Site hosted by Build your free website today!

History of modern Hawaii as taught in Hawaii schools

By Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D. June 10, 2011 in honor of King Kamehameha Day

1. Introduction

All students in the Hawaii public schools are required to pass a course on the modern history of Hawaii before they can graduate. As a result of the history-twisting and victimhood mentality spawned by this course, thousands of teenagers and young adults now feel rising levels of anti-Americanism and anti-Caucasian racial resentment. How did this sad state of affairs come about?

Two textbooks are available for the course, and they will be reviewed below. Actually, the Department of Education and its area offices try to maintain the fiction that the social studies teachers in each high school are free to chose any book they wish, whether or not it is one of these two. However, the DOE has established a set of "standards" for every course, including this one. There are only two books for which the highly paid bureaucracy at the DOE has created curriculum guides identifying which chapters, sections, or pages in the book are devoted to each of the standards. Thus, if the overworked teachers in a public school were to choose a different book, the burden would fall upon them to create such a guide. Apparently neither the DOE nor its area offices keep track of which textbooks are used by which schools. To find out, it's necessary to contact the social studies department chair, or the individual teachers, in each school.

Although there is a set of "standards", there appears to be no specific curriculum. Each teacher uses the chosen textbook in whatever way he/she wishes. Homework assignments and projects might be suggested in the textbook, but apparently examinations are created by each teacher from scratch. There is no midterm or final exam which all students take, which would allow teachers to be compared against each other according to how well their students do in meeting the so-called "standards." The "standards" themselves are extremely vague; never specifying any set of facts which students must know, but rather identifying general topics which students are supposed to be able to "discuss" or "compare" or "explain." The apparent freedom given to each teacher to design his/her own curriculum and to decide how to measure student achievement is actually a huge burden requiring each teacher to reinvent the wheel. The result is that teachers are likely to recycle class lessons or projects which they did when they themselves were students in a Hawaiian Studies course, or use lesson plans offered to them by Kamehameha Schools or other Hawaiian sovereignty groups.

This essay will begin by identifying the so-called "standards" for the Modern History of Hawaii course, and the two books whose contents have been allocated among the standards by the DOE. Some specific examples will be provided to show how the books skew Hawaiian history to brainwash students with pro-sovereignty, anti-American, or racist attitudes. This essay will then briefly consider a wider scope of related topics such as the role of education in society, the role of the University of Hawaii in shaping how Hawaiian history is taught, the charter schools and especially the "Hawaiian-focus" ones, and the growing influence of Kamehameha Schools in shaping the public school curriculum.

Here are the titles of the remaining sections of this essay. Scroll down to find the one you want.

2. The official "standards" for the required course on Hawaii's modern history

3. The two textbooks referenced by the Hawaii Department of Education standards

4. Examples of how the Hawaii history textbooks brainwash the students with anti-American and anti-Caucasian attitudes

4.1 Laura Brown's brief 2006 critique of MENTON; addendum regarding textbook's routine use of the word "haole"

4.2 MENTON textbook identifies 4 "models" of Hawaiian sovereignty and offers homework and classroom debate encouraging students to choose the best model. But MENTON does not offer the possibility that all these models are deeply flawed because the best model for Hawaiian sovereignty is the unity of Hawaii with the U.S., the unity of the State of Hawaii as a single sovereignty, and equality of all people under the law regardless of race.

4.3 MENTON textbook allows Aiko Reinecke herself to tell or edit a highly biased version of the "Communist scare" in Hawaii during the McCarthy period, including the story of how she and her husband were fired from their teaching jobs on charges of being Communists. Textbook strongly pushes students to conclude there was nothing wrong with a teacher being a Communist, even at the height of the Cold War when the Russians were stealing nuclear secrets.

4.4 Both textbooks spend considerable time on pro-sovereignty documents generated by the U.S. government, most notably the 1893 Blount report and the 1993 apology resolution. But they do not mention the far more detailed and credible Morgan report (1894) and Native Hawaiians Study Commission report (1983) even though Morgan clearly refutes Blount and NHSC describes in detail why the "whereas" clauses of the apology resolution are false.

4.5 Both textbooks repeatedly use the word "oligarchy" as a sort of slur to describe the relatively small group of politically powerful Caucasians and the economically powerful "Big Five" corporations that controlled Hawaii during the Territorial period. But they never use that same word "oligarchy" to describe the small group of enormously powerful and wealthy native Hawaiians who controlled Hawaii during the 18th and 19th Centuries.

4.6 Changing the government of a nation by means of a revolution does not destroy the nation. The temporary Provisional Government and internationally recognized permanent Republic of Hawaii continued as an independent nation for five and a half years despite U.S. President Grover Cleveland's efforts to destabilize it.

5. Education transmits the culture or can be used to change it

6. Ken Conklin's personal background as related to Hawaiian issues

7. Hawaii history as taught at the University of Hawaii

8. Hawaii history as taught in the non-traditional Hawaii public (charter) schools

9. The impact of Kamehameha schools on charter schools and regular public schools

10. Ten sample test questions to show the likely ignorance and bias of students who have completed the history course (and probably of their teachers too!)


2. The official "standards" for the required course on Hawaii's modern history

Let's examine the official list of "standards" for the Modern History of Hawaii course, and the accompanying descriptions of what the students are expected to know and how they are expected to prove that they know it. This section on "standards" is unfortunately detailed and repetitive, because bureaucrats feel it necessary to generate such documents to justify their power and their high salaries.

The State of Hawaii Department of Education published a catalog of "Authorized Courses and Code Numbers" for 2006-2010, containing 403 pages, which can be downloaded from

Page 345 has the following paragraph under the heading: "High School Courses for Social Studies Education; Required Courses; CHR1100 Modern History of Hawaii Semester"

"This course examines the technological and multi-cultural development of modern Hawaii and how the decisions of the past account for and impact present circumstances. This course examines contemporary Hawaii, engages students in in-depth historical inquiry focusing on the historic, geographic, socio-political, and economic structures in the context of the complex interactions and interrelationships that have shaped and continue to influence major decisions facing Hawaii. Students will use the tools and methods of social scientists to conduct their inquiry and study."

An interactive "Standards toolkit" is available at

It is entitled "Hawaii Content and Performance Standards Database." That title is immediately followed by: "proudly presented by the Hawaii State Department of Education" although it will be clear that the bureaucrats have nothing to be proud of except for the salaries they earned while creating such nonsense.

From a list of courses and topics one may select
Content Area: Social Studies
Grade level/Course: 9: Modern Hawaiian History
Strand: All

And then in addition to "standard and topic" one may also select one or more of these associated elements: Benchmark, Sample Performance Assessment, Rubric

Having slected all those things brings us to this page:

Several "strands" are provided for this course:

Strand "Historical Understanding" has two so-called "standards":
Standard 1: Historical Understanding: CHANGE, CONTINUITY, AND CAUSALITY-Understand change and/or continuity and cause and/or effect in history
Standard 2: Historical Understanding: INQUIRY, EMPATHY AND PERSPECTIVE- Use the tools and methods of inquiry, perspective, and empathy to explain historical events with multiple interpretations and judge the past on its own terms

Strand "History" has one so-called "standard"
Standard 3: History: MODERN HAWAIIAN HISTORY -- Understand important historical events in Modern Hawaiian History

This standard is to be accomplished through nine topics. Each topic has its own numbered "benchmark" which is a clickable link leading to a brief list of pages from each textbook, whose contents are focused on the benchmark. The collection of all nine benchmarks with textbook page references is remarkably short, and can be seen at

Each topic benchmark is accompanied by a single extremely vague sentence identifying a goal; and a "sample performance assessment" which is a single vague sentence telling how the student should be expected to prove he has achieved the benchmark.

Most of the sample performance assessments are accompanied by four "rubrics" describing in very vague language how a student's performance is to be judged as meeting one of four levels of achievement: Advanced, Proficient, Partially Proficient, or Novice ("Novice" is actually a euphemism for "failure").

Note that none of the standards, benchmarks, or rubrics provide a list of facts to be learned. Hawaii has clearly adopted a theory of education which says that memorization and multiple-choice testing are bad. What's good is an inquiry or problem-solving approach characterized by group discussion, group projects, cooperation, and consensus; and measured by how well students "discuss" or "analyze" or "explain" historical events. It seems doubtful that any student would be given a failing grade for the course so long as he attends class, is cooperative and gets along, and spouts the opinions he is clearly expected to believe; even if he is remarkably ignorant of historical facts, names, dates, etc.

Here are the 4 topics dealing with the revolution of 1893 that overthrew the monarchy. The "History" strand has only 9 topics, so it is highly significant that four of them deal with the "overthrow" as though that's the most important thing that happened in the modern history of Hawaii. The extraordinary anti-American bias is very clear in the benchmarks and sample performance assessments.

Topic: The Overthrow
Benchmark SS.9MHH.3.1 Explain the political, social, and economic causes of the Overthrow, including the Mahele, Reciprocity Treaty, and the Bayonet Constitution
Sample Performance Assessment (SPA) The student: Describes the various causes of the Overthrow.
Advanced: Explain, with clear and precise detail, the political, social, and economic causes of the Overthrow
Proficient: Explain, with detail, the political, social, and economic causes of the Overthrow
Partially Proficient: Explain, with minimal detail, the political, social, and economic causes of the Overthrow
Novice: Ineffectively explain the political, social, and economic causes of the Overthrow

Topic: The Overthrow
Benchmark SS.9MHH.3.2 Describe the role of the United States government in the Overthrow, including the various United States administrations and Minister John Stevens
Sample Performance Assessment (SPA) The student: Uses chronology to describe the United States involvement leading up to, during, and immediately after the Overthrow.
Advanced: Describe, with clear and precise detail, the role of the United States government in the Overthrow
Proficient: Describe, with detail, the role of the United States government in the Overthrow
Partially Proficient: Describe, with minimal detail, the role of the United States government in the Overthrow
Novice: Ineffectively describe the role of the United States government in the Overthrow

Topic: The Overthrow
Benchmark SS.9MHH.3.3 Explain the events and turning points of the Overthrow, beginning with the foreign movement against Kalakaua, Liliuokalani's attempts to change the Bayonet Constitution, and her abdication from the throne
Sample Performance Assessment (SPA) The student: Uses chronology to explain the major events and turning points of the Overthrow.
Advanced: Analyze the events and turning points of the Overthrow, making significant connections, insights, and generalizations
Proficient: Explain the events and turning points of the Overthrow
Partially Proficient: Describe the events and turning points of the Overthrow
Novice: Name the events and/or turning points of the Overthrow

Topic: The Overthrow
Benchmark SS.9MHH.3.4 Explain the political, social, and economic effects of the Overthrow, including U.S. military presence, the Organic Act, the Territorial government, and Statehood
Sample Performance Assessment (SPA) The student: Explains the short- and long-term effects of the Overthrow.
Advanced: Analyze the political, social, and economic effects of the Overthrow, making significant connections, insights, and generalizations Proficient: Explain the political, social, and economic effects of the Overthrow Partially Proficient: Describe the political, social, and/or economic effects of the Overthrow
Novice: Name the political, social, and/or economic effects of the Overthrow


** Ken Conklin's comment: Notice that none of the four benchmarks related to the "Overthrow" allow for any way to interpret that event as an internal revolution sparked by the monarchy's astounding level of financial and moral corruption and by the Queen's attempt to stage a coup against the Constitution she had sword to uphold. There is no mention of the opium bill, lottery bill, or distillery bill which the Queen bribed the legislature to pass immediately before dissolving the legislature, and no mention of her publicly proclaimed plan to unilaterally proclaim a new Constitution the following day. There is no expectation that students will learn that the 162 U.S. peacekeepers never patrolled the streets, never pointed their guns at anyone, never took over any buildings nor gave any assistance to the 1500 armed local men who carried out the revolution. There is no expectation that students will learn that every foreign government's local consul in Honolulu gave de facto recognition to the temporary Provisional Government within two days after the revolution; and that the Emperors, Kings, Queens, and Presidents of at least 20 nations on 4 continents personally signed letters in 11 languages giving de jure recognition to the permanent Republic of Hawaii during the several months following its creation. There is no expectation that students will learn that the Constitution of the Republic was written in a Constitutional Convention where at least five delegates were native Hawaiians, and that the Speaker of the House of Representatives was native Hawaiian John Kaulukou. There is no expectation that students will learn that Liliuokalani was NOT imprisoned in the Palace by U.S. military forces following the revolution in January 1893 (as Senator Inouye has asserted on the floor of the U.S. Senate), but rather that she was imprisoned in the Palace by the Republic of Hawaii because of her conspiracy in the attempted counter-revolution by an army led by Robert Wilcox in January 1895, when guns and bombs were found buried in her flower garden at her private home (Washington Place) and documents were found in her home signed by her as Queen appointing the new cabinet ministers for the monarchy she expected the revolution to establish. Indeed, hardly anyone in Hawaii is aware of these facts -- not even the teachers of the history course -- because those facts have been censored out of the textbooks and the Hawaii history courses taught at the universities.

After the "History" strand there are five more strands, each related to a social studies subject area such as political science/civics, cultural anthropology, geography, economics. The only one which has a benchmark and sample performance assessment is

Standard 4: Political Science/Civics: GOVERNANCE, DEMOCRACY, AND INTERACTION -- Understand the purpose and historical impact of political institutions, the principles and values of American constitutional democracy, and the similarities and differences in government across cultural perspectives
Topic: Governance, Power, and Authority
Benchmark: Explain how governments acquire, use, and justify power, including how limited governments differ from unlimited ones
Sample Performance Assessment: The student: Explains whether, based on the laws, treaties, and official documents related to the Overthrow of the monarchy, any U.S. or Hawaii actions broke any national or international laws of the time period, and explains how the U.S. acquired, used, and justified its use of power.
Advanced: Explain how governments acquire, use, and justify power, including how limited governments differ from unlimited ones, and make and defend generalizations and inferences with compelling explanations, reasons, or evidence
Proficient: Explain how governments acquire, use, and justify power, including how limited governments differ from unlimited ones, and make and defend generalizations and inferences
Partially Proficient: Explain how governments acquire, use, and justify power, or explain how limited governments differ from unlimited ones
Novice: Recognize that governments acquire, use, and justify their power differently

** Ken Conklin's comment: Once again we see that students are to be brainwashed to believe that the revolution of 1893 was an illegal violation of international law carried out by the United States. Any view contrary to that will be suppressed. Students will not be provided with historical facts which would support such a contrary view. Students asserting such a contrary view are likely to be ostracized and humiliated -- or at least they and perhaps their parents would be called in for "counseling."


3. The two textbooks referenced by the Hawaii Department of Education standards

Linda K. MENTON and Eileen H. Tamura, "A History of Hawai'i" (2nd ed.; Honolulu: University of Hawaii Curriculum Research & Development Group, c1999). 429 pages.
ISBN: 0-937049-94-8.
Hawaii Public Library catalog # H 375.9969 Me. 63 copies available among various branches.
In addition there are 42 copies of an edition from 1991; and 5 copies of a 1989 edition; and 5 copies of a 2002 edition. On the internet, no copies are available for less than $53 including shipping.

Ann RAYSON, "Modern History of Hawai'i" (Honolulu: Bess Press, c2004), 294 pages.
ISBN 1-57306-209-X
Hawaii Public Library catalog # H 996.9 Ra. 85 copies available among various branches On the internet new and used copies are available for not less than $55 although older editions are available much more cheaply.

Comparing the two books:

The two books cost approximately the same, but MENTON provides far greater objectively measurable value. MENTON has 429 pages while RAYSON has only 294 pages. Furthermore, MENTON probably has twice as many words per page, because RAYSON prints text on only a 4 inch wide single column on each page while MENTON prints text in two columns each 3 inches wide. The empty 1/3 width of each RAYSON page sometimes has a picture, or a short definition of a word; but usually is mostly blank; and often a large picture takes up the entire width of the page and 1/3, 1/2, or even the entire vertical height of the page. MENTON provides a lengthy glossary, list of references, and index; whereas RAYSON has only a combined total of 13 pages of notes, references, and index. The only criterion where RAYSON offers more value is the use of color: the MENTON book has no color in the pictures or words, while the RAYSON book has many color pictures and some colored vocabulary words with colored definitions.

The MENTON book looks more "respectable" or scholarly or academic because it has a far greater number of words per page, uses tables, charts, and drawings; and has no color. The color pictures in RAYSON make it look somewhat cartoonish, and the color used in giving definitions adds to its appearance as a textbook for children rather than a history book for grownups.

MENTON also gives the impression of being far more authoritative than RAYSON. The MENTON book identifies a long list of well-known professors and teachers who served as consultants to the University of Hawaii Curriculum Research & Development Group and presumably wrote or heavily edited major portions of the book. The RAYSON book identifies only a few content contributors, one of which is the same University of Hawaii Curriculum Research & Development Group.

MENTON begins the history of modern Hawaii with the arrival of Captain Cook in 1778, and spends about 20 pages describing major political events in the Kingdom. In later chapters MENTON also describes the economic, social, and land history during Kamehameha's conquest and the Kingdom. However, RAYSON begins the history of modern Hawaii with the overthrow of the monarchy! No coverage of the Kingdom! It must come as quite a surprise to the students when RAYSON on page 13 gives the usual excuse for the Queen surrendering "temporarily" without a fight, saying "Believing that the United States would refuse to support these actions, just as England had done in the case of Lord Paulet ..." The students must wonder: Who the heck is Lord Paulet?

Identifying a major source of bias:

25 people are listed as "Content Reviewers" on the back of the title page of MENTON. The following 18 are the ones I am familiar with who are leftwing pro-sovereignty political activists with long histories in the "movement": Haunani Bernardino, Dan Boylan, Williamson Chang, Malcolm Chun, Linda Delaney, Judith Hughes, Arthur King, Pauline King, Jocelyn Linnekin, Arnold Lum, Davianna McGregor, Franklin Odo, Aiko Reinecke, Rona Rodenhurst, Lokomaika'i Snakenberg, Holoua Stender, Ken Toguchi, Jon Van Dyke. There is nobody associated with either book who could be described as politically conservative or even neutral; or who has ever written or spoken against special race-based Hawaiian rights, indigenous rights, etc. None of them would favor the 7-2 Rice v. Cayetano decision in 2000 by the U.S. Supreme Court, or the 9-0 U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2009 on the question whether the State of Hawaii has the right to sell ceded lands without the permission of ethnic Hawaiians; none of them would oppose the existence of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs or the Department of Hawaiian Homelands, the apology resolution, or the pledge to turn over the island of Kahoolawe to a future sovereign ethnic Hawaiian government. All of them would favor the Akaka bill, and would probably hope the Akaka bill could be a first step toward re-establishing the entirety of Hawaii as an independent nation "liberated" from the U.S. These are the attitudes that guided the selection of content for the Hawaii history textbooks, and excluded content which might help students reach an opposite viewpoint.

Remember that the course "Modern History of Hawaii" is only a single semester. Remember that on the mainland the school year contains 180 instructional days, so a semester has 90. But here in Hawaii the school calendar has been cut short because of budget concerns. Every Wednesday is a half-day to allow for teacher preparation. Also, there are many days when there's no classroom instruction because of "field trips", or several periods are eliminated to allow for school assemblies, state-mandated exams to assess student achievement in Mathematics and English, etc. Students in "Modern History of Hawaii" would be lucky to get 80 periods of 45-50 minutes, and some of the time would be taken by minor quizzes, major exams, etc. There's no way the entire MENTON book with 429 densely printed pages could be covered. Even the 294 less densely printed pages of RAYSON probably cannot be covered. Both books, especially MENTON, have numerous fascinating ideas for projects, committee work, discussions and debates; but such activities are very time-consuming. The result is that the individual teacher has great latitude to pick and choose which topics and subtopics to cover. The "standards" make it clear that the overthrow of the monarchy is the most important topic, and attention is also given to plantation life, the attack on Pearl Harbor, and ethnic relations. With no real curriculum -- no set of facts which students are expected to master -- each teacher will inculcate his students with his own biases as learned from college courses in "Hawaiian Studies" taught by sovereignty activists, and prepackaged materials from Kamehameha Schools, Hawaiian Civic Clubs, or other community groups.

I happily acknowledge that by reading these books I learned many details about Hawaii history which I had not previously known. For example, Captain Cook found pineapples already growing wild in the Kona district of Hawaii Island (RAYSON p. 116); therefore pineapples were either endemic to Hawaii or were brought as canoe plants by the Polynesian settlers from Marquesas or Tahiti.

I strongly encourage adults in Hawaii, including those born and raised in Hawaii, to go to their local branch library and take home one or both books. Everyone will learn many interesting things about Hawaii history. The difference between adults and teenagers is that adults are able to recognize the bias in the books and set it aside, whereas teenagers will simply be brainwashed.

Here's a concise way of describing my reaction to the textbooks. I am politically conservative, and a defender of unity and equality. I am opposed to race-based political sovereignty for ethnic Hawaiians, and opposed to secession from the U.S. If I were a teacher using either of these textbooks, I would find it impossible to use what's in the textbook to teach many of the facts I know or to make it possible for students to support the views I believe are correct. I would be in a constant struggle to explain "That's only half the story" or "You need to know the following things which are not in the book." I'd have to constantly print materials from other sources to give to the students to ensure they get fair and balanced lessons.


4. Examples of how the Hawaii history textbooks brainwash the students with anti-American and anti-Caucasian attitudes

Remember that MENTON is 429 pages long, and RAYSON has 294 pages. There are hundreds of examples to choose from. Only a few can be analyzed here. After reviewing a brief critique by Laura Brown five years ago, I have chosen a few additional examples where my own expertise is strong. Many more examples could be chosen, but my time to devote to this project is limited.

The textbooks seem to be free from the major falsehoods about Hawaiian history which have become widely accepted. However, what is contained in the books is a one-sided view of history which brainwashes the students by failing to offer opposing facts and opinions.

Here's a review of a book distributed to volunteers and friends of Iolani Palace, which is filled with a large number of outrageous falsehoods. The book review identifies the falsehoods it contains, and provides detailed refutations of them. The author was apparently hoping it would be used as a school textbook. MENTON and RAYSON instill the same anti-American, anti-Caucasian attitudes as this book, but do so in a manner whose subtlety conceals the evil. "Book review of Kim Hunter (author) and Patti Carol (illustrator), Ka Puuwai Hamama -- Volunteer Spirit (Waianae, HI: One Voice Publications, May 2010). Numerous historical falsehoods are quoted and disproved. The author/publisher is urged to recall the book as a defective product poisonous to the souls of innocent readers."


4.1 Laura Brown's brief 2006 critique of MENTON; addendum regarding textbook's routine use of the word "haole"

An article in Hawaii Reporter on September 6, 2006 by education writer Laura Brown provided a brief review of MENTON. The article was entitled "'History of Hawaii' Textbook Indoctrinates Students with Racist Propaganda." Although Hawaii Reporter has changed its archive URLs, Ms. Brown's article can be seen in the Grassroot Institute archives at

Brown pointed out that "High school students who do not pass a Hawaiian History course using this text will not qualify for a high school diploma. What do families think of this indoctrination of their children by the anti-American and racist propaganda foisted upon their children by the DOE?"

Brown noted that "Many of the excerpts that are supposed to be historical are actually fictional journal entries or dialogues, with references to 'reliable sources.' Ultimately, the victims in this textbook are Hawaiians and Japanese, while the heroes are Democrats and labor unions."

She noted "the words 'forced,' 'haole' or 'white,' and 'imperialist' are repeated throughout the entire text. In a lesson on imperialism, High School students must color a map with crayons to highlight American and European imperialism in countries 'that fell under' Western dominance. Nearly every Hawaiian ruler is said to have been 'forced' to sign treaties by 'haoles.' Hawaiians were killed off only by 'white' diseases. Foreign labor was imported to work the plantations either because Hawaiians left for California due to the gold rush or because they were killed off by diseases, depending on which chapter is being read. The majority of the text exceeds the subject of 'Hawaiian history' and moves into the realm of propaganda, urging students to write about Martin Luther King or call the National Organization for Women (NOW). In a discussion of land, a passage states that ceded lands are the only thing left that once gave them a 'feeling oneness with the world and nature.' The Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) was created to 'provide Hawaiians the right to determine priorities which would effectuate the betterment of their condition and welfare…' However, [says Laura Brown] all citizens of Hawaii already have the right to better themselves based on U.S. constitutional rights.

Brown says "A section on the military in Hawaii includes two opposing views of the military presence here, including 9 pages of questions regarding the safety of nuclear weapons stored in Pearl Harbor. Jim Albertini, head of a local peace group, is given triple play over Admiral Robert Long, who was commander-in-chief, Pacific Command, in dismissing the admiral’s assurances regarding the safety of nuclear submarines in Pearl Harbor and concerns regarding the Soviet threat during the 1980s."

Brown describes a poem presented on page 363 of MENTON: "A racist poem, 'The Color of Ghosts,' by an obscure poet only referred to as 'dgbair,' rounds out the 'history' lesson. The narrator is from Boston, and feels 'gritty' like New York. The narrator confesses to being haole – 'the color of ghosts, the color of whalers, missionaries and plantation boss-men, who bought guns, bibles and ships full of workers, and took women, land and too many lives.' He is talking to the 'sansei' that sees only the ghosts noisily following the narrator around. He must remain 'strange,' never considered 'local,' never belonging.

What Brown does not mention is that the poem is found in a section of the book devoted to cultural pluralism and "local culture." The poem is apparently presented as an attempt to sensitize "local" students "of color" to the fact that Caucasians in Hawaii often feel they can never be accepted as "local." Discussion question #7 at the end of the poem asks: "The poet seems to feel forever the outsider to Hawai'i. Are her feelings justified? Is there prejudice against haole or other ethnic groups in Hawai'i today?"

But the very wording of that question shows a terrible insensitivity bordering on racism that permeates the entire book. The word "haole" is used throughout both MENTON and RAYSON textbooks as though it is perfectly acceptable. Without actually counting word usage, it seems the word "haole" is used a larger number of times than "Caucasian" or "white" in both books. I, Ken Conklin, am not personally offended by the word, and have often used it to describe who I am. I am only offended when someone says it to me as an epithet with a nasty adjective in front of it, like "fuckin'." However, many Caucasians do take offense at it, and feel it is comparable to the word "nigger" or "jap." On some occasions after I have given a speech and described myself as a "haole," one of the Caucasians in the audience (usually a middle-aged or elderly one) has warned me that I should not use that word because it is offensive. Surely the writers of this book know the word is offensive to some Caucasians. Yet the writers make no effort to avoid giving offense even though they surely know about it.

By contrast, another poem is offered for analysis much earlier in the book, on pages 151-154. "To My Brother" was a prize-winning poem written by UH freshman Nobuko Shimazu to her brother in 1944, who was a soldier in the 442nd Regimental Combat Team. The poem repeatedly used the word "Jap" in a very prejudicial, pejorative way to illustrate how Americans of Japanese ancestry are denigrated as being less than American -- exactly as the word "haole" is used to denigrate a Caucasian as being an outsider. And yet, the authors of this textbook never use the word "Jap" in framing the discussion questions about the poem, even though the authors have no hesitation to use the word "haole" in framing discussion questions about "The Color of Ghosts." The different treatment of the two racial epithets clearly shows at least an insensitivity toward Caucasians, or perhaps even blatant disrespect. Students using this textbook are well justified in believing the book is giving them permission to freely use hurtful words toward Caucasians but not toward people of color.

Some commentators like to defend the routine use of the word "haole" by claiming it is not hate-speech and not a racial epithet. For example, people point out that "haole" was originally used in the 1700s and 1800s to refer to all foreigners regardless of skin color. But the point is that today many Caucasians consider it highly offensive, and those writers who are so eager to push "political correctness" and racial sensitivity when it comes to words like "nigger" and "jap" should apply the same standards to "haole." Here is some evidence that the word "haole" is used as an epithet during commission of racial hate crimes, and that the general community finds it highly offensive:

A savage beating in a Waikele (Honolulu) shopping center parking lot in 2007 makes it important to think clearly about what distinguishes racial violence from ordinary violence. Witnesses on the scene perceived the event as a racial hate crime, largely because the perpetrators used the epithet "fuckin' haole" while performing their brutal beating of a Caucasian couple. The general public was greatly disturbed by the news reports and most considered it a racial hate crime, as indicated by dozens of commentaries, editorials, and letters to editor over a period of several weeks. Full text of all significant news reports, editorials, and letters to editor are compiled, along with dozens of online comments.

Webpage: "Anti-Caucasian Racial Hate Crimes in Hawaii -- Southern Poverty Law Center brings the issue to national awareness in a flawed but valuable Intelligence Report article."

The main flaw in the SPLC article is a portion of the article which "explains" and apparently provides an excuse for anti-Caucasian hate crime by describing the history of Hawaii in the same way MENTON and RAYSON describe it, in terms of American imperialism and Caucasian dominance over ethnic Hawaiians and Asians. Excusing racial hate crimes against Jews or "Japs" on the basis of allegations about control of the banking industry or bombing of Pearl Harbor is never acceptable among leftwing commentators; yet somehow it is acceptable to justify racial hate crimes against Caucasians in Hawaii by citing an alleged history of oppression by Caucasians between 1778 and 1950. That's the attitude fostered by the MENTON and RAYSON books.

Both textbooks foster the same sort of browns vs. whites anti-Caucasian mentality as is painfully evident in the 2008 UH Press book "Asian Settler Colonialism" which tells Hawaii's people of Asian ancestry that they are collaborators with Caucasians in oppressing ethnic Hawaiians unless they join Hawaiians in throwing off the yoke of American imperialism. See a major book review at


4.2 MENTON textbook identifies 4 "models" of Hawaiian sovereignty and offers homework and classroom debate encouraging students to choose the best model. But MENTON does not offer the possibility that all these models are deeply flawed because the best model for Hawaiian sovereignty is the unity of Hawaii with the U.S., the unity of the State of Hawaii as a single sovereignty, and equality of all people under the law regardless of race.

Pages 379-383 identify four "models" of sovereignty for "the structure of a new Hawaiian nation." Each model is briefly described, "with a discussion of the pros and cons of each." But all the pros and cons are focused on whether each model would be better for ethnic Hawaiians than the other models, without regard to whether it would be good for all the people of Hawaii. MENTON projects the clear concept that what would be "good" for ethnic Hawaiians is race-based land, money, political power, and independence from the U.S.

Here are the four MENTON-authorized models of sovereignty: (1) The international model, or full independence; (2) Free association (independence for domestic affairs but a treaty whereby the U.S. handles military affairs and maintains military bases in Hawaii); (3) Nation within a nation (the Akaka bill to recognize ethnic Hawaiians as an Indian tribe); (4) State within a state (a state-recognized tribe functioning like a county government, having its own lands and limited sovereignty over its internal affairs).

Class activity (page 381): "Your teacher will divide the class into groups of three or four. Each group will be assigned to advocate or promote one of the four possible models of sovereignty. Decide how to persuade your classmates to vote for the model assigned to your group. ... You must defend the model assigned to you even if you do not agree with it. You will have a chance to express your own choice later on a secret ballot."

But I believe that most of Hawaii's people, and many -- perhaps most -- ethnic Hawaiians, favor what I will call the "Aloha" model of sovereignty: all people are equal in the eyes of God; all people should be treated equally under the law regardless of race; Hawaii should remain unified with the U.S.; and all people of Hawaii should remain unified under the single sovereignty of the State of Hawaii (not divided into separate governments according to race).

The Aloha model is never mentioned in the textbook, even though I believe it is the most widely accepted one. Only the four models presented by the book are available for class discussion. Every student must push for one of them publicly during class debates. In the end, the students will have a secret ballot, but the Aloha model will not be on it. Thus the textbook brainwashed students to believe that some sort of race-based political sovereignty is inevitable and desirable, and the only question is which model should be adopted.


4.3 MENTON textbook allows Aiko Reinecke herself to tell or edit a highly biased version of the "Communist scare" in Hawaii during the McCarthy period, including the story of how she and her husband were fired from their teaching jobs on charges of being Communists. Textbook strongly pushes students to conclude there was nothing wrong with a teacher being a Communist, even at the height of the Cold War when the Russians were stealing nuclear secrets.

MENTON devotes a section, pp. 271-280, to "The Communist scare in Hawai'i" including Congressional concern over possible Communist infiltration of the ILWU labor union and the hearings in Hawaii by a subcommittee of the House Unamerican Activities Committee.

Aiko Reinecke is listed as one of 25 "content reviewers" for MENTON. It seems obvious that she personally wrote, or heavily edited, the section on pp. 271-280, entitled "The Communist scare in Hawai'i" which includes discussion of Congressional concern over possible Communist infiltration of the ILWU labor union and the hearings in Hawaii by a subcommittee of the House Unamerican Activities Committee. The ACLU is portrayed as a hero, while Senator Joseph McCarthy is an evil demagogue. Aiko and John Reinecke are portrayed as heroes.

MENTON explains that Aiko and her husband John Reinecke had been public school teachers in Hawaii for many years, and John had become a UH Professor in 1946. Both of them were accused of being Communists, and both lost their jobs while under investigation. MENTON notes that John later admitted he truly was a Communist, and the textbook encourages students to reach the conclusion that there's nothing wrong with being a Communist (even during the Cold War in the 1950s when Russian spies were stealing U.S. nuclear secrets). In response to the "Questions" (for class discussion or homework) at the end of the section students are expected to conclude that Communism is perfectly compatible with democracy, and it was wrong to persecute the Reineckes for their personal beliefs. For example, on page 279 Question 4b: "Evidence indicates that John and Aiko Reinecke were good citizens, kind and thoughtful people who tried to help others better their lives. Why do you think they were attracted to Communism?"


4.4 Both textbooks spend considerable time on pro-sovereignty documents generated by the U.S. government, most notably the 1893 Blount report and the 1993 apology resolution. But they do not mention the far more detailed and credible Morgan report (1894) and Native Hawaiians Study Commission report (1983) even though Morgan clearly refutes Blount and NHSC describes in detail why the "whereas" clauses of the apology resolution are false.

MENTON has a section on pp. 120-125 discussing the concept of reparations in relation to the ceded lands. Much space is devoted to setting up a classroom debate between groups and individuals who support reparations and who oppose reparations. The classroom debate is modeled on the hearings held in Hawaii in 1977 and 1982, leading up to the NHSC report. However, the NHSC report is never mentioned, and there is no attempt to provide a summary of the main points in the majority report. For many years only the minority report was easily available, since that's the one written by sovereignty activists who favor massive race-based reparations. But recently the majority report was also digitized and is now available on the internet, at

MENTON discussion of the revolution of 1893 discusses the Blount Report but never mentions the Morgan Report whose credibility is far superior and refutes both the assertions and the credibility of the Blount Report. For many years the Blount report has been easily available, since that's the one favored by sovereignty activists demanding either the racial separatist Akaka bill or ethnic nationalist Hawaiian independence. But more recently the Morgan report has been digitized and is now available on the internet, at

A short summary of the main points of the Morgan and NHSC reports, and discussion of their implications for today's sovereignty debates, is on a webpage "What Does the United States Owe to Native Hawaiians? Two reports commissioned by Congress (Morgan 1894 and NHSC 1983) contain the answers, which are directly applicable to the Akaka bill" at


4.5 Both textbooks repeatedly use the word "oligarchy" as a sort of slur to describe the relatively small group of politically powerful Caucasians and the economically powerful "Big Five" corporations that controlled Hawaii during the Territorial period. But they never use that same word "oligarchy" to describe the small group of enormously powerful and wealthy native Hawaiians who controlled Hawaii during the 18th and 19th Centuries.

RAYSON on page 31 defines "oligarchy" as "government by the few, especially by a small faction of persons or families" in the context of describing annexation and the Organic Act. The concept of oligarchy continues as a main theme through several chapters. The entire page 80 is a multicolor chart where each of the Big Five companies has the names of its directors listed in a box colored red, orange, green, blue, or purple; with lines of the same colors connecting each man's name to the several other companies where he also served as a director, such as Bishop Bank, Hawaiian Electric, Maui Agricultural, Hawaiian Pineapple, HC&S, Matson, etc.

Likewise MENTON begins Unit 2 (Hawaii from 1900 to 1945) with a discussion of the oligarchy, describing it as somehow not a democracy, despite the fact that far more people (especially native Hawaiians) were eligible to vote under the Constitution of the Territory than had been able to vote in the Kingdom, Provisional Government, or Republic. Kawananakoa and Kuhio are portrayed as hapless native stooges of the Caucasian oligarchy. MENTON continues to hammer at the oligarchy throughout the period that includes the Massey case (early 1930s), World War 2, martial law, etc. It seems that MENTON regards the coming to power of the Democrat Party with an ethnic Japanese majority among the voters, and the rise of the labor unions, as the end of the oligarchy. Good guys are Democrats, labor unions, and people of color; bad guys (oligarchy) are Republicans, powerful corporations, and Caucasians.

But was it any different in the 1700s and 1800s? There were the ali'i land barons on various islands owning huge areas, intermarrying with ali'i from the same and other islands, often with multiple wives or multiple husbands making the same sort of interlocking directorates. There was the Kamehameha dynasty from 1810 through 1873 and the Kalakaua dynasty from 1874 through 1893 including Na Lani 'Eha (Kalakaua, Liliuokalani, Likelike, Leleiohoku); plus Emma, Ruth (Ke'elikolani), Pauahi, Kuhio; etc.

The only difference between the two oligarchies was race. The interlocking directorate of native Hawaiian ali'i came first, whose wealth was the land they owned; followed by the interlocking directorate of Caucasian corporate owners and officers whose wealth was money or shares of stock in companies using land that was leased and occasionally purchased from the native Hawaiians. But the writers of the textbooks reserve the ugly word "oligarchy" for the greedy Caucasians, while portraying the native Hawaiians as filled with aloha in their stewardship for the land and generosity toward their fellow natives. Remember that it was greedy native ali'i who wiped out the sandalwood forests to get foreign products for their own enjoyment, and in the process caused death by starvation to many maka'ainana families whose men were forced by the ali'i to abandon their taro fields and fishponds in order to gather sandalwood. The native ali'i who did that were just as greedy as the Caucasian oligarchs who came later; just as uncaring for the environment and for the well being of their workers. Of course the textbooks give only brief mention to the sandalwood trade, and blame the near-extinction of sandalwood in Hawaii on the greedy haoles rather than on the native chiefs who treated their tenants as slaves.


4.6 Changing the government of a nation by means of a revolution does not destroy the nation. The temporary Provisional Government and internationally recognized permanent Republic of Hawaii continued as an independent nation for five and a half years despite U.S. President Grover Cleveland's efforts to destabilize it.

Many -- perhaps most -- people of Hawaii do not realize that the revolution of 1893 changed the government of Hawaii, but did not change the status of Hawaii as an independent nation recognized internationally as a member of the family of nations.

From the revolution of January 1893 until annexation in August 1898, Hawaii remained an independent nation, first under the Provisional Government and then the Republic of Hawaii -- about five and a half years.

The "Overthrow" is almost always portrayed as the destruction of the nation of Hawaii. But all that happened is that a monarchial form of government was replaced by a republic form of government. On January 17, 1893 only five people immediately lost their jobs: the Queen and her four cabinet ministers. The revolutionary Provisional Government retained all the department heads and employees, and all the judges. The members of the legislature were already out of a job in the normal course of events when the legislative session had come to an end. Of course there were die-hard royalists who refused to take the oath of allegiance to the new government which was required of all employees, and therefore lost their jobs; but that was their own personal choice.

What happened in Hawaii followed the same path as what happens in any successful internal revolution. It was not a takeover by the United States. Neither the Provisional Government nor the Republic of Hawaii was a U.S. puppet regime. The short-term presence of 162 U.S. peacekeepers to protect American lives and property and to prevent rioting and arson had hardly any impact in Hawaii, as compared with the thousands of French troops and guns and warships who actively fought many battles to help win the American revolution. Nobody claims the American revolution was somehow illegitimate or illegal on account of massive assistance from the French, or that the resulting new government was somehow a French puppet regime.

From January 17 to 19 every consul of all the nations that had consulates in Honolulu delivered a letter to President Dole granting diplomatic recognition de facto. That means those consuls agreed that the Provisional Government had taken power, and those nations would now do business with the PG rather than with the ex-queen. De facto recognition is all a consul is empowered to grant. Also, de facto is the only level of recognition given to a self-described temporary provisional government. The PG immediately drafted a treaty of annexation and sent it on the next ship headed to America. Since the PG was hoping to be annexed promptly, it felt no need to establish a permanent republic, and no need to seek full-fledged recognition de jure. Complete text of all letters of de facto recognition from local consuls in Honolulu, January 17-19, 1893; as taken from the Morgan Report, are at

U.S. President Grover Cleveland spent his first 10 months in office trying to undo the Hawaiian revolution. He sent a hatchet man, James Blount, under secret orders to destabilize the Provisional Government, to write a report blaming the U.S. for the revolution, and put Liliuokalani back on the throne. Having failed, Cleveland published Blount's report and referred the matter to Congress. In January and February 1894 the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs held open hearings on the Hawaiian revolution, taking testimony under oath in open session with severe cross examination. The outcome was publication of the 808-page Morgan Report which repudiated the Blount Report and resulted in a resolution by the Democrat-controlled Senate ordering the Democrat President Cleveland to keep hands off Hawaii. The Provisional Government then held a Constitutional Convention, and in July 1894 published a Constitution for the Republic of Hawaii. During the next several months Emperors, Kings, Queens, and Presidents of at least 20 nations on 4 continents personally signed letters giving recognition de jure to the Republic of Hawaii as the legitimate permanent government. Those letters, in the state archives, have been photographed and placed on a webpage at
The historical significance of those letters and their implications for statehood, Akaka bill, and ceded lands; are explained at
along with a detailed example of the Hawaiian sovereignty lie that such letters do not exist.

For further information about the Republic of Hawaii and its Constitution, the Treaty of Annexation between Hawaii and the U.S., etc. see "Hawaii Statehood -- straightening out the history-twisters. A historical narrative defending the legitimacy of the revolution of 1893, the annexation of 1898, and the statehood vote of 1959." at

The things described in this section of this essay are barely mentioned in the two textbooks. RAYSON does a much better job that MENTON, although both books emphasize the Queen's protest, the Blount Report, and the protest song "Kaulana Na Pua." Only RAYSON mentions that there was a Constitution for the Republic of Hawaii, and even provides a photo of the members of the Constitutional Convention, on page 12. It's easy to see some native Hawaiian faces among the delegates in the photo if anyone looks for them (there were at least 5 native names on the convention roster), although the book does not explicitly mention that fact. MENTON spends almost no time discussing the Republic, and only a couple of sentences explaining that Liliuokalani's house arrest in the Palace in 1895 was on account of her conspiracy in the attempted Wilcox counterrevolution. Exactly 100 pages later MENTON provides a list of requirements to be a voter in the Republic, but only as an illustration of the concept of "oligarchy" and for comparison with the requirements to be a voter in the Territory.


5. Education transmits the culture or can be used to change it

Genes transmit biological characteristics that distinguish humans from dogs, and make children look like their parents. Sometimes random mutations produce offspring with unexpected characteristics; or scientists might do genetic engineering to create new species.

Education is the reproductive organ of a society. Curriculum content and instructional methods transmit a culture from one generation to the next. If a society has values that are uncertain or confused, it's not surprising when the next generation grows up with psychological maladjustments and interpersonal conflicts. Schools can also be harnessed as engines of social change by controlling what children learn, so their hearts and minds will be shaped in accord with beliefs and values imposed by powerful leaders with a political agenda.

The University of Hawaii at Manoa has traditionally been the place where most Hawaii teachers were educated. But Chaminade, Hawaii Pacific, and Brigham Young Universities have been increasingly active in teacher education.

The history of Hawaii is highly controversial and aggressively politicized. It's hard to know what really happened, and even harder to make sense of it. For at least 20 years the schools have been used as propaganda factories in support of Hawaiian sovereignty. This happened because the professors who teach teachers are not only at the far left of the political spectrum, as is true throughout America; but they have abused their power over college students to churn out thousands of public school teachers who have been brainwashed to believe Hawaii people of Asian ancestry, and especially ethnic Hawaiians, were victims of American imperialism and oppression at the hands of Caucasians.


6. Ken Conklin's personal background as related to Hawaiian issues

I spent about five weeks in Hawaii on each of three summer vacations from 1982 to 1989. Then I moved permanently to Hawaii in 1992. I was inclined to go along with what the Hawaiian sovereignty activists were saying, because what had attracted me to make Hawaii my permanent home was the profound spirituality which pervades the land; and the music, hula, and language of the Hawaiian people. But having a Ph.D. in Philosophy and a career in teaching, research, and writing shaped my character to investigate things for myself. For an autobiographical webpage describing my intellectual and spiritual growth, see

From the beginning it was clear that the history of Hawaii is highly controversial and aggressively politicized. It surprised me that the history contained in older books is disputed by the history found in newer books. Some ethnic Hawaiians I spoke with, and their leftwing supporters of other races, adamantly insisted on telling me "facts" which turned out to be false when I carefully researched them. By 1999 I had read many books, attended hundreds of sovereignty rallies, and spoken with many people of all races. As my research continued, I grew increasingly ambivalent about the sovereignty movement.

I finally had a short period when all the pieces came together to form a gestalt which I can only describe as the face of evil. I became an outspoken opponent of the sovereignty movement -- both the racial separatism of things like OHA and the Akaka bill; and the ethnic nationalism of an independence movement which claims to seek restoration of an independent nation of Hawaii with multiracial citizenship. See my book "Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State"

The assertion that the restored nation would give voting rights to citizens of all races is undercut by a doctrine of racial supremacy for ethnic Hawaiians based on "the rights of indigenous people under international law" and also based on religious fascism -- a beautiful creation legend which the activists twist into a hideous justification for racial supremacy -- the concept that ethnic Hawaiians are brothers to the land and children of the gods in a way nobody ever can be who lacks a drop of Hawaiian native blood. See


7. Hawaii history as taught at the University of Hawaii

By 2000 I had thoroughly studied Hawaiian history, had become moderately fluent in Hawaiian language, and was familiar with some elements of Hawaiian culture. My Ph.D. was in Philosophy, with a specialty in epistemology (theory of knowledge); but my area of greatest expertise had now become Hawaiian sovereignty. I began participating in public discourse about Hawaiian sovereignty, including letters to editor and serving as expert panelist on TV and radio programs. In February 2000 the U.S. Supreme Court made a 7-2 ruling in Rice v. Cayetano ending racial segregation in voting in Hawaii -- the Court ruled that all registered voters in Hawaii can vote for OHA trustees regardless whether the voter has any Hawaiian native blood. For a webpage tracing the history of the impact of the Rice v. Cayetano decision from 2000 through 2010, see

I decided to run for OHA trustee. But when I tried to pull nominating papers, the Elections Office told me I could not be a candidate for OHA because I lack Hawaiian blood. I replied "Rice v. Cayetano." The Elections Office responded "That only says you can vote, it does not say you can be a candidate." So a multiracial group of 13 plaintiffs (including three ethnic Hawaiians) filed a federal civil rights lawsuit, and we won the right for people of all races to not only vote for OHA trustees but also to run as candidates for OHA trustee. In November I placed 4th out of 20 candidates for one trustee position (there were 96 candidates for 9 positions). Information about my campaign is at

Legal documents, news reports, and commentaries about the civil rights lawsuit that was necessary to allow me (and other people with no native blood) to run for OHA are at

During my first ten years as a citizen of Hawaii (starting 1992) I learned that the University of Hawaii had become a propaganda factory for Hawaiian sovereignty. Not only the Center for Hawaiian Studies was teaching highly biased courses, but also every other university department which teaches courses related to Hawaiian history and culture -- departments like History, Political Science, Anthropology, Sociology, Psychology, Religion, Regional and Urban Planning, Geography, Business, etc. No professor dared to teach lessons contrary to the doctrines of the Center for Hawaiian Studies. Students were not assigned to read opposing views, and dared not express opposing views for fear of being ostracized in class and/or receiving a failing grade. A few professors who dared to contradict CHS were put in fear, including threats of violence.

In September 2002 a very brave coordinator of the Center for Lifelong Learning (CLLL), responding to a request from some of her elderly students, invited me to teach a non-credit, unpaid short course entitled "Hawaiian Sovereignty: An Alternative View." When a brochure was distributed on campus containing course descriptions and instructor names for the handful of courses to be offered by the CLLL, the coordinator began receiving threats warning her to cancel the course because otherwise there was going to be trouble. Most threats were by telephone, but at least one was face-to-face in her office featuring a huge Polynesian man shouting and pounding his fist on her desk. She complained to university administrators, who did nothing to help her. She mentioned the threats to more than a dozen elderly students who had signed up for the course, all of whom withdrew their signups for fear of violence. The Honolulu Advertiser ran a news report, and a followup editorial asking what had happened to academic freedom at UH. UH administrators replied that since nobody was now signed up for the course, there was no longer any problem. It appeared that the tactics of the Hawaiian Ku Klux Klan had been successful. But the brave CLLL coordinator and I changed the room where the class meetings were to be held, and she persuaded the previously enrolled students to re-enroll. Others also signed up. The class went forward very successfully, in an undisclosed location which I referred to as "the bunker." Complete details about this incident, including a few reports from other UH professors whose academic freedom was killed by Hawaiian sovereignty activists, can be found on a webpage at

To this day all courses in Hawaiian Studies at UH Manoa and all the community colleges are taught by Hawaiian sovereignty activists who use a curriculum produced by such UH professors as Haunani-Kay Trask, Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, Jonathan Osorio, and others of the same ilk. The courses are used as tools for recruiting and indoctrinating more activists; in much the same way as "Black Studies" and "Women's Studies" courses. Professors of courses in cognate departments (History, Political Science, Anthropology, etc.) know that they dare not present any views conflicting with the doctrines of the Hawaiian Studies department, for fear of losing the enrollment of Hawaiian Studies students and losing the opportunity for placing students into "field experiences" in taro patches, fishponds, political organizations, etc.


8. Hawaii history as taught in the non-traditional Hawaii public (charter) schools

31 Hawaii public schools are charter schools, meaning that each one has its own board of education, hires its own teachers, and develops its own curriculum. The charter schools are "public" in the sense that they are supported by tax dollars, must allow all students to apply for admission; and students are expected to meet the same standards of achievement as students in non-charter schools, as measured by the same annual tests. Some of the charter schools are focused on science and technology, or environmental studies; without any overarching focus on Hawaiian culture.

A majority of the charter schools are "Hawaiian-focus." That means that the curriculum is centered around activities important to ethnic Hawaiian culture, such as taro cultivation, fishponds, heiaus, hula, etc. The history courses are undoubtedly rabidly pro-sovereignty, portraying the U.S. as having staged an armed invasion in 1893 which continues until now as a belligerent military occupation. The language of instruction is English, although Hawaiian words, phrases, songs, chants, poems, culture-based stories, etc. are a much larger part of the curriculum than in other schools. It seems likely that Hawaiian religious observances are part of the curriculum, including prayers to the ancient gods and ceremonies (such as permission to enter the classroom, or makahiki celebrations). U.S. law is very clear that a public school can teach facts about what various religions believe, but cannot engage in actual religious worship ceremonies or preaching. However, the only people who would have legal "standing" to complain would be the parents of children in the school; and of course all of them would strongly support the use of tax dollars to engage their children in Hawaiian religious observances.

In these Hawaiian-focus charter schools more than 90% of the children are ethnic Hawaiian, along with most of the teachers and administrators and virtually all policy makers and members of the governing board. Children with no native blood are allowed because the law prohibits racial segregation. But parents of non-native children are likely to be zealous supporters of Hawaiian sovereignty, and likely to "know their place" when it comes to setting school policy and curriculum. When there are more children applying for admission than the spaces available, the law requires a lottery; but it seems likely that non-native parents would be quietly pressured to withdraw in favor of ethnic Hawaiians. It's unimaginable that any non-native parent would insist on barging in when told he is unwelcome, and would then become a troublemaker regarding what the children are taught about Hawaiian history.

The Hawaiian-focus charter schools have created their own organization "Ka Lei Na'auao" to lobby the Department of Education and the legislature for what they want. For a period of several years Ka Lei Na'auao tried very hard to push a bill through the legislature to create its own racial separatist school department that would be totally independent of the regular DOE bureaucracy, curriculum standards, and teacher certification regulations; able to certify and de-certify schools; and would explicitly impose a racial requirement on each school's board of directors and on the consortium as a whole. See webpage "PUBLIC EDUCATION FOR ETHNIC NATION-BUILDING IN HAWAI'I -- a legislative bill to create a separate statewide school system for Native Hawaiians" at

Some Hawaii public school classrooms, or even a few entire schools, are Hawaiian language immersion. That means that the regular school subjects are taught, such as mathematics, science, history, biology, etc.; but the language used for teaching every subject is Hawaiian. Some of these classrooms or schools use only Hawaiian in the early grades and then teach English (as though it's a foreign language) in higher grades; while others use Hawaiian exclusively at all grade levels. At one school serving the few children of the island of Ni'ihau, there was a dispute between parents who favored teaching English in higher grades vs. parents who insisted on no English at any level. As a result, one faction broke away and created its own school, with support from OHA and the DOE. We can only imagine what the Hawaiian history curriculum is like in these two schools.


9. The impact of Kamehameha schools on charter schools and regular public schools

Kamehameha Schools today is worth between $8-15 Billion depending on how land is valued and what happens in the stock market. It began with a single campus on Oahu. It then started doing outreach programs in the public schools in areas with large ethnic Hawaiian populations, such as Waianae and Waimanalo, and giving advice to the "Kupuna In the Schools" program which sends elderly ethnic Hawaiian cultural advisors to most public schools to provide enrichment activities. Kamehameha also gave help to the Hawaiian language immersion classrooms in the regular public schools, as well as the public schools that are entirely Hawaiian language immersion (such as Anuenue). When public charter schools were created, half of them (today more than half) were Hawaiian-focus, meaning that the curriculum was centered around Hawaiian culture; and Kamehameha has given them many millions of dollars. Kamehameha has also built its own campuses on Maui and Hawaii Island, with corresponding outreach to the public schools there as well as on Kauai, Molokai, and Lanai. Kamehameha's influence is not limited to the K-12 public schools. It also gives scholarships for ethnic Hawaiians to attend college not only in Hawaii but anywhere they choose to go, thus making those students beholden to Kamehameha as they become influential in their professional careers.

These outreach programs are NOT politically neutral. Wherever Kamehameha is involved, it provides curriculum materials and teacher training which incorporate Kamehameha's views on Hawaiian history. In a program which began in the early 2000s, Kamehameha "adopted" public schools in areas with large ethic Hawaiian populations and entered into formal agreements with them whereby Kamehameha provided 20% of the operating budget of the school -- one Kamehameha dollar for every four government dollars -- in return for taking control of all aspects of curriculum and teacher in-service training that might be related to Hawaiian history and culture. Thus Kamehameha has infiltrated the entire public school system and controls what children learn about Hawaiian history and culture. Kamehameha's outreach and infiltration is especially heavy in schools where ethnic Hawaiians are a large portion of the student population, but Kamehameha also has an impact on all public schools systemwide. Thus Kamehameha is ensuring that the next generation of ethnic Hawaiians will be radicalized in their views on historical and sovereignty issues, while the general population is also influenced to be supportive.

Following are some published news reports and press releases, in chronological order, which provide actual numbers and show the growth of Kamehameha's influence as the years go by.

Honolulu Magazine, November 2004 ** Excerpts

Can Hawaiians Save the Public Schools? by Ronna Bolante

In 2000, lawmakers went a step further, approving the creation of startup charter schools. These were brand-new schools, designing their curriculum and programs from scratch. Startups accept all the students they have room for, regardless of where they live.

More than 40 applicants sought state authorization for startup charters in 2000. Half of them wanted to create Hawaiian-focused schools-a clear response to the plight of Hawaiian students in public education.

By the end of 2001, the fledgling Hawaiian charter school movement needed help. The same bureaucratic red tape it was supposed to escape now threatened its survival.

Meanwhile, Kamehameha Schools was reassessing its mission. The institution, one of the wealthiest and most powerful in the state, realized it needed to reach beyond its Kapälama campus to help more Hawaiian children.

"We looked at where we were going and where the bulk of the Hawaiian students were -- 87 percent are in the public schools today," says Charlene Hoe, Kamehameha's interim head of community outreach education. "The charter methodology seemed to hold promise."

In 2002, Kamehameha headed straight for the state Legislature. Backed by the Hawai'i Business Roundtable, Kamehameha lobbied to revise the charter law. It wanted the Legislature to allow nonprofits like Kamehameha to manage and operate conversion charter schools. The DOE provides the school facilities, staff and operating budget for conversions. In return, the nonprofits match $1 for every $4 of state funds.

It is unlikely for bills to pass, let alone get a hearing, the first year they are introduced in the Legislature. But Kamehameha prevailed. It was the first bill Gov. Ben Cayetano signed into law that year.

"This was historic legislation," says Rep. Ken Ito, chairman of the House Education Committee at the time. "Many of these schools were struggling, and this was a new concept."

Kamehameha partnered with other community organizations, including the Harold K.L. Castle Foundation, to establish the nonprofit Ho'okäko'o Corp. Hawai'i now has 23 startups, the maximum number allowed under state law. The only room for substantial growth in the charter-school movement is for conversion schools, with 21 remaining slots available.

Waimea Middle School on the Big Island became the first public school to convert to charter under Ho'okäko'o. In June, Kualapu'u Elementary on Moloka'i made the move.

"It was almost too good to pass up," Kualapu'u principal Lydia Trinidad says. "The partnership with Kamehameha through Ho'ökäko'o was the biggest incentive. "Now we could say what parts of the DOE were working and which weren't. With these additional resources, we can take care of some things now, like adding a preschool to our campus or extra tutoring positions."

For existing startups, Kamehameha's impact was even greater. In 2003, Kamehameha established the Ho'olako Like program to give Hawaiian-focused startups funding similar to the conversion schools. Kamehameha also provides schools with leadership training, assistance in budgeting and grant-writing, workshops for their students, donations of furniture and equipment and so on.

"Before, people thought that the Hawaiian charter-school movement was a joke," says Alvin Parker, principal at Ka Waihona o ka Na'auao. "Kamehameha Schools absolutely certified, validated, gave the credibility of their institution to the Hawaiian charter-school movement. If I could have any educational partner in this state, it's gotta be Kamehameha Schools."

Last year, Kamehameha gave nearly $3 million in matching funds to charter schools with large Hawaiian populations, not counting expenses for additional programs and services. Unlike Kamehameha, Hawaiian-focused charter schools accept all students, regardless of ethnicity or academic standing. By partnering with charter schools in predominantly Hawaiian communities, Kamehameha aids Hawaiian and, to a much lesser extent, non-Hawaiian students who probably wouldn't qualify for admission to its campuses.

Honolulu Advertiser, Wednesday, December 19, 2007 * excerpts

Hawaii school helped 35,000 last fiscal year

By Loren Moreno
Advertiser Staff Writer

Through its community and outreach programs, Kamehameha Schools reached more than 35,000 Native Hawaiian children and families in its most recent fiscal year, up 27 percent from the previous year, Kamehameha officials said yesterday. Of that, only 5,400 were students who attended one of the school's three campuses. The other 30,000 participated in a wide variety of programs ranging from classes for expectant parents to college scholarships funded by Kamehameha Schools.

The trust contributed $78 million to more than 60 community organizations statewide -- from programs for expectant parents to early education to literacy programs to college scholarships, Mailer said.

One of the largest partnerships is with the state Department of Education, she said. Kamehameha Schools helps fund some 21 summer school programs in public schools across the Islands. Kamehameha also supports literacy programs, professional development for teachers, Hawaiian cultural education programs and scholarships. Earlier this year, Kamehameha provided 14 Hawaiian-focused charter schools with $4.8 million in funding.

In addition to more than $16 million spent last year on college scholarships, Kamehameha also increased the number of preschool scholarships by 37 percent. Some 850 children received a total of $4.4 million in early-childhood education scholarships, up from $3 million a year before. Last year, Kamehameha Schools served about 8,800 children from birth to age 8 through preschools, preschool scholarships and other educational partnerships. Kamehameha has 31 pre-schools statewide, but with an estimated 32,000 keiki in Hawai'i between birth and age 4, Pating said, Kamehameha has been supporting other early-childhood education efforts across the state in hopes of reaching more native children.

"The biggest theme over the past couple of years has been reaching out and collaborating with our community partners in a much different way than we have in the past," he said.

Honolulu Advertiser, Friday, December 19, 2008

Trust spent $273M on outreach
Kamehameha Schools programs aimed at keiki outside campuses

There are an estimated 74,000 school-age Native Hawaiian children in the public or private school system, with only about 5,400 of them attending one of the Kamehameha Schools campuses. "The majority of our Hawaiian children are not on our campuses," said Christopher Pating, vice president of Strategic Planning and Implementation. "How do we really serve our people? It's about getting out into the community and our schools," Pating said.

Kamehameha's literacy enhancement programs are an example of the kinds of partnerships that the trust has with the public schools. The program is concentrated in 14 public schools and is serving about 2,530 students from kindergarten to third grade. An additional nine schools are expected to join the program.

This past year Kamehameha Schools also continued to support the public charter school movement with some $9.8 million in per-pupil funding to 16 Hawaiian-focused charters. "We are seeing very good gains in achievement at the charter schools," said Kamehameha Schools spokeswoman Ann Botticelli. Kamehameha has expanded the number of preschool scholarships it offers by 48 percent. The school also offers nearly $24 million in pre-school and post-high school scholarships. It is also serving more than 10,000 children through its preschools, preschool scholarships and other educational partnerships.

Honolulu Advertiser, Saturday, November 28, 2009

Kamehameha increases grants
Public charter schools received $7.2 million to help Hawaiian students

Public schools receive a good chunk of the Kamehameha Schools grants — and there is good reason for it, Pating said. Kamehameha Schools serves almost 7,000 students at its three campuses and multiple preschools. But it's estimated there are 76,000 school-age Native Hawaiian children, of which 65,000 are in Hawai'i's public schools. "So it really behooves us to be working in partnership with public- school children, because that's where the majority of our children are educated," Pating said.

Public charter schools with a Hawaiian emphasis get a particular boost, with grants from Kamehameha Schools for the past five years. "Charter schools are feeling the pinch" of reduced state funding, Pating said. "They know it will always be a challenge for them," because the state gives them less money per student, he said.

For Hawai'i's smallest charter school, Kamehameha's contributions in recent years have made a big difference. "We're forever grateful to Kamehameha Schools," said Haunani Seward, principal of Ke Kula Ni'ihau O Kekaha on Kaua'i, which uses the grant to hire native Hawaiian speakers who are working on their state teaching credentials. Ke Kula Ni'ihau O Kekaha has 40 students in grades kindergarten through 12, all of whom speak Hawaiian. Use of English doesn't start until fourth grade.

That connection of one Native Hawaiian teaching another is also fostered with Kamehameha's grants to the University of Hawai'i. "It's very important to have teachers from the community teaching in community schools," Pating said. "Students need to see their face in the face of their teacher."

To that end, some UH programs help Native Hawaiians seeking education degrees to follow through, even though many are working, going to school, and raising their own families, Pating said. Other UH programs help teachers of any background learn about "Native Hawaiian learning styles and how to be successful in classrooms," Pating said.

Other major collaborators and grant recipients include Alu Like, 'Aha Punana Leo, Kanu O Ka 'Aina, Partners in Development Foundation and the Institute for Native Pacific Education & Culture.

TOP PARTNERS Kamehameha's top eight collaboration partners for the 2009-2010 school year are:
• Public charter schools (16 schools): $7.2 million
• Hawai'i Department of Education: $1.8 million
• 'Aha Punana Leo: $1.7 million
• University of Hawai'i: $1.5 million.
• Kanu O Ka 'Aina Learning 'Ohana (KALO): $1.4 million
• Alu Like: $1 million
• Partners in Development Foundation: $1 million
• Institute for Native Pacific Education & Culture (INPEACE): $1 million

Kamehameha Schools press release, from its own website; excerpts

Monday, November 30 2009

Kamehameha Schools Awards $23 Million in Grants to Community Collaborators

by: Thomas Yoshida

Kamehameha Schools’ mission is to educate Native Hawaiians, and through its three K-12 campuses and 31 preschools, Kamehameha serves thousands of learners across the state every year. Yet many remain untouched by this legacy left by founder Bernice Pauahi Bishop. As part of its Education Strategic Plan, Kamehameha Schools continues to find ways to serve more Hawaiian children and families by collaborating with service providers in communities who offer quality educational experiences.

Since 2006, Kamehameha Schools has provided $79 million to community collaborators throughout the state. This current fiscal year (09-10), Kamehameha’s collaboration funding amounted to $23 million, an 18% increase over the $19.5 million awarded last fiscal year.

Kamehameha Schools received approximately 90 collaboration requests this year. The top eight collaboration partners for the current fiscal year are:

Collaboration Partner Grant Amount
Charter Schools 1:4 Match (17 schools) $7,204,630
University of Hawai'i (UH) $1,485,865
Alu Like (ALI) $1,060,000
Hawai'i Department of Education (DOE) $1,779,063
'Aha Pūnana Leo (APL) $1,763,333
Kanu O Ka 'Āina Learning 'Ohana (KALO) $1,392,901
Partners in Development Foundation (PIDF) $1,025,000
Institute for Native Pacific Education & Culture (INPEACE) $978,050

Funds are granted to collaborators who have shown that they can deliver quality educational services on a sustainable basis. Funds are provided for direct service, improvement in services and training service providers on an annual and multi-year basis. Collaborators commit to showing learning impact and sharing their successes with others.

According to Chris Pating, vice president of Strategic Planning and Implementation, “Kamehameha Schools relies upon its relationships with community providers to fulfill mutual goals – to raise levels of well-being for people and communities through education. With our programs and services and those of other community providers, we can weave a fabric of learning support that provides strength and hope for better lives.”

Charter Schools: KS continues to champion 17 charter schools that serve many Native Hawaiian students through culturally integrated programs. While these schools largely serve Native Hawaiians, students from other backgrounds also attend, seeking the unique learning environments these schools offer. KS matches one dollar for every four dollars provided by the Department of Education and hopes to increase the percentage of quality charter schools who demonstrate skilled, rigorous, relevant and culturally-grounded instruction.

University of Hawai'i (UH): KS has nine collaborations with UH, four of which are focused on teacher recruitment, training and retention programs with the intent of getting more Native Hawaiian teachers into teaching positions in Native Hawaiian communities. The remaining collaborations focus on increasing academic achievement and graduation rates of Native Hawaiian students within the University of Hawai'i system. “We have similar missions to serve Native Hawaiians, so our relationship with the University is critical to the pursuit of education for our people,” said Dr. Shawn Kanaiaupuni, director of Kamehameha’s Public Education Support Division.

Alu Like, Inc. (ALI): Alu Like’s mission is to support Native Hawaiians who are committed to achieving their potential for themselves, their families and communities. Their services include community economic development, business assistance, employment preparation, training, library services, and educational and childcare services for families with young children. KS supports many Alu Like programs, with more than half of its funding directed toward Alu Like’s family-based parent education program called Pülama I Nā Keiki (PINK).

Hawai'i Department of Education (DOE): KS supports 11 DOE collaborations that seek to increase student achievement. The major DOE collaboration is the Kahua Program which provides teacher induction and support for teachers in our targeted communities. The program supports KS’ belief that changing teaching practices is critical for increasing the achievement of Native Hawaiians in our public school system. KS also funds literacy services in 21 DOE elementary schools, approximately 215 classrooms, to improve reading before third grade.

'Aha Pūnana Leo Preschools (APL): 'Aha Pūnana Leo is committed to the use of Hawaiian language and Hawaiian ways at all times – in 'Aha Pūnana Leo programs, from preschools to graduate school, from canoe sailing lessons to contemporary office practices. ‘Aha Pūnana Leo is an active partner in their communities, fostering academic, social and economic progress. 'Aha Pūnana Leo serves over 200 keiki and their families via their Hawaiian immersion preschool programs throughout the state. KS supports the sharing of APL-developed Hawaiian language books, instructional materials and methodologies that can be disseminated to a wider audience and are viewed as valuable resources for our Native Hawaiian families and communities. Kanu O Ka 'Āina Learning 'Ohana (KALO): The Kanu O Ka 'Āina Learning 'Ohana is a non-profit organization located in Waimea, Hawai'i. KALO’s mission is to grow womb-to-tomb models of education that advance Hawaiian culture for a sustainable Hawai'i. KS supports KALO with a multi-year collaboration to provide a wide range of education services such as teacher training, early education programs, charter school management, community building and education policy advocacy.

Partners in Development Foundation (PIDF): Partners in Development is a non-profit public foundation whose goal is to help families and communities overcome difficult challenges in ways that would make them, in turn, teachers and helpers of others in need. Using traditional Hawaiian concepts, PIDF creates and implements programs to support Native Hawaiian keiki and families. KS supports these PIDF collaborations: Tūtū and Me Traveling Preschool; services to homeless children and families on the Leeward Coast of O'ahu through the the Ka Pa'alana Traveling Preschool and Homeless Outreach program; and 'Ike No'eau, an early childhood education program.

Institute of Native Pacific Education & Culture (INPEACE): INPEACE is committed to improving the quality of life for Native Hawaiians through community partnerships that provide educational opportunities and promote self-sufficiency. Through our collaboration, INPEACE operates the Keiki Steps to Kindergarten program in several public schools throughout the state. The program provides much needed transition support for keiki and families as they enter kindergarten. Another collaboration, the Kaulele program, is a scholarship program focused on supporting advanced learning for graduate students and interns in the UH system, including a community service commitment in exchange for KS’ financial support.

In addition to providing funding, Kamehameha Schools works with its collaborators to promote and support the creation, evaluation and reporting of measurable outcomes to ensure program effectiveness. Kamehameha also provides resources to support the development and implementation of culturally appropriate assessment and evaluation activities.

Kamehameha Schools is a private, educational, charitable trust founded and endowed by the legacy of Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop. Kamehameha Schools operates a statewide educational system enrolling more than 6,700 students of Hawaiian ancestry at K-12 campuses on O`ahu, Maui and Hawai`i and 31 preschool sites statewide. Thousands of additional Hawaiian learners are served each year through a range of other Kamehameha Schools’ outreach programs, community collaborations and financial aid opportunities in Hawaii and across the continental United States.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser, January 31, 2011, * excerpts

Hawaiian education funding up

By Mary Vorsino

As part of a push to extend services to more native Hawaiian children statewide, Kamehameha Schools spent $102 million on educational outreach programs last fiscal year, up from $57 million in 2006. Spending on outreach was up 5 percent from fiscal year 2009.

Altogether, the outreach programs -- through school campuses and community groups -- served some 45,000 children and their caregivers, according to an annual report for fiscal year 2010 released last week. About 10 percent of the spending, or $31 million, went to public school programs (from homework centers to summer enrichment programs to after-school help for at-risk youth), compared with $28 million the year before. "Most people think of our (three) campuses when they see the name Kamehameha Schools," Kamehameha Schools Chief Executive Officer Dee Jay Mailer said. "But what many don't realize is that we support talented young students in community programs and public schools throughout Hawaii." Kamehameha Schools also continued to expand its literacy instruction initiative, which helps public school students improve their reading skills. The program is now in 21 schools, eight of which were added last fiscal year.

The $102 million spent for outreach education programs last fiscal year compares with about $129 million spent for programs at the three Kamehameha Schools campuses on Oahu, Maui and the Big Island, a spokeswoman said. Additionally, the trust spent $68 million for major repairs and capital improvement projects, debt financing and other programs.

Spending on outreach last fiscal year, which ended June 30, included:
» $7.9 million for teacher training and support.
» $12 million in preschool and kindergarten scholarships.
» $12.6 million for native Hawaiians attending college.
» $9.1 million for Hawaiian-focused charter schools.

Hawaii Reporter, February 2, 2011; * excerpts

Kamehameha Schools’ Endowment rises to $7.82 Billion

The charitable trust’s latest annual report shows ... The $299.2 million of education and services spending included $31 million spent in support of state Department of Education programs and services, while another $129 million was spent on campus-based programs. The trust noted it also provided $9.1 million for 17 Hawaiian-focused start-up and conversion public charter schools and $7.9 million in educator training and support for Teach For America participants.

Kamehameha Schools said it also spent tens of millions more in providing scholarships to native Hawaiians attending pre-schools, kindergarten programs, college and other post-high school programs.

** Note from website editor Ken Conklin:
Several of the most recent annual reports, including this one, are available on the KSBE website. The full report can be downloaded, along with report on financial activities, consolidated financial statements, and the community outreach programs. Go to


10. Ten sample test questions to show the likely ignorance and bias of students who have completed the history course (and probably of their teachers too!)

Following are a few test questions which nearly all high school students, and even most adults, will probably answer incorrectly even after completing the required course on the modern history of Hawaii. These are not "trick" questions nor are they obscure. The answers are provided at the end of the questions, along with references to support them.

Q1: T/F: In 1893, the representative of the people of the United States directed a marine company on an American ship to land and take over the government. They imprisoned our queen.

Q2: T/F: In 1894 President Grover Cleveland proclaimed April 30 to be a day of prayer and repentance for the U.S. role in overthrowing the Hawaiian monarchy.

Q3: T/F: On August 12, 1898, at the ceremony of Annexation at Iolani Palace, when the Hawaiian flag was lowered it was publicly cut into pieces which were handed out as souvenirs for the haoles who had led the overthrow and annexation.

Q4: T/F: The reason why only the Hawaiian flag flies at Mauna Ala (the Royal Mausoleum) is because that piece of land remains the property of the Hawaiian Kingdom and was never transferred to the United States.

Q5: T/F: Nearly all the Hawaiian people signed a petition opposing annexation.

Q6: T/F: In 1954 nearly 120,000 Hawaii people signed a petition in two weeks demanding "Statehood now!"

Q7: At the time of the overthrow, what percentage of Hawaii's people had any degree of Hawaiian native blood?
(a) 90
(b) 70
(c) 60
(d) 40

Q8: In 1893 at the time of the overthrow, how many full or part native Hawaiians were members of the 5500-member Annexation Club pushing for annexation to the United States?
(a) zero
(b) 50
(c) 300
(d) 1,000

Q9: In 1893 at the time of the overthrow, which ethnicity/nationality had the largest number of members of the 5500-member Annexation Club?
(a) American
(b) English
(c) German
(d) Hawaiian
(e) Portuguese

Q10: In 1894, after the Republic of Hawaii was created, which of the following nations officially recognized it as legitimate by sending letters to President Dole personally signed by their head of state?
(a) No nation recognized the Republic of Hawaii as legitimate
(b) United States
(c) England, France, Russia and Spain
(d) Belgium, China, Portugal, and Switzerland
(e) (b) and (c) and (d) and more

A1: F. That statement is a quote from a speech by Senator Dan Inouye on the floor of the U.S. Senate on June 7, 2006 during debate on the cloture motion for the Akaka bill. Senator Byron Dorgan (D, ND) said something similar. For a thorough explanation why it is false, see

A2: F. That claim was made in a resolution which passed the Hawaii legislature in 2007 establishing April 30 as a permanent holiday to be called Hawaiian Restoration Day. But President Cleveland never issued such a proclamation; the fake proclamation was published in a New York newspaper in 1894 as sarcasm against President Cleveland for his support for ex-queen Liliuokalani; and the date of the fake proclamation was April 1 (April Fools Day). For thorough documentation of the fraud perpetrated on our legislature see
On April Fools Day 2008 a 4-page flyer was published, poking fun at the Hawaii Legislature for passing the resolution in 2007 which assumed that an April Fools joke from 1894 was actually true. See the flyer at

A3: F. That assertion is an often-heard "urban legend." Senator Inouye has said it several times on the Senate floor and in print. For a thorough de-bunking see

A4: F. That assertion is an often-heard "urban legend" was was the focus of a series of articles in "Midweek" newspaper by editor Don Chapman. For a thorough de-bunking see

A5: F. There were 21,269 signatures on a petition in 1897 opposing annexation. The population of Hawaii at that time was about 120,265, all of whom were eligible to sign it, so only about 18% actually did. If "Hawaiian people" means only full or part ethnic Hawaiians, there were nearly 40,000 of them, so only about 54% of them signed it. For details see discussion about page 29 of a book being reviewed at

A6: T. RAYSON has a photo of the petition unrolled for signing along Bishop Street (page 194), and p. 195 says there were 116,000 signatures. Other news reports at the time said 120,000 signatures. See

A7: (a) 40. For population figures see

A8: (d) There were actually 1,022. See evidence in analysis of page 12 of a book being reviewed at

A9: (e) Portuguese, at 2261 members, had more than double the 1218 Americans. Same reference as A8.

A10: (e). For photos of the letters of recognition personally signed by emperors, kings, queens, and presidents of at least 20 nations on 4 continents in 11 languages, see


Send comments or questions to:

You may now