claims that are clearly false, and the large webpages that provide ample documentation of their falsity. Many more examples could be provided. Hawaiian language was made illegal after the overthrow of the monarchy (Note #28). Following the overthrow (or annexation) the Hawaiian flag was desecrated by hauling it down from atop 'Iolani Palace and cutting it into strips that were handed out as souvenirs to the white leaders (Note #29). The (government and) crown lands, now known as the "ceded lands", belonged to the (ethnic) Hawaiian people and were stolen from them (Note #30). Private property deeds in Hawai'i are not valid (because all Hawai'i governments since 1893, which officially record land conveyances, are illegal) (Note #31). The International Court of Justice at the Hague has ruled that the Kingdom of Hawai'i still exists and is the rightful government of Hawai'i (Note #32). Mauna Ala (the Royal Mausoleum) was exempted from the ceded lands and remains to this day the sovereign territory of the Kingdom of Hawai'i (Note #33).
Sometimes victimhood claims are strung together like poisonous flowers in an evil lei to be hung around the necks of the "oppressors." The collection of claims are asserted in formal documents such as the preamble ("findings") of a piece of legislation.
In the 106th Congress, 1999 to 2000, the bill S.1929 was introduced, to provide a race-based entitlement for free healthcare for all ethnic Hawaiians regardless of financial need. The bill contained 29 false or twisted historical or legal victimhood claims made in the "Findings" preamble to the bill, that were intended to provide justification for the health care bill as well as to put Congress on record in support of special political status for a racial group. A webpage provides rebuttals for those 29 points. (Note #34)
Since the summer of 2000 one or more versions of the Akaka bill have always been circulating through Congress. The "findings" preamble to the bill contains numerous false or twisted historical or legal victimhood claims. Those claims are refuted by Honolulu attorney Paul Sullivan in his monograph "Killing Aloha." (Note #35)
Hawaiian racism is rationalized as an attempt to ensure survival of a unique endangered species by fencing out greedy predators and by protecting a smaller population from being overwhelmed by a larger one. It is portrayed as an effort by an ethnic minority of "indigenous" people to withdraw into a protective cocoon -- the opposite of a racist group seeking to dominate, oppress, and exploit others as a white majority did to blacks in America and as a white minority did to blacks in Africa.
The laudable desire to perpetuate Hawaiian culture as the core of Hawai'i's multiracial society is confused with demands for Hawaiian racial supremacy to be enshrined in law through the creation of an apartheid regime. This confusion is intentionally fostered by supporters of the Akaka bill. OHA trustee Boyd Mossman has been particularly aggressive in pushing the "endangered species" argument as a justification for the Akaka bill. (Note #36) However, this "endangered species" has seen unprecedented prosperity during the first century of American sovereignty in Hawai'i, while its numbers have multiplied tenfold, from fewer than 40,000 in the year 1900 to more than 401,000 in the year 2000. (Note #10, from before)
While it is true that the Akaka model of racial separatism envisions an apparently humble cocooning into only a portion of Hawai'i's lands, the independence activists seek racial supremacy over the entirety of Hawai'i through restricting the voting and property rights of non-natives in a multiracial nation. Also, both the Akaka tribal model and the independence model envision a permanent arrangement whereby all Hawai'i's people and all America's people would be forced to subsidize ethnic Hawaiians by establishing a permanent funneling of billions of tax dollars to them and by turning over public lands for their exclusive use. The tribal model would send federal money and land to ethnic Hawaiians the same way the U.S. now subsidizes Indian tribes. The independence model envisions huge reparations from the U.S. to the newly independent nation of Hawai'i because of more than a century of illegal occupation and colonial exploitation; and perhaps additional money would be paid as rent for the leasing of military bases in case the Hawaiian government decides to allow the U.S. to keep those bases in Hawai'i.
If Jim is forced to give money, land, or labor to Kimo one time against his will, it might be called robbery or extortion. But when that happens on an on-going basis by law forever, we might then say that Jim is Kimo's slave. Slavery based on race is racism, even if the master seems friendly and entertains the slave by performing hula. It is racism, even if the slave dearly loves the master and considers it morally righteous for the master to rule him because the master has intellectual, spiritual, and moral superiority. "Native Hawaiians" are the state pet or mascot of Hawai'i. They are Hawai'i's "punahele" race (favorite and specially entitled). (Note #37)
Hawaiian activists are not bashful about publicly portraying ethnic Hawaiians as victims. The idea is to seek sympathy, make whites feel guilty for the downfall of Hawaiians, seek apologies, and then demand reparations in the form of money, land, and power. Racially exclusionary institutions, and a future racially exclusionary government, are seen not as evil but as long-overdue installments on a debt so vast it can never be paid. Politically liberal whites easily succumb to the guilt trip and eagerly support institutional racism and even personal racism directed against themselves. Politically liberal Asians are glad that whites deserve most of the blame. They know the racism of ethnic Hawaiian racially exclusionary institutions is not intentionally directed against Asians. Asian liberals are willing to accept collateral damage to themselves because, after all, Hawai'i rightfully belongs to the Hawaiians; and maybe it's OK if whites are taken down (because whites also oppressed Asians during the plantation era and discriminated against them even after that).
Hawaiian victimhood claims are both historical and current. Historical victimhood is always at the hands of whites. The United States is blamed for everything even though the first 42 years of victimization came mostly from England (and partly from Russia). Current victimhood is reflected in statistics purporting to show that Hawaiians are at the bottom among all Hawai'i's ethnic groups on measures such as poverty, breast cancer, diabetes, obesity, substance abuse, incarceration, family dysfunction, lifespan, etc. Such victimhood is attributed to lingering effects of the overthrow of the monarchy (1893!!) and "Westernization" of lifestyle.
There are common core anti-white and anti-American attitudes held by all sovereignty activists, including supporters of the Akaka bill. The history put forward by all sovereignty activists (including whites) goes like this. White sailors from England who "discovered" Hawai'i in 1778 brought diseases which wiped out 95% of native Hawaiians. White missionaries from America (beginning in 1820) "forced" native Hawaiians to adopt religious views contrary to native culture, and smoothed the way for colonialism. White businessmen from America colonized Hawai'i and eventually conspired with the U.S. government to overthrow the native government. The United States staged an armed military invasion in 1893 which overthrew the monarchy, and established a puppet regime. After a few years the puppet regime was able to get Hawai'i annexed to the United States despite a written protest signed by nearly all ethnic Hawaiians. The puppet regime both before and after annexation made Hawaiian language illegal and suppressed the native Hawaiian culture. Hawai'i is now under military occupation by the United States. Native Hawaiians are oppressed and their culture is trivialized by a tourist industry using it to reap huge profits. The core attitudes of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement include racial separatism, ethnic nationalism, anti-Americanism, and racial supremacy. For details about this common core see Note #38.
Many of the historical grievances in the earlier paragraph are false or greatly distorted, as shown by numerous other webpages on this website. But the point is that Hawaiian activists push this version of history; white liberals eagerly embrace the guilt; and Asian liberals choose not to ask too many impolite questions. The University of Hawai'i is controlled, on all issues related to Hawaiian history and ethnic politics, by radicals in the Center for Hawaiian Studies and affiliated liberal arts departments. The public school curriculum in Hawaiian history and Hawaiian culture is controlled by activist commisars, including a program of "kupuna in the schools" -- elders who must be ethnic Hawaiian and who teach Hawaiian crafts, music, and stories.
Perhaps the best victimhood tear-jerker is a little book "Then There Were None" by Martha H. Noyes (based on Elizabeth Lindsey Buyers TV docudrama) The book is part of a propaganda campaign to make everyone "feel the pain" of "Native Hawaiians" who have become "strangers in their own homeland." The constant theme running through the book is the steadily declining number of "pure Hawaiians" until, sometime in the near future, "then there were none." An essay-length book review can be found on this website. Also provided are a review by Honolulu Advertiser music critic Gregory Shepherd of a live performance based on the book's contents, and a book review by Honolulu Advertiser books editor Wanda Adams. (Note #39)
The portrayal of ethnic Hawaiians as an "endangered species" victimized by history and especially by white men got a boost from three different "documentaries" televised during a five day period to local audiences in Hawai'i. The Eddie Aikau biography, televised locally on April 19, was previously mentioned and further discussed in Note #17. The other two documentaries were televised to nationwide audiences. The timing was surely not accidental. In 2004 Senators Akaka and Inouye maneuvered to force the Republican leadership to guarantee a vote on the Akaka bill not later than August 2005.
"The Hawaiians" was broadcast in Hawai'i April 15, 2005. It was advertised as a documentary that tells the history of ethnic Hawaiians in one hour. But actually it's an infomercial by Hawaiian activist filmmaker Edgy Lee, paid for by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Kamehameha Schools. Stunning photography and expert narration portray Hawaiians as a great people brought low by white men. A review by Honolulu Star-Bulletin film critic Tim Ryan, entitled "Half the Truth," clearly identifies it as a propaganda film. (Note #40)
Another Hawaiian victimhood docudrama, televised on April 18, 2005 was a one hour PBS program on the Massie case, timed to coincide with publication of a book about that case by University of Hawai'i Professor David Stannard. Not coincidentally, Stannard is the long-time live-in lover of Professor Haunani-Kay Trask. He is also the author of an earlier book, "Before the Horror," about the "genocide" of native Hawaiians caused by diseases brought to Hawai'i by white men (Although the term "genocide" refers to the intentional slaughter of a racial group, as in Nazi genocide against Jews or Rwandan genocide by Tutsis against Hutus, Hawaiian activists like to solicit pity for victimhood status by throwing around the term "genocide" to describe the unintentional deaths of a large portion of the native population resulting from diseases for which the natives had no biological resistance due to centuries of isolation). Stannard and Trask had a good year, since they also organized the visit to the University of Hawai'i by anti-white and anti-American radical Ward Churchill immediately after Churchill became hotly controversial in the national media.
The Massie case involved a false accusation of rape in which a white woman married to a Navy officer claimed to have been raped by a gang of local men who were Hawaiian and Asian. One of the Hawaiian men, although falsely accused, was murdered by the woman's supporters at the urging of the woman's politically connected mother after a jury had found him not guilty. The white murderers were found guilty in a trial by a racially mixed jury, but their sentence was commuted by the Governor to one hour to be spent having refreshments in the Governor's office. The case caused a nationwide uproar over whether white women are safe in Hawai'i, and whether white defendants can get a fair trial with brown-skinned jurors. But nowadays the case is rightly seen as an example of the terrible racism by whites against local Hawaiians and Asians. (Note #41)
The Massie case TV documentary and book are interesting in the context of this webpage because the events in the Massie Case occurred in 1931. That's nearly 75 years ago, at a time when blacks were being lynched in the Southern United States in significant numbers. In general, ethnic Hawaiians and Asians were being treated far better in Hawai'i than they would have been treated anywhere else in America at that time. So, why is the case being brought to the fore in a nationwide PBS broadcast and coordinated book publication in April 2005? And why at the same time as the propaganda documentary "The Hawaiians" and the heroic tragedy of Eddie Aikau?
The obvious answer is that Hawaiian activists have decided this is a good time to stir white and Asian compassion toward Hawaiians as victims, and also to stir up ethnic Hawaiian solidarity and resentment toward whites. It's always a good time to do those things, but the likely scheduling of a vote on the Akaka bill in Congress makes this an especially good time. The main reasons offered in support of the Akaka bill are either false or irrelevant. Supporters of the bill say it is not about race -- they say its purpose is to protect indigenous rights, self-determination, and cultural preservation; but careful study shows that is false. (Note #42) The bill's primary focus is racial separatism. The purpose is to protect racial entitlement programs from legal challenges, and to establish a separate apartheid government inside the State of Hawai'i restricted to ethnic Hawaiians. Claims about illegal overthrow of the monarchy, illegal annexation, and the apology bill raise the specter of secession but are not relevant to support a bill for establishment of tribal status for ethnic Hawaiians as a political entity inside the United States.
Throughout the Spring of 2005 a series of television commercials urged ethnic Hawaiians to "kau inoa" -- sign up on a racial registry which can then be used as a basis for tribal enrollment when the Akaka bill passes. Some commercials feature powerful imagery of a group of Hawaiians dressed in costumes not normal for them but intended to make them look "indigenous." One man carried a bundle of sticks, showing that the bundle is strong and cannot be broken, whereas individual sticks are easily snapped in two. Another commercial shows a Hawaiian man sitting at home in his easy-chair reading the OHA newspaper while the radio is carrying coverage of a Hawaiian protest march; then the TV springs to life showing the march; and then a friend comes to the door and gestures to come join a group of protestors heading to the march. Of course the reference is to the series of red-shirt marches previously held. (Note #5)
There is nothing new about using the arts as propaganda vehicles. Music, film, and public performances have been used very effectively by fascist regimes to arouse public support for political purposes, both to build solidarity within a favored group and to build hostility toward an outside group. Nero's Rome, Nazi Germany, and Soviet Russia come immediately to mind. The emotional and political power of culture, music, art, architecture, film, and language were well-known by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato, who said that the government of the wise philosopher-kings must carefully control the arts. Their power was well known by propaganda experts in the Communist Soviet Union and in Nazi Germany. One of Hitler's closest advisors was Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels. He worked closely with artists, musicians, writers, and architects to harness the music of Beethoven and Wagner, the writing of Goethe and Nietsche, and the talents of a new generation. Architects like Albert Speer, and filmmakers like Leni Riefenstahl ("Olympia" and "Triumph of the Will"), produced inspirational masterpieces that stirred German passions for fascism in the 1930s and kept people enthusiastically loyal even when millions of tons of bombs were falling on them in 1943-1945.
In August, 2002 an important administrator at Kamehameha School publicly stated the concept that Hawaiian language and culture should be primary vehicles for ethnic nationbuilding, and that Kamehameha School should be the leader in such a movement. Kamehameha School renders a great service to all the people of Hawai'i by providing full-time education to some students, and enrichment programs, tutoring, and scholarships to many more. But there is danger as well. The danger is that the poison of racial separatism and ethnic nationalism implicit in the school's racially exclusionary admissions policy and in parts of the curriculum will become a spreading infection as Kamehameha reaches out to partner with the public schools, leveraging its vast wealth to dominate their curriculum and administration. The danger is that Hawaiian culture and the powerful emotions it conveys will be harnessed in the service of an evil political agenda. The ghost of Joseph Goebbels may be haunting Kamehameha School, and may soon begin traveling to neighborhood public schools throughout the islands. For more analysis about Kamehameha School's intention to harness Hawaiian culture and arts as tools to promote ethnic nationbuilding, see Note #43.
THE VELVET GLOVES ARE STARTING TO BE PULLED OFF, REVEALING THE BRASS KNUCKLES UNDERNEATH
Hawaiian victimhood propaganda has two purposes. On one hand it is intended to stir the general population to feel sympathy and compassion toward ethnic Hawaiians -- "Whatever they want, let's give it to them because we owe it to them." On the other hand, it is intended to stir up feelings of solidarity and hostility within the ethic Hawaiian community -- "Those settlers (especially the whites) have treated us badly and oppressed us in our own homeland, so now it's time for us to stand together and demand what is rightfully ours." Constant repetition of historical grievances not only builds racial solidarity and elicits compassion for victimhood, it also incites bitterness and hatred. Increasing the frequency and volume of proclaiming grievances is a way of removing the velvet gloves to reveal the brass knuckles underneath.
Within a five day period in April 2005 Hawai'i's people were treated to three TV propaganda spectaculars building racial solidarity and anti-white resentment among ethnic Hawaiians, while jerking tears from non-Hawaiians by celebrating Hawaiian victimhood. "The Hawaiians" was broadcast on April 15, the Massie case on April 18, and the Eddie Aikau biography on April 19. Only a couple months previously Hawaiian activists (especially Trask and Stannard) were at the forefront inviting anti-American radical Ward Churchill to lecture at the University of Hawai'i. The invitation was extended at the exact moment when negative publicity about Churchill's anti-Americanism was at its nationwide peak.
Activists seeking independence and activists seeking tribal recognition share a common core of historical grievances against the U.S. and against white people, which was described earlier. (Note #38, from before) Those historical grievances can obviously be used to incite Anti-Americanism. Most Hawaiians of native ancestry are not sovereignty activists, and probably not favorable to either version of Hawaiian sovereignty. They are proud to be Americans and totally uninterested in re-establishing Hawai'i as an independent nation. They also do not want an apartheid partitioning of Hawai'i that would occur through the creation of a race-based (tribal) government under the Akaka bill. However, there are various degrees of anti-Americanism among both the independence activists and supporters of the Akaka bill. The nature of the anti-Americanism in the Hawaiian sovereignty movement is described and documented in a large webpage. (Note #44)
Consider how we remember the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King. Was he a racial partisan for dark-skinned people against whites, or was he a fighter for full equality for all races? Considering the nature of American society at the time Dr. King was active, perhaps those two descriptions merge into one. Dark-skinned people were oppressed by whites, so championing their cause and struggling against whites was necessary to achieve full equality for all races. But would Dr. King have gone further in his racial partisanship? Once equality was achieved, would Dr. King have continued on, to seek racial supremacy for blacks?
Hawaiian sovereignty activists have tried to claim the legacy of Dr. King, focusing on how he fought for the rights of dark-skinned people aginst a white power-establishment. Hawaiian activists believe the U.S. staged an armed invasion of their indigenous homeland and has illegally engaged in a belligerant military occupation of the Hawaiian indigenous homeland for over a century. They believe white people were responsible for the decimation of the native population, for the destruction of Hawaiian culture and language, and for the subjugation of the natives under a white colonialist regime. Thus, Hawaiian activists believe Dr. King would be on their side as a fighter for the rights of dark-skinned people against whites.
Opponents of race-based government programs for ethnic Hawaiians point out that Dr. King's most fundamental principle was that all people should be treated equally under the law, and should be judged by the content of their character rather than by the color of their skin. But Hawaiian sovereignty activists then laugh and say it would be absurd to imagine white people marching through the streets of Hawai'i demanding equal rights and singing "We shall overcome, someday."
Marsha Joyner, formerly head of the NAACP of Hawai'i and a supporter of the Hawaiian independence movement, has stated at public rallies and on the radio that Dr. King was fighting for the rights of African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, American Indians, and others "of color" both in the civil rights struggle and in the labor union movement -- fighting for the rights of poor downtrodden people of color against a wealthy and powerful white establishment. Sovereignty activists, and NAACP leaders, thus portray Dr. King as a racial partisan engaged in a racial confrontation for money and power, rather than as a man of principle fighting for fundamental colorblind equality for all people regardless of race.
Portraying Dr. King as merely a racial partisan does a disservice to his memory, suggesting that his Nobel Peace Prize was awarded improperly. It also makes visible the anti-white attitude of Hawaiian sovereignty activists. (Note #45)
Another way Hawaiian activists remove their velvet gloves to reveal the brass knuckles is in their effort to recruit Hawai'i's people of Asian ancestry to form a majority dark-skin coalition resentful toward white people and toward the United States.
The activists like to remind today's Hawai'i citizens of Asian ancestry about the denial of voting rights to Asians under the Hawaiian Kingdom's "Bayonet Constitution" of 1887. That Constitution was demanded by the white businessmen but was, of course, promulgated under the authority and signature of King Kalakaua. The fact is that both Hawaiians and whites had a desire to protect their voting majority against the rapid growth of the Asian population recruited for the plantations by King Kalakaua on his trip to Asia.
Hawaiian activists like to remind Asians about the exploitation of Japanese, Chinese, and Filipino plantation laborers who lived under primitive conditions and earned very low wages while being kept on the plantations under long-term contracts of indentured servitude. But of course many tens of thousands of Asians continued coming to Hawai'i to work on the plantations even knowing what the conditions were; and they sent huge remittances to their families back in Asia; and they brought in "picture brides" who willingly came to join them; and today's descendants of the plantation workers look back with fond memory and nostalgia at plantation life.
The activists remind Asians about the Chinese Exclusion Act that prevented Chinese immigration to the United States a hundred years ago; and laws that prevented Asian immigrants from becoming American citizens or having voting rights. The activists stir up bitter memories of racism against Hawaiians, Chinese, and Japanese shown by both the American military and local white people in the Massie Case in Honolulu of 75 years ago (which hardly anybody now alive can remember). (Note #41, from before)
Data from Census 2000 show that ethnic Japanese have higher incomes than whites in Hawai'i; and it is also widely believed that Japanese are disproportionately powerful in the state government, especially in the government bureaucracies, the Legislature, and the public school system. Ethnic Japanese are greatly over-represented in the student body of the University of Hawai'i when their percentage of UH enrollment is compared with their percentage of the state's population; Hawaiians are significantly over-represented; ethnic Filipinos are represented appropriately; ethnic Caucasians are significantly under-represented; and ethnic Chinese are greatly under-represented. People of Asian ancestry in Hawai'i certainly are not entitled to any grievances against whites based on current economic status or political power. (Note #46)
Activists wanting to rip the 50th star off the flag have been pushing nonviolently for Hawaiian independence for many years. Although the independence movement has not resorted to physical violence, there is a more subtle violence of gradually escalating intimidation.
One form of intimidation is the increasing presence of bare-chested ethnic Hawaiian "warriors" carrying spears and doing warlike chants in various cultural performances such as the Merrie Monarch hula competition and the Kamehameha Schools song contest intermission "ho'ike" (show). Those warriors are also present in the red-shirt marches which were intended to show solidarity but also intended to "send a message" to federal judges in the Arakaki#2 and Kamehameha Schools lawsuits. (Note #5) The ancient martial-arts bone-breaking techniques of "lua" are now also being revived through various cultural groups and are occasionally displayed to the public. The Maori war chants from Aotearoa (New Zealand) are now being adapted for use by Hawaiian groups, partly because those chants are so powerful and intimidating -- a formation of bare-chested warriors covered in tattoos, carrying spears or clubs, chanting loudly in unison (tu mate, tu mate -- your death, your death) while marching aggressively, sticking their tongues out at the end of the chant as a threatening challenge to anyone who would dare to defy them.
One high-profile leader in the ethnic Hawaiian community is "Uncle Charlie" Maxwell. He likes to portray himself as a "reverend" (although he is not ordained and has never led a congregation), and he has for many years been Chairman of the Hawai'i Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. But despite his "reverend" pretensions and his leadership of a civil rights organization, he aggressively intimidates individuals, small businesses, and government institutions with demands for money and political power (sort of like Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton, but much less successfully). He also has repeatedly followed a pattern of making demands and then reminding listeners that "Hawaiians were once a warrior people" and "Our backs are up against the wall." (Note #47) Let's be clear that a threat of future violence is itself an act of violence in the present.
HOW THE AKAKA BILL FACILITATES THE VICIOUSNESS OF RACISM AND ANTI-AMERICANISM
The apology resolution of 1993 (U.S. apology to ethnic Hawaiians for the overthrow of the monarchy) gave great impetus to both the secessionist movement and to demands for race-based group rights, communal land tenure, and megabucks in reparations -- despite assurances from Senator Inouye on the floor of the Senate that the apology bill would not be used in that way. Independence activists cite the apology bill as a confession of a crime, and demand independence as the only rightful restitution. The Akaka bill incorporates the apology resolution as justification for providing "reconciliation" in the form of federal recognition of a "Native Hawaiian" tribe.
The Akaka bill would give a major boost to the secessionist movement -- indeed, supporters of the Akaka bill, including Senator Akaka himself, go as far as they can go to support secession without actually committing treason. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights relied heavily on the apology resolution to claim that the civil rights of ethnic Hawaiians are violated by the Supreme Court decision in Rice v. Cayetano, and that the Akaka bill should be supported as a way to protect those rights during a transitional period in which ethnic Hawaiians have a perfect right to force the secession of Hawai'i from the United States. The Akaka bill should not be seen as a way to strengthen the ties of Hawai'i to the United States, to make ethnic Hawaiians more patriotic toward America, to dampen demands for independence, or to promote racial reconciliation. On the contrary, the Akaka bill facilitates and enables the Hawaiian independence movement by giving money and political power to race-based institutions harboring people who see themselves as primarily Hawaiians and only secondarily (or not at all) as Americans. All these points are discussed further in a large webpage showing how the Akaka bill is seen by its supporters as a way to facilitate the secession of Hawai'i from the United States. (Note #48)
Although it wears a velvet glove, Hawaiian racism is extraordinarily powerful. If the Akaka bill passes, the velvet glove will soon be removed to reveal the brass knuckles underneath.
If the Akaka bill passes, a government of the race, by the race, and for the race will be empowered by the federal government to negotiate against the state and federal governments for money, land, and power. The Akaka bill sets up an adversarial confrontation pitting ethnic Hawaiians against everyone else, allowing a twenty-year period of bitter disputes and lawsuits against the federal government and an unlimited time period for fighting against the State of Hawai'i.
First, the bill is intentionally anti-democratic. It will allow any small fraction (perhaps 30,000) of ethnic Hawaiians wanting to create a tribe to get federally recognized as speaking on behalf of all 400,000 -- and there's no way the majority of ethnic Hawaiians can prevent such a thing from happening. It will allow the tribal council to ratify a final global settlement with the federal government, without putting that settlement to a vote of tribal members let alone a vote of all ethnic Hawaiians. It will allow the Legislature of the State of Hawai'i to ratify a final global settlement giving the tribe perhaps 95% of all the public lands of Hawai'i , and huge sums of money, and political jurisdiction over civil and criminal law -- the Legislature can do all this without putting the settlement to a vote of Hawai'i's people in the way required for even "trivial" Constitutional amendments. A large webpage describes some of the amendments that would be needed to make the Akaka bill more democratic (in the context of its evil purpose of establishing an apartheid regime).
The Akaka bill violates the rights of ethnic Hawaiians, both those who join the tribe and those who do not. Those who join will be governed by tribal laws enforced by tribal police and tribal courts. The laws and court procedures are established by the tribal council in accord with their view of Hawaiian culture and historical custom, with no recourse to the protections of the laws of Hawai'i or of the U.S. For example laws for marriage, divorce, child custody, and alimony might be written and enforced by people like Clayton Hee, Rowena Akana, John Waihe'e, and Clyde Namu'o. Ethnic Hawaiians will feel compelled to join the tribe and submit themselves to its jurisdiction, because all government benefits currently given to any ethnic Hawaiian must now flow through the tribe to tribal members only. (Note #50)
The Akaka bill violates the rights of Hawai'i citizens with no native ancestry, and would devastate businesses and local communities. Tribal sovereignty includes the right to evade state and local taxes, ignore local zoning and environmental regulations, violate minimum wage and occupational safety laws, and contribute millions of dollars to (bribe) candidates for federal, state and county offices without regard to campaign spending laws. Most importantly, the Akaka bill allows a minority of a minority group to force the carving up of the State of Hawai'i along racial lines with no vote among all ethnic Hawaiians or among all Hawai'i's people regarding whether such a thing should be done at all. (Note #51)
The Akaka bill sets a precedent leading to the further balkanization of America by African-Americans seeking reparations for slavery, and by Latinos demanding the creation of a sovereign "Nation of Aztlan" for Americans of Aztec (Hispanic) ancestry. Just how far do we want to allow "identity politics" to fragment our nation? (Note #52)
FOOTNOTES (52 footnotes occupying more than 60% of the space for this essay provide both content and references. Some footnotes are quite lengthy, and are cited more than once)
An essay by Chief Maui Loa of the Hou Hawaiians illustrates native Hawaiian racism against Asians. On April 6, 2005 Chief Maui Loa wrote an open letter to President Bush opposing the Akaka Bill (S.147). He argues that "Hawaiians of the blood" (those who have more than 50% native blood quantum) already have federal recognition under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920 and the Hawai'i statehood admissions act of 1959. His view is that the Constitution of the State of Hawai'i as amended in 1978 established the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and later legislation awarded a continuous flow of 20% of ceded land revenues to OHA specifically earmarked for Hawaiians of the blood. Chief Maui Loa makes repeated disparaging remarks against ethnic Hawaiians of low native blood quantum, most of whom are primarily of Japanese or Chinese ancestry. He says they are Asians, not Hawaiians. (Another defender of special rights for "true Hawaiians" is Emmett Lee-Loy, who refers to low-quantum Hawaiians as "toenail Hawaiians."). Maui Loa says these "Asians" are creating a minstrel show of counterfeit Hawaiian culture and are backing the Akaka bill to seize control of what rightfully belongs to Hawaiians of the blood. Maui Loa's complete open letter can be seen at:
He published essentially the same content in an Indian Country Today article on April 26, 2005:
Below are two e-mails written by Eric Po'ohina from his e-mail account firstname.lastname@example.org. (Interestingly, "'aumakua" refers to the spirits of deified family ancestors who make occasional appearances today as guardian spirits in the bodies of sea turtles, eels, sharks, or owls). These e-mails were widely circulated, and clearly illustrate deep-seated racism that is so vicious that the author denounces portions of his own genealogy. Original incorrect spellings have been preserved. Mr. Po'ohina was convicted of (among other things) harassing a teenage girl who was his neighbor, and violating a court order prohibiting him from contacting her.
November 8, 2004
Intermingling of cultures by ha'ole and asian nations can be defined as ethnic clensing and or rape by native peoples of the world. My ancestors never invited the ha'ole or asians. They have extended their vacation time. The vacation is over pack your bags and go home. Although I might have a drop of Germen koko I denounce by Germen DNA. There is no way in hell that the Germen people in Germeny would acknowledge me as a human. Plus the way the Germens treated the native peoples in the Pacific, especially Samoa, is
unacceptable. The Ole Mau of Western Samoa ( The Independent Nation
State of Samoa ) kicked their white rear ends out of Samoa and tried their best to stop the Germens from copulating with Samoan women. Long live the global native resistence movement. Kick the ha'ole and asians back to their homeland and take their religions home. Long live the spirit of the OLe Mau
And oh yes if all those ha'ole colonizing countries like the intermingling of cultures so much then they should agree to have the Zulu warriors of Africa copulate with their young teenage european girls. I will be very happy to
organize the intermingling of euro afro cultures. I'm sure the Germens would agree to have Zulu as part of their genealogy. In fact I'm sure the Germans wouldnt mind if I copulated with one of their young women since I am 1/32nd Germen hahahahahahahahaha Ku'e Kupa Maoli Hawaii Ne History will never forgive the atrocities commited upon the native peoples in the pacific and the world by Britin, the U.S., Russia, France, Germany, Japan, China in the name of imperialism. Thats why for me I publicly denounce and drop of Euro
[** the word "pocho" is a derogatory reference to people of Portuguese ancestry **]
April 12, 2005
The pochos never brought the ukulele to Hawaii the ukulele was invented
by Hawaiian musicians. The braghinia was a guitar similar to a quatro.
The ukulele is a composite of a guitar a violin and a lute. On the inter marriage issue. I am absotultely sure that if my Hawaiian ancestors knew why the immigrant dogs from england,germany, portugal japland, china, phlipland etc.etc. the reason why they were here was to dominate their culture they would not have married immigrant dogs. The immigrant dogs were planted here in hawaii by their country to take over and dominate the Hawaiian culture its people and their religion. Thats why I am ashamed of my german dna. And I publicly denounce my german ancestory. The proof? Try going to the immigrant dogs country and inter marry with their young women. The immigrant dogs would kill any dark skinned race who would try to assimilate into their culture. Whats my solution? Go back to your own homeland. If your part Hawaiian and part immigrant dog go back to the homeland that you like the best. The pochos are the most racist bastards against the Hawaiian people. Sure glad I'm not part pocho but then I could have been part jap. I'd rather be a dog than a white secular male christian or a bald headed buddah.
University of Hawai'i Professor Haunani-Kay Trask is famous for her vitriolic public statements denouncing American culture and foreign policy; and she does not hesitate to make racist public attacks both orally and in writing against the white race in general and against individual white students on account of their being white. For an overview of Professor Trask's opinions, see:
A racist attack by Professor Trask against a white undergraduate student in her own department, specifically directed against his being white, and published in the student newspaper by admiring editors, can be seen her article "Caucasians are haole." together with other related articles, at:
Professor Trask has composed poetry filled with themes of hate and physical violence. For example, below is Trasks' poem "Racist White Woman" as published in her book of poetry entitled "Light In The Crevice Never Seen." Her book "From a Native Daughter" has been a required textbook for many years at the Universityof Hawai'i (where white women are in some of the classes using the book). On Thursday, April 14, 2005, 6:30 pm, Haunani-Kay Trask gave a reading and lecture on her book "From a Native Daughter" at the Hawaii State Public Library. Earlier in 2005 the Hawaii Library Association (HLA) submitted "From a Native Daughter" as its adult book selection for the American Library Association's (ALA) "Many Voices, One Nation" project, and it is now part of ALA's "America's Booklist."
"Racist White Woman
I could kick
Your face, puncture
You deserve this kind
No more vicious
Just a knife
Slitting your tight
For all my people
Under your feet
For all those years
Lived smug and wealthy
Off our land
In your painted
Adolf Hitler was reported to be very worried that one of his grandfathers might have been Jewish; and Reinhard Heydrich, Chief of SS Intelligence and boss of Adolf Eichman, was haunted by a similar fear. In an on-line discussion sponsored by the Chronicle of Higher Education, Professor Bryan Mark Rigg, who recently published a book on the surprisingly large role of Jews in Hitler's military, said the following: "I explore all these men's Jewish or possibly Jewish origins in my book. During my research, some have claimed that Hitler was of Jewish descent. The facts seemed to indicate that Hitler feared that his paternal grandfather was Jewish. As psychiatrist and author of Hitler: Diagnosis of a Destructive Prophet, Fritz Redlich said that "Hitler was mixed up about his descent. He was definitely scared about the possiblity that he had a Jewish grandfather." However, no documents that I am aware of have survived to confirm or deny this allegation. Heydrich was definitely haunted by stories of his Jewish past, but whether he had any or not, still remains unknown -- unless more documents come to light. He, like Hitler, probably did not have any Jewish ancestry. But from a psychological point of view, it is interesting to note that they both feared it." The complete on-line discussion is available at:
Many whites and Asians are made welcome and actively participate in the Hawaiian sovereignty movement. Even Governor Lingle (a Jewish woman) and some white and Asian Legislators and business leaders participate in the "red shirt" marches to support "Native Hawaiian rights"; along with the usual assortment of leftists, hippies, and "save-the whale" white and Asian activists who support any anti-establishment cause-du-jour.
There have been a series of red-shirt marches following a traditional route from Ala Moana Park through the heart of Waikiki to Kapi'olani Park, and also some red-shirt demonstrations both at the U.S. District Court and at the downtown venue for the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Some degree of anti-Americanism is always shown, although it is downplayed in order to broaden the base of support and to permit the participation of Governor Lingle and other "establishment" politicians.
A huge pro-apartheid march and rally were held in Waikiki on Sunday September 7, 2003. Somewhere between 5,000 - 10,000 ethnic Hawaiians and their supporters wore red shirts symbolizing (a) the blood that unifies and defines who is Native Hawaiian, and (b) the schools of red fish 'aweoweo whose rare appearance portends a period of great change, and (c) the ominous red cloud that is the name of the lead organization in the march, 'Ilio'ulaokalani. That march and rally were sponsored by Kamehameha Schools and other large ethnic Hawaiian institutions to protest two lawsuits seeking to overturn Kamehameha's racially exclusionary admissions policy. That same Sunday OHA had scheduled a rally at Kapi'olani Park to support the Akaka bill and to get ethnic Hawaiians to sign up for a registry of ethnic Hawaiians and receive a "race card." So the march traveled from Ala Moana park through Waikiki to Kapi'olani Park, displaying unity. For news reports and photographs, see:
For the three days of Sunday November 16 through Tuesday November 18 2003 another series of carefully planned marches and rallies (featuring the same red shirts) protested three lawsuits. A hearing had long been scheduled in the U.S. District Court in Honolulu for Monday November 17, in the Arakaki 2 lawsuit seeking to abolish OHA and DHHL as being unconstitutional. In addition a hearing was scheduled for that same Monday for one of the Kamehameha School lawsuits to abolish the school's racially exclusionary admissions policy, and a second lawsuit against the admissions policy was set for a hearing on Tuesday. For newspaper reports and photographs, see:
At both of these rallies, and numerous other Hawaiian sovereignty rallies, dozens (perhaps hundreds) of Hawaiian (Kingdom) flags are always carried and displayed (often upside-down to indicate distress or emergency). But there is never a single U.S. flag. It would be inconceivable for anyone to carry a U.S. flag in any such event. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and Kamehameha Schools, (who aggressively promote these events and demand passage of the Akaka bill to save their programs) always like to say they are not anti-American. They say they are merely using the provisions of American law to ask the American Congress to pass a bill; and they are seeking their rights as "indigenous" people of the United States, comparable to the Indian tribes and Alaska natives. But OHA, Kamehameha Schools, and other organizations in control of these marches know that the mob would never tolerate the presence of an American flag, because the propaganda for many years has been that America colonized Hawai'i, staged an armed invasion, overthrew the monarchy, suppressed the language and culture, illegally annexed Hawai'i to the U.S., stole the land, and illegally conducted the statehood vote of 1959. Thus, any display of respect for America would be very unwelcome. These activists resent living under U.S. law where the 14th Amendment equal protection clause makes it unconstitutional to have racially exclusionary government programs like OHA and DHHL, and where even a private benevolent institution like Kamehameha Schools is given a hard time by the U.S. Office of Civil Rights and U.S. Internal Revenue Service.
Some people with no native ancestry are active supporters of Hawaiian sovereignty. Some of these non-natives support total independence; some support the Akaka bill. The independence supporters tend to be political leftists who also support other leftist causes such as environmentalism, demilitarization, and gay rights. Some non-native supporters of the Akaka bill are professors, lawyers, bankers, and bureaucrats who earn high salaries providing services to institutions serving racially exclusionary beneficiaries and need the Akaka bill to defend their racial policies against legal challenges.
Well-meaning non-natives often feel sorry for ethnic Hawaiians because of the historical grievances, and therefore support either independence or the Akaka bill or "whatever the Hawaiians want." Ethnic Hawaiians have become Hawai'i's favorite racial group, partly because of the grievances and partly because Hawaiian culture is the core that holds together Hawai'i's rainbow of races and cultures. Ethnic Hawaiians as a group are a sort of state mascot to be petted and pampered. Like all forms of racial profiling or stereotyping, there are many individuals in the group who do not want or deserve to be stereotyped, but they are included nevertheless. See:
A huge racial separatist march and rally were held in Waikiki on Monday September 6, 2004 (Labor Day). Depending who did the counting, somewhere between 7,000 - 20,000 ethnic Hawaiians and their supporters participated. Many of the marchers -- perhaps most -- were children or teenagers affiliated with Kamehameha Schools, the "host-culture" charter schools, or beneficiaries of other racially exclusionary programs. For photos, and a comparisdon with the brown-shirt and black-shirt "youth" marches in Germany in the 1930s, see: "Red-Shirt Pro-Apartheid March of September 6, 2004 -- 'Die Jugend Marschiert'" at:
A recently published book has thoroughly documented that there were about 150,000 Jews who served in Hitler's military forces, including high-ranking officers reaching all the way up to two field marshalls. See:
Bryan Mark Rigg, "Hitler's Jewish Soldiers: The Untold Story of Nazi Racial Laws and Men of Jewish Descent in the German Military" (Lawrence, Kan.: University Press of Kansas, 2002).
By now most people have heard of the bestselling book by the white leftist Michael Moore, entitled "Stupid White Men."
White liberals laden with guilt over being white, together with some people "of color" seeking to eliminate what they see as white supremacy, have invented a new academic field called "whiteness studies" modeled after "black studies" and "wymyn's studies" and (dare we say it?) Hawaiian studies. All those other "studies" portray those groups as victims and celebrate their accomplishments; however, "whiteness studies" is strongly negative toward the racial group it studies. For an introduction to whiteness studies, see:
An example of a leftist white professor describing white privilege and taking pride in fleeing from it is Robert Jensen, Department of Journalism, University of Texas, Austin, TX. Here are four of his articles:
WHITE PRIVILEGE SHAPES THE U.S.
MORE THOUGHTS ON WHY SYSTEM OF WHITE PRIVILEGE IS WRONG
FLEEING WHITENESS: A MEMOIR ABOUT ACHIEVING HUMANITY
THE MORALLY LAZY WHITE MIDDLE CLASS
** During the legislative session of 2005 an attempt was made to require the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation to stop hiring preferred contractors (attorneys) without a bidding process. Legislation was written to withdraw government funding completely from NHLC, or to require NHLC to put its legal services contracts out to public bid. The debate over funding for the Native Hawaiian Legal Corpopration was also affected by an on-going political struggle over who should be President of the Senate. Senator Clayton Hee, formerly Chairman of OHA, became involved in both disputes, along with Senator Fred Hemmings. Hemmings is white, born and raised in Hawai'i, a (former) champion surfer, with ancestors who were subjects of the Hawaiian Kingdom. Senator Clayton Hee is Ethnic Hawaiian and Chinese. Clayton Hee made remarks on the Senate floor attacking Senator Hemmings as a possessor of white privilege and, in effect, challenging Hemmings' right as a white man to participate in making decisions about an ethnic Hawaiian institution. After the 2005 Legislative session ended, Hemmings published a blistering letter defending himself from those racist attacks, pointing out that Hemmings' ancestors were (non-native) citizens of the Hawaiian Kingdom, and that Hemmings has a personal history of character development profoundly shaped by Hawai'i's sacred places. **
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, May 6, 2005
Hemmings, who has said he supported Bunda's presidency, then looked at Sen. Clayton Hee, Democratic floor leader, and said: "This resolution is about power. It is about who the face of the Senate is going to be, and quite frankly the face I am looking at across the aisle is not the one I want to lead this honorable body."
Hemmings (R, Lanikai-Waimanalo) went on to say he did not want the Senate run "the way OHA (Office of Hawaiian Affairs) used to be run."
Hee, a former chairman of OHA who is fluent in Hawaiian, defended his performance at OHA and criticized Hemmings.
"Let there be no doubt, regardless of my brother from Punahou, he kanaka koko ole (a person without Hawaiian blood), my brother from Outrigger, he kanaka haole (a person not from Hawaii). Let us be clear that the last thing the kanaka need is an outsider telling the insider what's wrong with it," Hee said.
After the session, Hemmings said he thought Hee was trying to "divide along political or racial lines.
"We resent the racism," Hemmings said.
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, May 13, 2005
Letters to the Editor
Senators' verbal joust became racist
It was a sad exchange between Sen. Clayton Hee and myself on closing day of the Legislature (Star-Bulletin, May 6). I know I hit pretty hard politically, but I hope my utterances are in the bounds of fair and honorable debate. I don't think the racism and Hee's remarks about Punahou, Outrigger and my ethnic heritage were anything other than racist.
It really is upsetting for me as I have written before about my feelings for Hawaii: I have stood on Mauna Kea and felt the coldness of the snow goddess Poliahu chill my soul. My heart has beat like a ancient chanting drum while running across the scorched lava fields of Kau.
From the crest of Haleakala I have felt the warm rays of the dawning sun as they caress these islands.
Sleeping alone in a cave in Papalaua Valley on Molokai, I have heard the night wind whisper of ancient Hawaii.
I have paddled a koa canoe for painful hours across the Kaiwi Channel.
In the shadow of Konahuanui I have felt the ghosts of warriors.
Fear has seized my being as I screamed across the face of a 20-foot wave at Makaha. I have shared the joy and exhilaration of riding waves with my brothers and sisters Eddie, Buffalo, Rell and so many more.
On a full moon night I have danced with the silver waves of Hanalei.
Every fiber of my being is of Hawaii. My mother's forebears were citizens of the kingdom of Hawaii. Though my koko is not of the ancient people, my heart certainly is. I love this Hawaii as much as any human can.
How dare Clayton Hee insult the people of Hawaii with his self-righteous racism.
Sen. Fred Hemmings
** The 30-year history of NHLC, and the 2005 dispute over how the state Legislature should exercise control over its funding and contracting procedures, is portrayed in the following letter from the long-time executive director of NHLC, Mahealani Kamauu. **
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, May 12, 2005
Senators' political power play hurts Hawaiians
This past legislative session, Sens. Colleen Hanabusa and Clayton Hee struck a potentially crippling blow at funding the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation receives from the Legislature through the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. It could jeopardize our organization's ability to provide legal representation to Hawaiians.
On very short notice, nearly 100 Hawaiian individuals and organizations opposed the senators' actions, to no avail. Appeals to their Senate colleagues were not fruitful. These senators said they must defer to the committee leaders. Hanabusa is chairwoman and Hee is vice chairman of the Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs committees.
There was strong support for NHLC in the House of Representatives, but the Senate ultimately prevailed. The choices presented were either (a) the House agree with the Senate; or (b) zero funding for NHLC. At OHA's urging, the House Hawaiian Affairs Committee leadership, Reps. Scott Saiki and Mele Carroll, agreed with the Senate to avoid having all state funding cut.
For 30 years NHLC has represented Hawaiians in complex land, natural resources, cultural practices and breach of public trust cases. In one fell swoop, Hee and Hanabusa wielded their considerable authority and influence to single out NHLC's funding as an item within OHA's budget to be subject to a competitive bidding process.
Complex Hawaiian rights cases typically take many years to resolve. A year-to-year competitive bidding process could undermine the ability of any attorney, from NHLC or elsewhere, to resolve the legal issues that beset Hawaiians today. The OHA grants process that funded NHLC in the past had been supported by the Legislature until Hee, since his recent election, decided change was necessary.
The action by Hanabusa and Hee was wholly unnecessary, as borne out by an opinion from the Attorney General's Office they had requested regarding the legality of NHLC's OHA funding and whether it exposed the state to liability.
The AG's opinion dated Feb. 22 stated that OHA's funding of NHLC was legally and constitutionally sound and did not expose the state to any liability.
As a former OHA trustee and chairman of the OHA board, Hee had gone along for many years with OHA's funding approach to NHLC. There had been, however, instances where he had expressed dissatisfaction with NHLC, including:
» While OHA chairman, Hee suggested privately that NHLC back away from the Hokulia case, the large Kona resort development involving land use, burials, historic sites and shoreline pollution issues.
» He had questioned why NHLC did not accept his relatives as clients in a case involving burials discovered at the newly opened Wal-Mart site. NHLC already represented clients whose interests conflicted with those of Hee's family. NHLC was therefore ethically precluded from taking them on as clients.
» He said there were other attorneys who were interested in representing Hawaiians in native rights issues, and they should have a chance at the funding NHLC receives. (For many years, NHLC operated with volunteers. We hope attorneys who come forward now do so out of conviction, not just dollars.)
At a Senate committee public hearing, Hee espoused "transparency in government" as his rationale for requiring NHLC be subject to a competitive bidding process. This is a principal tenet of NHLC's advocacy, and we wholeheartedly support it if there is a good reason.
It seems questionable, however, whether subjecting NHLC to a competitive bidding process was the best means to accomplish this transparency, especially when the attorney general's opinion found the current funding approach to be legally sufficient and therefore transparent enough.
Moreover, perhaps to diffuse negative reaction in the Hawaiian community, Hee privately suggested to me and a senior staff attorney that we get together with OHA to make sure specifications were written to ensure NHLC be successful in any future competitive bidding process. We therefore question the senator's pretext regarding his desire for transparency in government.
After learning of recent maneuverings by Hanabusa and Hee regarding their ambitions relative to Senate leadership, it appears Hee might have had an axe to grind with OHA and gotten Hanabusa to carry out a personal vendetta, with NHLC as pawn, in exchange for his support of her leadership.
If this is true, Hawaii and Hawaiians deserve better.
Mahealani Kamauu is executive director of the Native Hawaiian Legal Corp.
Hawaiian metaphysical racism is a fundamental belief that possession of even a small degree of Hawaiian native ancestry carries a genetically encoded racial supremacy based on a family relationship among the gods, the land, and the ethnic Hawaiians. A large webpage describes this religious/metaphysical theory and how it is used as a basis for political claims to racial supremacy. See:
A spreadsheet showing for each state the number of people who marked the box for "Native Hawaiian" in Census 2000 can be found at:
In Census 2000, there were 80,137 people living in Hawai'i who marked themselves as being only Hawaiian, even though they could have marked as many boxes as they wished to indicate all their racial ancestries. Nationwide, 140,652 marked themselves as being only Hawaiian. These figures are sloghtly below the actual numbers reported in later refinements of Census 2000 data, because Summary File 1 was the first release of Census data, later improved by files 2,3,and 4. The following URL will lead to two tables where those data can be found: the top one is for the United States as a whole; the bottom one is for the State of Hawai'i.
Racial pride can easily turn to implied or overt racial prejudice against outsiders not fortunate enough to have a drop of the magic blood. See: "Pride and Prejudice -- What It Means To Be Proud of a Person, Group, Nation, or Race; Racial Profiling, Racial Prejudice, and Racial Supremacy" at:
One of the more subtle ways Hawaiian metaphysical racism can lead to personal racism is the often-heard assertion that Hawaiian culture is the "host culture." An unstated but ever-present assumption is that only ethnic Hawaiians can be the true bearers or owners of Hawaiian culture (See note #14 below on the topic of the Polynesian Voyaging Society). Thus ethnic Hawaiians are the hosts, while everyone else is (merely!) a guest in the Hawaiian homeland. Hosts, of course, are owners; and although they might choose to be friendly and hospitable, they are entitled to make all the important decisions and they have the right to throw out the guests whenever the guests overstay their welcome or become unruly. This subtle racism is an integral part of the curriculum and management style of the "host-culture" charter schools, which could profoundly damage the self-esteem of non-ethnic-Hawaiian children in such schools and could also lead to feelings of racial supremacy and racial entitlement ingrained into the character of ethnic Hawaiian children (see note #13 below on the topic of the charter schools). "Were non-kanaka maoli historically full partners in Hawai'i, or only second-class guests?" See:
Real damage from metaphysical racism occurs when it is translated into demands for race-based political power. Claims are made that because ethnic Hawaiians have genetically programmed unique ways of learning and knowing; therefore they need and are entitled to special curriculum and special teaching methods. Ethnic Hawaiians are thus entitled to a racially separate school system which can set its own standards for teacher certification and for testing student achievement. Children trapped inside such a race-centric school are brainwashed with a curriculum that makes ethnic Hawaiian children feel superior while children with no native ancestry are taught that they are genetically incapable of full equality. See: "PUBLIC EDUCATION FOR ETHNIC NATION-BUILDING IN HAWAI'I -- a legislative bill to create a separate statewide school system for Native Hawaiians" at:
Real damage from metaphysical racism occurs when it is translated into demands for race-based political power. Claims are made that because ethnic Hawaiians are fundamentally different from everyone else; therefore they have genetically programmed unique ways of learning and knowing. An ethnic Hawaiian professor of teacher education at the University of Hawai'i at Hilo wrote her Ph.D. dissertation at Harvard on the topic of Hawaiian epistemology, and has published books and journal articles on that topic. See:
The Rice v. Cayetano decision was handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court on February 23, 2000. The decision has the legal citation 528 U.S. 495 (2000). A webpage describing that decision and its immediate political fallout in Hawai'i is at:
Here are some well-known excerpts from that decision directly addressing the topic of race. The Court's language makes clear that the racial restriction on voting in OHA elections was deeply-rooted institutional racism.
"Ancestry can be a proxy for race. It is that proxy here........ The State, in enacting the legislation before us, has used ancestry as a racial definition and for a racial purpose."
"The ancestral inquiry mandated by the State implicates the same grave concerns as a classification specifying a particular race by name. One of the principal reasons race is treated as a forbidden classification is that it demeans the dignity and worth of a person to be judged by ancestry instead of by his or her own merit and essential qualities. An inquiry into ancestral lines is not consistent with respect based on the unique personality each of us possesses, a respect the Constitution itself secures in its concern for persons and citizens."
"... the use of racial classifications is corruptive of the whole legal order democratic elections seek to preserve. The law itself may not become the instrument for generating the prejudice and hostility all too often directed against persons whose particular ancestry is disclosed by their ethnic characteristics and cultural traditions. "Distinctions between citizens solely because of their ancestry are by their very nature odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon the doctrine of
Ben Finney's book on Polynesian voyaging is perhaps the best single source providing an in-depth philosophical justification of Hawaiian metaphysical racism, and also illustrating how that metaphysical racism gets translated into both personal racism (hate crimes against Finney and other whites) and institutional racism (the insistence on Hawaiian racial supremacy in the Polynesian Voyaging Society, where political correctness demands that non-native whites and Asians can hold membership and lend support but cannot exercise leadership either in the institution or on the canoe voyages). See an essay-length book review of Ben Finney, "Sailing in the Wake of the Ancestors: Reviving Polynesian Voyaging" (Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 2003) at:
An hour-long TV documentary on the life of Eddie Aikau was broadcast on April 19, 2005. The Aikau documentary portrayed him as an ethnic Hawaiian hero; it was all-Hawaiian all the time. Whites simply did not get mentioned except rarely as surfing competitors whom Aikau eventually bested. No mention was made about Ben Finney or the first voyage of Hokule'a which made it all the way to Tahiti with a racially mixed crew and non-Hawaiian leadership. No mention was made of the fact that the whole purpose of the second voyage just two years later to the same destination, which cost Eddie Aikau his life, was to do ethnic cleansing of the Hokule'a. The TV show was reviewed in the morning newspaper the same day it was to be broadcast (thereby giving it free advertising).
The Honolulu Advertiser, Tuesday, April 19, 2005 **excerpts**
The legend of Eddie Aikau is being looked at again, this time in a KGMB TV special at 9 tonight.
"Eddie Aikau: Hawaiian Hero" offers a glimpse of an inspiring Hawaiian icon who, according to his family and friends, had premonitions of his demise.
A North Shore lifeguard and noted surfer, Aikau vanished in 1978: When the Hokule'a canoe capsized during a sailing he was aboard, Aikau volunteered to paddle on his surfboard to Lana'i, about 20 miles away, for help and was never seen again.
To this day questions remain over whether he was swept away by the current and drowned or was a shark-attack victim.
What people do know is that Aikau died trying to save the lives of his mates. Through the years he has emerged as an Island hero. Books have been written about him, as have plays, and in the ultimate tribute the "Eddie Would Go" big-wave competition was organized in his honor. A movie on his life is also in the works.
The documentary, which repeats at 9 p.m. on Saturday, is produced and directed by Phil Arnone. It captures intimate reflections while shedding light in dark corners of Aikau's life, factoring in his divorce from Linda Ipsen and the conversations he had the day before the voyage.
The documentary also looks at his peacemaking skills and, of course, his ability to save lives as the first lifeguard on the North Shore.
Aikau, a high-school dropout, is depicted as someone with formidable drive and ambition — a soul with mythic implications.
With Jon Osorio's "Hawaiian Soul" (performed by the Peter Moon Band) occasionally heard in the soundtrack — the "how could you leave us?" lament is haunting — the show emerges as a brilliant portrait bringing color and detail on a figure most only have heard about.
In the documentary, surfing champs herald his courage on the big waves while friends laud his fortitude and legacy.
As the story goes, Aikau yearned to win the Duke Kahanamoku Surfing Classic on the North Shore. In 1967, the desire to win fell short; Ricky Grigg came in first, with Aikau placing sixth. But his finish, with the Duke in his presence, was an official changing-of-the-guard moment; a still photo of Kahanamoku with Aikau clearly depicted "early Hawai'i with modern Hawai'i," in the words of Van Dyke. Aikau finally won the event in 1977.
Written by Robert Pennybacker, with Billy V. as narrator, "Eddie Aikau: Hawaiian Hero" also offers Aikau singing intimate songs about the Hokule'a; sister Myra admitting he had "premonitions" of that fateful day, adding, "he knew he wasn't going to come back"; Nainoa Thompson (then a Hokule'a crew member) admitting "I was scared" on that departure day in 1978; and Hokule'a skipper David Lyman allowing Aikau to paddle to Lana'i for help after the boat capsized "because he (Aikau) couldn't accept Hokule'a being upside down."
Today's Hawaiian sovereignty independence activists are systematically ignoring heroes of the Hawaiian Kingdom who had no native blood. By removing non-natives from the pantheon of Hawaiian national historical heroes, today's Hawaiian activists show their intentions for the future. They say their movement is about a nation, not a race. They say people of all races will be welcome as citizens in the newly re-established nation. But their clear intention is to make second-class citizens of everyone lacking native blood, giving them only voting rights restricted to certain topics and property rights restricted to certain areas. This webpage explores several Hawaiian holidays (both historical and modern) to show how the ethnic cleansing is being implemented. Holidays include Ka La Ho'iho'i Ea (Sovereignty Restoration Day), Ka La Ku'oko'a (Independence Day), the hijacking of Martin Luther King's birthday, the 4th of July, and a newly created Hawaiian memorial day to supplant Christmas. See:
Hawaiian language and a Christianized version of Hawaiian religion are used for ceremonial purposes to assert ethnic Hawaiian hegemony throughout all institutions in Hawai'i, including the Legislature. It is customary in Hawai'i for meetings to open with a prayer, often delivered entirely or partly in Hawaiian language. Hawaiian language is often used in political activity to lend an aura of respect for "indigenous rights" and to provide a sense of mystery and solemnity. The situation is comparable to the way the Roman Catholic mass 50 years ago was performed in Latin despite the fact that very few members of the congregation understood Latin (most ethnic Hawaiians today do not understand or speak Hawaiian). The use of Latin made everything seem especially sacred, dealing with mysteries beyond the ability of most parishioners to comprehend; and it gave the congregation confidence in the divine authority of the priest. Likewise, many cultural and political events in Hawai'i begin with Christian prayer, often delivered in whole or in part in Hawaiian language, which most of Hawai'i's people, including most ethnic Hawaiians, do not understand. For a good example of this, see a transcript of a hearing at the Hawai'i Legislature on March 31, 2005 at which Senator Inouye, Congressman Abercrombie, and Congressman Case presented testimony and answered questions on the progress of the Akaka bill. The hearing was opened by state Representative Ezra Kanoho leading the "congregation" in singing the Christian Doxology in Hawaiian language, followed by a prayer in English calling upon the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to watch over the proceedings and to help bring people together to support the Akaka bill. See:
Arakaki vs. State of Hawai'i -- The Right to Run for Statewide Public Office Without Racial Restriction, Including the Right of Voters to Have a Full Range of Candidates Unrestricted by Race. Plaintiffs' legal briefs at both the U.S. District Court in Honolulu, and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals are provided, along with news coverage and analysis. See:
The Arakaki#2 lawsuit: A Multiethnic Group of 16 Hawai'i Citizens File Suit Challenging the Constitutionality of Both the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Two large webpages cover the progress of the lawsuit at the U.S. District Court in Honolulu and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Newspaper articles, analysis, and a complete collection of all the legal briefs filed at the 9th Circuit by plaintiffs and all 5 defendants.
OHA and DHHL have cost the State of Hawai'i treasury over one Billion dollars to date, and will cost an additional two Billion over the next ten years unless they are stopped. See spreadsheets for details, at:
A very large webpage provides the contents of the Akaka bill and describes what's wrong with it. The history of the bill is traced since the first drafts of the bill were floated as trial balloons in mid-2000, right up until the present.
Papa Ola Lokahi has an uninformative website that has been "under construction" for the last couple of years, at:
The website says: "Papa Ola Lokahi was created in 1988 to help improve the health status of Native Hawaiians living in Hawaii. Our programs include planning, advocacy, technical assistance and research projects for Native Hawaiian Health in Hawaii. Our projects also serve the health care planning & advocacy needs of Native American Indian and Alaska Native, and Native Pacific Islander populations in Hawaii and the Western Pacific."
Papa Ola Lokahi was created by an act of Congress. Its purpose is not to actually do medical research or provide medical care, but rather to serve as an umbrella organization funneling money to other racially exclusionary government and private institutions that do research, gather data, write grants, and provide propaganda regarding Native Hawaiian medical problems. In other words, it is a bureaucratic money-machine for a racial spoils system. The mission of Papa Ola Lokahi can be seen in a short piece of the U.S. Code, Title 42, Chapter 122, at:
Information from http://www.alulike.org/
ALU LIKE, Inc. is a private, non-profit service organization that has assisted Native Hawaiians in their efforts to achieve social and economic self-sufficiency since 1975. ALU LIKE, Inc. has a comprehensive range of services and activities to fill identified needs in the Native Hawaiian community, including community economic development, business assistance, employment preparation, training, library services, educational and childcare services for families with young children. Funding comes from federal, state, county, and private sources. The U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and Office of Human Development Services have funded ALU LIKE, Inc., through the ANA (the Administration for Native Americans), since 1976. ALU LIKE, Inc. received additional funds as grantees under the Job Training, Partnership Act from the U.S. Department of Labor through the Division of Indian and Native Americans Programs (DINAP) in 1978. ALU LIKE, Inc. continues to receive federal funding and has expanded its funding base to include State purchase of service contacts, county and private foundation grants, and individual donations to continue the expansion of service to Native Hawaiians.
See Note #8, above
Kamehameha Schools, formerly known as Bishop Estate, has assets somewhere between $6-15 Billion, and is the largest private landowner in Hawai'i. Theoretically, its sole reason for existence is to operate forever a small network of private schools under the Will of Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop, a 19th Century descendant of Kamehameha the Great. The trustees of this tax-exempt charitable trust have successfully maintained a race-based admissions policy that requires all students to have at least one drop of Hawaiian native blood. For four decades prior to 2002 this admissions policy was 100% successful in keeping out anyone lacking a native Hawaiian ancestor, and for seven decades before that there were only exceedingly rare exceptions. In 2002 school officials announced that one white boy with no native ancestry had been admitted to the Maui campus after there were not enough qualified ethnic Hawaiians to fill every opening. A major uproar among parents and thousands of alumni produced a pledge from the trustees to modify admissions procedures to zealously defend the race-based policy. In 2003 two lawsuits were filed seeking to force the admission of two well-qualified white applicants. One of those applicants had been accidentally admitted and then had his admission rescinded at the last minute when it was discovered that his mother had been adopted into an ethnic Hawaiian family but did not herself have native blood. The judge ordered that student to be admitted temporarily pending the outcome of the lawsuit; and then Kamehameha settled that lawsuit by agreeing to let the boy attend the school for all 6 years remaining through graduation. The other case, involving a child whose name is being kept secret, was not settled. U.S. District Court Judge Alan Kay ruled on November 17, 2003 in favor of Kamehameha and dismissed the lawsuit. An appeal was filed in the 9th Circuit Court in January 2004, with oral arguments on November 4, 2004. See:
An alternative model of extreme institutional racism would be the restoration of the entire archipelago of Hawai'i as an independent nation, coupled with ethnic Hawaiian racial supremacy based on a theory of "indigenous rights." Ethnic Hawaiians would have full voting rights while everyone else would be limited to certain topics; and ethnic Hawaiians would have full property rights while everyone else would be limited to land ownership only in certain restricted areas or else limited to leasehold. The government of Fiji is an example of what Hawaiian sovereignty independence activists have in mind. On several occasions in recent years, when Asian Fijians actually won control of the government through free and democratic elections, the native Fijians staged military coups and rewrote the Constitution to guarantee native supremacy.
FALSE victimhood claim: Hawaiian sovereignty activists like to say that "Hawaiian language was made illegal." They like to say that "Here in our own homeland we were forbidden from speaking Hawaiian, and our grandmothers have told us how they were punished for speaking it." The activists like to say Hawaiian language was illegal because it magnifies their claim to victimhood status. It's one more way those haole oppressors turned the natives of this land into a poor, downtrodden people who have the worst statistics for education, health, incarceration drug abuse, etc. "Those haoles stole our land, and our nation, and even made our language illegal right here in our own homeland. So of course we're angry, we feel deep pain, and we're entitled to huge reparations for the damage done to us."
This particular victimhood claim is tightly embraced by many, perhaps most, ethnic Hawaiians. They zealously defend this claim against all evidence to the contrary, becoming quite angry with anyone who disagrees. The anger level rises as hard evidence is presented to disprove it.
For overwhelming evidence that it is false, and that the broader concept behind it is also false, see:
The myth of the shredded Hawaiian flag -- a false claim that the Hawaiian flag removed from 'Iolani Palace on annexation day August 12, 1898 was cut up into pieces distributed to the annexationists as souvenirs of their victory over the Hawaiian people.
FALSE victimhood claim: The (government and) crown lands, now known as the "ceded lands", belonged to the (ethnic) Hawaiian people and were stolen from them.
There is no historical, legal, or moral justification for race-based claims to ownership of ceded lands or to the revenues they generate. History, law, and morality all favor using the ceded lands to benefit all Hawai'i's people equally.
Here are the points to be covered: (1) What are the ceded lands? (2) Did ethnic Hawaiians ever have special rights to own the ceded lands or receive revenue from them? (3) Does the Legislature have any obligation to make a racial allocation of ceded lands or revenues? (4) Indeed, does the Legislature have any right to make such a racial allocation? (5) What purpose would be served by doing so? (6) If the Native Hawaiian Recognition bill passes, the federal government will be taking responsibility for ethnic Hawaiian entitlement programs. States generally leave the funding of Indian programs to the federal government. Therefore, it is unwise to establish any permanent flow of State of Hawai'i government resources to a group which might become a federally recognized tribe engaged in adversarial legal battles against the State of Hawai'i.
FALSE victimhood claim: Private property deeds in Hawai'i are not valid (because all Hawai'i governments since 1893, which officially record land conveyances, are illegal). Any ethnic Hawaiian has a right to claim any household property he wants that does not have a royal patent deed or has not yet been certified by an acting regent of the Hawaiian kingdom.
The "Perfect Title" Scam -- Self-Proclaimed Regent of Hawaiian Kingdom Collects Huge Fees, Causes Grief to Property Owners, Messes Up Land Titles, Escapes With Probation and $200 Fine
FALSE victimhood claim: The International Court of Justice at the Hague has ruled that the Kingdom of Hawai'i still exists and is the rightful government of Hawai'i
See: "Fraudulent Hague Arbitration -- The Use of "the International Court at the Hague" for a Propaganda Circus" at:
FALSE victimhood claim: Mauna Ala (the Royal Mausoleum) was exempted from the ceded lands and remains to this day the sovereign territory of the Kingdom of Hawai'i.
See: "Mauna Ala (Royal Mausoleum) -- History, Mystery, Ghost Stories, and A Claim of Continuing Hawaiian Sovereign Territory" at:
In the 106th Congress, 1999 to 2000, the bill S.1929 was introduced, to provide a race-based entitlement for free healthcare for all ethnic Hawaiians regardless of financial need. The bill contained 29 false or twisted historical or legal victimhood claims made in the "Findings" preamble to the bill, that were intended to provide justification for the health care bill as well as to put Congress on record in support of special political status for a racial group. A webpage provides rebuttals for those 29 points. See:
Since the summer of 2000 one or more versions of the Akaka bill have always been circulating through Congress. The "findings" preamble to the bill contains numerous false or twisted historical or legal victimhood claims. Those claims are refuted by Honolulu attorney Paul Sullivan in his monograph "Killing Aloha" at:
OHA trustee Boyd Mossman has been particularly aggressive in pushing the "endangered species" argument. See item #3 at:
"Native Hawaiians" as the State Pet or Mascot: A Psychological Analysis of Why Hawai'i's People Tolerate and Irrationally Support Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism
Playing Favorites -- Da Punahele Race
See also "Pride and Prejudice -- What It Means To Be Proud of a Person, Group, Nation, or Race; Racial Profiling, Racial Prejudice, and Racial Supremacy"
Core Attitudes of Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement -- Racial Separatism, Ethnic Nationalism, Anti-Americanism, Racial Supremacy
Perhaps the best victimhood tear-jerker is a little book "Then There Were None" by Martha H. Noyes (based on Elizabeth Lindsey Buyers TV docudrama). The book is part of a propaganda campaign to make everyone "feel the pain" of "Native Hawaiians" who have become "strangers in their own homeland." The constant theme running through the book is the steadily declining number of "pure Hawaiians" until, sometime in the near future, "then there were none." An essay-length book review can be found on this website. See: "Haole Collective Guilt for Hawaiian Grievances and Pain -- A book review of "Then There Were None" by Martha H. Noyes (based on Elizabeth Lindsey Buyers TV docudrama)"
But see Note #10 for data showing there were over 401,000 ethnic Hawaiians in Census 2000, and that, if those Hawaiians were marking their Census forms truthfully, then 80,137 of them in Hawai'i and 140,652 nationwide were "pure Hawaiians."
A narrated performance of "Then There Were None, similar to an opera, was performed with an accompaniment by the Honolulu Symphony Orchestra in 2003. Here is a review of that performance by Gregory Shepherd at the end of his six years as music critic for the Honolulu Advertiser.
The Honolulu Advertiser, Sunday, November 3, 2003, page A11
Not available in the Advertiser on-line archives, therefore no URL can be provided.
Article can be found on microfilm in the Hawai'i Public Library.
'Masterworks' A Tottering Soapbox
by Gregory Shepherd
What the heck were they thinking at the Honolulu Symphony when they put together this week's program?
Titled "Cinematic Masterworks," a goodly portion of the program is a tottering soapbox for the social theories of Dr. Elizabeth Kapu'uwailani Lindsey Buyers via her latest film "And Then There Were None," and a masterwork it ain't, not by any stretch of the imagination.
In fact it's difficult to figure out just what her "documentary" is other than a tendentious harangue about the evil haoles (disingenuously called "the newcomers" in the film) and the depredations they visited upon the native populace. Of course, it is undeniable that these depredations did in fact occur, but Lindsey Buyers' reduction of 200 years of history into a 25-minute oppressor/victim dialectic turns that history into a politically correct cartoon and not a very good one at that.
In an early portion of her on-stage narration of the film, Lindsey Buyers states, in a voice fairly quaking with victimhood, "The newcomers bring diseases against which Hawaiians have no immunity." That was, of course, true, but "the newcomers" also brought, among many other positive things, the writing system that makes this newspaper possible, as well as a technological tradition that led to the invention of the movie camera which made "And Then There Were None" possible.
Another example of Lindsey Buyers' shoddy methodology is her manipulation of statistics for the decreasing numbers of native Hawaiians. As the numbers plummet throughout the film over images of greedy haole overseers and starving Hawaiian children, only the barest mention is made
of the intermarriage that was and always has been a major factor in that decrease. It is, at the very least, remiss of a film maker who is alive today as a result of such intermarriage (she is identified in the program notes as Hawaiian, Chinese and an unidentified European "newcomer" stock) to give short shrift to the main reason for the decrease in the population of "pure" (her word) Hawaiians.
Lindsey Buyers' parting shot in the film is that by the middle of the 21st century there will not be a single "pure" Hawaiian left, but she does not give the slightest indication as to what she thinks should be done to remedy this. Indeed, the only thing that seems possible would be to restrict current "pure" Hawaiians to marrying others of similarly unsullied lineage. But there's no victimhood in that, and Lindsey Buyers doesn't raise the issue.
The music for the film is taken from Lalo Shifrin's "Liliuokalani Symphony" with chants performed by Kumu John Ka'imikaua and two other gentlemen who are unidentified in the program. These chants and additional singing at the film's conclusion by the children's chorus, Na Leo Kuho'okahi, were actually the most effective parts of Friday night's performance.
The music for the rest of the program takes a backseat to "And Then There Were None" and of the three other pieces performed (Copland's "Music for Theater," Charles Strouse's "Concerto
America" and Gershwin's "An American in Paris") only the Gershwin has anything memorable about it.
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Tuesday, April 12, 2005
Half the truth
Review by Tim Ryan
"The Hawaiians" documentary by filmmaker Edgy Lee is a poetic history of the Hawaiian people, from their discovery of the islands through stunning visuals of a "paradise" that began to collapse with the arrival of England's Capt. James Cook in 1778.
"The Hawaiians": Airs from 7 to 8 p.m. Friday on KHON/Fox
However, the documentary suffers from a one-sided view, making it appear more like a propaganda film to rally students into cultural appreciation and activism. That's not surprising because most of the film's funding came from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Kamehameha Schools.
Narrated by Winona Rubin, former director of the state Department of Human Services, "The Hawaiians" tells the story of indigenous people who were just fine until Westerners arrived with new religion, money, disease and, especially, a new landownership concept.
While the aina provided Hawaiians sustenance and spiritual fulfillment, Westerners are said to use the land rather than embrace it. Before the Western invasion, Hawaiians were superior navigators, farmers, herbal practitioners, and had a solid family structure. "Children were honored. Child abuse was rare ... different from the ways of the West," we're told.
A geological lesson of Hawaii's volcanic origin is followed by a biology lesson about indigenous flora and fauna, leading to another Western spanking.
"When the outside world swept into paradise, nature had few defenses. ... By the late 20th century (Hawaii) became the endangered species capital of the world. ... Its endemic creatures and indigenous people began to disappear."
"The Hawaiians" says of the 1893 overthrow of the monarchy that the U.S. government understood that "whoever controlled Hawaii controlled the Pacific." The "last blow to the monarchy" was Hawaii's annexation to the United States in 1898.
Other indignities: Schools banned the Hawaiian language; Hollywood portrayed Hawaii and the culture as a backdrop; Hawaii became a destination for "well-heeled travelers."
It's all true but we all know it. "The Hawaiians" adds no new insights or solutions.
What the film does well is to remind us that for too many Hawaiians, Westernization has led to poverty, lack of education, inadequate housing, drug use and despair.
Navigator Nainoa Thompson sends the message that the culture is being renewed from within and that there's plenty of room to join in.
"The Hawaiians" would have more credibility if objective historians were called upon to give a broader perspective. Native Hawaiians themselves drove 45 species of endemic birds extinct. Are Hawaiians in the least bit responsible for their predicament today? Wasn't it inevitable that Hawaii's militarily strategic location would lead to takeover by another country such as England or Japan?
The students "The Hawaiians" is meant for have the right to know.
An hour-long documentary on the Massie case was televised nationwide as part of the PBS series "American Experience", with the Hawai'i broadcast on April 18. A preview of that TV program was published in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin of April 17 at:
As part of the coordinated media push to revive outrage over the Massie case, book reviews were also published of David Stannard, "Honor Killing." See:
A massive Massie webpage was also created by PBS to provide research resources for the TV audience. The webpage includes interviews with Hawaiian activists, recommended classroom activities for social studies teachers, etc. See:
The PBS Massie webpage also includes a timeline emphasizing ethnic Hawaiian victimhood and American oppression. The timeline includes many events from the history of Hawai'i that are irrelevant to the Massie case, and leaves out any comparisons to racism elsewhere.
The last three events in the timeline are typical in their irrelevance to the Massie case and their portrayal of ethnic Hawaiians as victims of American oppression.
Devastation from bombing at Pearl Harbor December 7: Nine years after the Massie case, the Japanese attack the U.S. Navy at Pearl Harbor, precipitating America's entry into World War II.
June 27: A majority of Hawai'i's electorate vote to accept statehood, which has been offered by the United States. Many Native Hawai'ians vote against it, however. [Note from Ken Conklin: 94% of all voters said "yes" to Statehood. Even if all 6% of the "no" votes were cast by the 20% of the voters who were ethnic Hawaiian, there would still be 70% of ethnic Hawaiian voters voting "yes.]
August 20: Hawai'i becomes the 50th U.S. state. President Dwight Eisenhower signs the proclamation and orders the stars on the existing American flag rearranged. He addresses the American people by radio, saying, "we will wish for [Hawai'i's] prosperity, security, and happiness."
The main reasons offered in support of the Akaka bill are either false or irrelevant. Supporters of the bill say it is not about race -- they say its purpose is to protect indigenous rights, self-determination, and cultural preservation; but careful study shows that is false. (Note #27) The bill's primary focus is racial separatism. The purpose is to protect racial entitlement programs from legal challenges, and to establish a separate apartheid government inside the State of Hawai'i restricted to ethnic Hawaiians. See:
On August 6, 2002 Randie K. Fong, head of Kamehameha Schools Performing Arts Department, published an extraordinary article in the Honolulu Advertiser outlining the concept that Hawaiian language and culture should be a primary vehicle for ethnic nationbuilding, and that Kamehameha School should be the leader in such a movement. Ethnic pride and solidarity can easily be transformed into ethnic nationalism and racial hatred toward outsiders, especially when those outsiders are constantly portrayed as colonial oppressors. A webpage compares Mr. Fong's concept with the work of Joseph Goebbels, Leni Riefenstahl, and others. See:
Hawai'i's Fifth Column: Anti-Americanism in the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement
Most Hawaiians of native ancestry are not sovereignty activists, and probably not favorable to either version of Hawaiian sovereignty. They are proud to be Americans and totally uninterested in re-establishing Hawai'i as an independent nation. They also do not want an apartheid partitioning of Hawai'i that would occur through the creation of a race-based (tribal) government under the Akaka bill.
This essay focuses on various degrees of anti-Americanism among both the independence activists and supporters of the Akaka bill.
Here are the major topics in the order they appear
SOME SUPPORTERS OF THE AKAKA BILL MIGHT ALSO BE PATRIOTIC AMERICANS
HISTORICAL GRIEVANCES AGAINST THE UNITED STATES PRODUCE A SIMMERING ANTI-AMERICANISM EVEN AMONG WEALTHY HAWAIIANS AND WELL-ESTABLISHED INSTITUTIONS NOT (YET) SEEKING INDEPENDENCE
HAWAIIAN ACTIVISTS SEEKING INDEPENDENCE THROUGH U.S. DOMESTIC ACTIVITY
THE HAWAIIAN INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT AT THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL
THE POSSIBILITY OF ESPIONAGE OR SABOTAGE IN COLLABORATION WITH FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS HOSTILE TO THE U.S. IN ORDER TO GET DIPLOMATIC RECOGNITION OF AN INDEPENDENT HAWAI'I, OR TO WEAKEN THE UNITED STATES AND PROVOKE U.S. ABANDONMENT OF HAWAI'I
Dr. Martin Luther King Vs. Queen Lili'uokalani
Today's Hawaiian sovereignty activists try to link their cause to the black civil rights movement. The holiday on Monday, March 17, 2005 was simultaneously the celebration of Martin Luther King's birthday, and of the 112th anniversary of the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy. Hawaiian activists joined with the local NAACP and other civil rights groups in the annual parade through Waikiki. The activists compare the ex-queen and Dr. King because both were imprisoned by governments they resisted. But it is both historically and morally wrong to compare the goals and methods of Dr. King with Queen Lili'uokalani. Dr. King had a soaring vision of a rainbow society unified in celebrating diversity under the protection of full equality. He used a powerful technique of non-violent resistance to unjust laws as a way to appeal to call forth the deeply buried good conscience of evil oppressors. Queen Lili'uokalani was an ethnic nationalist trying to reassert racial supremacy and monarchial control during a time of transition toward American-style democracy. She condoned the use of violence by allowing ethnic nationalist insurgents to hide rifles and bombs in the flowerbed of her private home in furtherance of a counterrevolution to restore her to the throne. The similarity between these two historical figures is superficial, based only on the fact that both were imprisoned and that the newly-deposed queen surrendered rather than fight. But the differences in their goals and methods are profound. See:
Ethnic Representation Among Students at the University of Hawai'i Compared With Ethnic Representation In The Population of the State of Hawai'i -- Implications for Affirmative Action and Diversity Recruitment Incentives (The Inappropriateness of Race-Based Tuition Waivers for Ethnic Hawaiians)
"Social justice" activists demand free tuition for ethnic Hawaiian students at the University of Hawai'i, and other race-based benefits for them. One victimhood claim offered to justify these demands is that ethnic Hawaiians are under-represented in the student body. But careful study of UH student enrollment data, together with Census 2000 population data for Hawai'i, shows that ethnic Hawaiians are significantly over-represented in the UH student body, while ethnic Caucasians and ethnic Chinese are significantly or greatly under-represented. Thus, it is illegal racial discrimination to provide race-based tuition waivers and other race-based benefits to ethnic Hawaiians while failing to provide the same benefits to ethnic Caucasians and ethnic Chinese. Even under the new Supreme Court ruling allowing race-based affirmative action to promote diversity, it cannot be right for a university to provide affirmative action to a significantly over-represented racial group while failing to provide such benefits to a significantly under-represented group.
Three items are offered: (1) A short introduction followed by detailed statistical analysis of UH ethnic enrollment data; (2) A letter published on two internet e-mail lists based in California, discussing the implications of this research for issues of importance outside Hawai'i, including affirmative action, reverse discrimination, race-based financial incentives to promote ethnic diversity on college campuses, and the question whether the gathering of racial data is helpful or harmful to achieving equality under the law (for example, the California Racial Privacy Initiative); (3) An informal Hawai'i-focused essay tying everything together, written for the on-line newspaper Hawaii-Reporter.com.
The following commentary was published by Ken Conklin in the Maui News of Saturday, June 29, 2002. It was in response to a speech by Mr. Maxwell at a Rotary Club luncheon on April 4, 2000 and a very similar written commentary by Mr. Maxwell published in the Maui News on June 26, 2002. Thus, Mr. Maxwell is documented as having been issuing public threats about Hawaiian warrior culture for at least two years. All three items can be found at:
Here is Ken Conklin's commentary, quoting Maxwell's language:
Reverend Charles Kauluwehi Maxwell, an unordained reverend without a church, was given that usually honorable title by a former minister. Now he does a very dishonorable thing by threatening the people of Hawaii.
He says if we don't knuckle under to his demands for racial entitlements and race-based political power, there will be trouble. Referring to people fighting for equality and unity, he says: "Now the Goemans, Rices and others driving to take away all the entitlements of the Hawaiian people is the 'straw that breaks the camels back.'" In other words, Maxwell is admitting he has a ton of racial entitlement programs already in place (more than 160 according to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs), and threatening that there will be trouble if
everybody else gets to share these programs equally.
"We all must remember that once we were warriors and as native people we cannot be continually attacked . . . without responding in a desperate manner." Thus the reverend gives his flock forgiveness in advance for the violence he clearly threatens, on the grounds that they can't help themselves because it's something that runs in the blood of these warrior people.
It is clearly a threat when he warns: "This is not a threat, it's reality. We can be pushed only so far . . . I predict that the Hawaiian people will rebel and take to the streets, causing Hawaii's economy to drop like a lead weight." And then he urges Hawaiians to gear up for the inevitable confrontation by staging a one-day racial boycott for practice. This guy is a real piece of work!
Maxwell "cannot understand why business leaders are not up in arms against these people (Goemans, Rice, et al.)." Here's why. Business leaders understand the need for a level playing field. They do not want passage of the so-called Akaka bill, which would recognize Native Hawaiians as an Indian tribe and thus allow a checkerboard of special economic zones on all "tribal" lands where untaxed, unregulated businesses could compete against
their heavily taxed and regulated neighbors.
Money for all those government programs Maxwell loves comes from taxes. The tax base will be destroyed when untaxed businesses drive out taxpaying businesses and when people focus their energy on grabbing government benefits rather than producing goods and services.
Native Hawaiians have a proud history and a chance for a wonderful future. Shall we follow Maxwell's path to Bosnia, Rwanda, Zimbabwe and Fiji - the path of racial separatism, bitterness, grievance, victimhood, and government wardship? Give Uncle Charlie the lei hala, hang his spear on the wall of a museum, and join hands as we move forward in unity, equality, and brotherhood.
Hawaii loa, kulike kakou, kupa'a me ka lokahi.
Activists wanting to rip the 50th star off the flag have been pushing nonviolently for Hawaiian independence for many years. The apology resolution of 1993 (U.S. apology to ethnic Hawaiians for the overthrow of the monarchy) gave great impetus to both the secessionist movement and to demands for race-based group rights, communal land tenure, and megabucks in reparations -- despite assurances from Senator Inouye on the floor of the Senate that the apology bill would not be used in that way. The Akaka bill now under consideration would be a major boost to the secessionist movement -- indeed, supporters of the Akaka bill, including Senator Akaka himself, go as far as they can go to support secession without actually committing treason. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights relied heavily on the apology resolution to claim that the civil rights of ethnic Hawaiians are violated by the Supreme Court decision in Rice v. Cayetano, and that the Akaka bill should be supported as a way to protect those rights during a transitional period in which ethnic Hawaiians have a perfect right to force the secession of Hawai'i from the United States. The Akaka bill should not be seen as a way to strengthen the ties of Hawai'i to the United States, to make ethnic Hawaiians more patriotic toward America, to dampen demands for independence, or to promote racial reconciliation. On the contrary, the Akaka bill facilitates and enables the Hawaiian independence movement by giving money and political power to race-based institutions harboring people who see themselves as primarily Hawaiians and only secondarily (or not at all) as Americans. All these points are discussed further in a large webpage showing how the Akaka bill is seen by its supporters as a way to facilitate the secession of Hawai'i from the United States.
Improving the Akaka Bill To Leave No Hawaiian Behind (proposing some serious amendments to make the bill less awful and more democratic, consistent with its purpose of creating racial separatism)
The Impact of Tribal Recognition On Ethnic Hawaiians Who Join the Tribe and On Ethnic Hawaiians Who Do Not Join the Tribe
The Impact of Tribal Recognition On Local Businesses and Neighborhoods
Note # 52
Hawaiian Nationalism, Chicano Nationalism, Black Nationalism, Indian Tribes, and Reparations -- The Akaka Bill Sets a Precedent for the Balkanization of America
(c) Copyright 2005, Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D. All rights reserved
Send comments or questions to:
GO BACK TO OTHER TOPICS ON THIS WEBSITE