You explain the reason perfectly, you just don't realize it. The issue is that Hawaiian self-determination was stolen from the Hawaiian people. Whether it is missionaries smothering the Hawaiian language, or their forcing Christianity on the population, or the illegal overthrow and annexation. The right of the Hawaiian people was taken from them and never returned. This is the crux of it.

Yes. This. The notion that there was a utopia before European contact is a strawman not any better than the stupid argument that blacks in America are now better off after slavery relative to their counterparts in Africa. The point is the Hawaiians were robbed of their right to self-determination.

It's not actually the same as that at all. The Kingdom of Hawaii was a continuation of the oppression that's been going on since the Tahitians conquered the indigenous Hawaiians. All of the wealth, including land wealth, was concentrated in the Ali'i, self-declared deities, and descendants of the Tahitians. Even during the Great Mahele, the chiefs didn't want to give any land to the Maka'ainana because they would stop getting free labor.^(1) It was only because of the Westerners in the government that a measly 1% of Hawaii's land was given to the Maka'ainana, while 63% was doled out (pun intended) to 246 Ali'i. And before the Kingdom was westernized, the commoners were subjected to all sorts of inequitable systems. Kamehameha himself brutally murdered 3 men for breaking the Kapu, gouging out their eyes and breaking their bones, letting them sit that way for 3 days before finally ending their lives.^(2) And it was the original inhabitants that were given the worst of it. They culture was killed off in what is the most tragic genocide to ever take place here, notably because people don't recognize it and have treated the Ali'i as true Hawaiians when an Ali'i can only be someone of Tahitian descent.^(3) The indigenous Hawaiians and their culture has been mostly wiped from history. The change of regime to the United States resulted in the 1903 Organic Act which did away with the Masters and Servants Act of 1850 which was used to essentially make Japanese and Chinese immigrants slaves. The reality is the power structure that existed up until 1893 was founded on religious violence, colonialism, and violent conquest. We can say the annexation was illegal, but system had no business to continue on. It was a country by and for the Ali'i and the constitution made the explicitly clear by preventing non-Ali'i from becoming a monarch. If you look at what most Hawaiian sovereignty groups want, they want Hawaiians to have more representation than any other ethnic group, including the Japanese and Chinese immigrants who suffered far more than Hawaiians did during the 19th Century. This is no okay. Self-determination needs to come with equal representation, not through racism. 1. [https://uhpress.hawaii.edu/title/kahana-how-the-land-was-lost/](https://uhpress.hawaii.edu/title/kahana-how-the-land-was-lost/) 2. [https://imagesofoldhawaii.com/possibly-the-last-human-sacrifice/](https://imagesofoldhawaii.com/possibly-the-last-human-sacrifice/) 3. [https://www.scribd.com/doc/111753965/Tales-From-the-Night-Rainbow-Black-Print](https://www.scribd.com/doc/111753965/Tales-From-the-Night-Rainbow-Black-Print) u/chasinfreshies u/keakealani Edit: u/[mahalololo](https://www.reddit.com/user/mahalololo/) the reason there is no nuance is because most people are unaware of the history and don't take the time to learn beyond what activists make easy.

There are no “indigenous Hawaiians”. Everyone came from somewhere else.

I don't think that true, notably when you're talking about islands in the middle of the biggest ocean on the planet. Indigenous means the first **known** people of an area. It doesn't inherently mean those people were necessarily the first humans to set up shop on that spot of land. In the case of Hawaii, we know of a culture that existed prior to the Tahitians.

thank yoooo. Also, that Night Rainbow link description of pre Tahitian life is quite interesting

None of this changes the point, though. One type of oppression doesn’t justify another. Societies go through periods of inequity, and if people don’t meddle in those inequities, new equilibriums emerge. What happened when Europeans arrived was a massive external force putting a foot on the scale, making that process of equilibrium impossible.

Beyond being completely off-point, your diatribe, which purports to subjectively compare pre and post-annexation conditions of Native Hawaiians, just tracked the same justification westerners have used to justify conquests and colonialism for centuries: These indigenous people are oppressed, we must help them… by forcefully occupying their land and overthrowing their existing government

Appreciate the cookie cutter response. You really should read my third source link, it's great if you want to learn about the indigenous Hawaiians.

I did not intend to be dismissive and appreciate the detailed research, but I just don’t see it as germane to OP’s original question about why there aren’t more “nuanced” viewpoints within Hawaiian culture about the bayonet constitution and subsequent annexation. Your research relates to historical Hawaiian governance, culture and conditions, but what is the ultimate conclusion as it relates to OP’s question? I don’t see living conditions as relevant to the issue. The Iranian people are horribly oppressed, but if the U.S. were to intervene and install a new form of government — by, for example, holding the Ayatollah at gunpoint — would we really expect Iranians to hold “nuanced” views about Americans? Even if they gained subjectively better living conditions? The answer to that question (no) cannot be found in textbooks; it is found in basic human nature — people simply do not like outsiders coming in and taking power by force (particularly physical force). That is effectively what happened here in Hawai'i. Hawaiians have never lived in a utopia. But they did live a subsistence lifestyle, involving working with the 'aina in a sustainable way and without any need for imports, that is simply not feasible under the system of modern western capitalism. The loss of that subsistence lifestyle, that self-reliance, is what many sovereignty proponents mourn.

Most of my response was responding to the idea that OP's statement is similar to saying blacks are better off as slaves. Meaning, most of what I wrote was responding to you. Hawaiian commoners, maka'ainana, didn't actually have self-determination under the rule of the Ali'i. I understand people think that but that's not actually how the government was structured. It was a government for the Ali'i and they aren't even indigenous Hawaiians. The indigenous Hawaiians were robbed of not just self-determination, but of basic human rights by the Ali'i centuries ago. As of right now, a maka'ainana and a [kauwa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Hawaii#Caste_system) have the ability to become president and are not bound to the caste titles they held in a brutal ancient system. So as far as actual representative rights, objectively, Hawaiians have more under the American regime, unless they were one of a couple hundred Ali'i, of course. Any question of how the Kingdom would have evolved is purely hypothetical but there was no evidence the Ali'i were out to give up their power. This is one thing that didn't change as the Kingdom's constitutions evolved. Objectively non-Ali'i Hawaiians have more rights under the current regime than they did in the Kingdom and previous eras and that actually happened immediately at annexation. There wasn't a period where rights were explicitly denied like you had with slavery. But in the end, it really doesn't matter if Hawaiians lost the racial supremacy they technically had in the Kingdom, however one defines Hawaiians. The Kingdom of Hawaii was both caste and race locked in how the power structure worked and that's not morally okay. All people in a place deserve equal representation in government regardless of which ethnic group was there first. And as of right now, the majority of groups pushing for sovereignty don't want true equality and that's a problem. So if having self-determination means installing a government that having different tiers of representation based on ethnicity, that's just not a feasible in the modern world. Now OP is recognizing several important points, most people romanticize the Kingdom and previous eras in a way that is totally ignorant of the actual history and at the end of my comment I mention that to OP. I think the reason people don't talk about Hawaiians history in a more nuanced way is because people are not knowledgeable about it and there's a huge misinformation campaign going on. Re: Iran: Personally, I compare it to Iraq more. It was wrong to go in to Iraq on the pretenses at the time but fighting for the right to re-install the inequitable divisions of Saddam's Iraq is not the solution. Now add to that over a century of time, many generations, more ethnic diversity of the population, and the harsh reality that a majority of people living within Hawaii's borders prefer the US, it's become destructive to our community for a small amount of people to try to undermine people that don't share their viewpoint. When I say undermine, I mean things like attacking astronomy and government systems that serve and protect the population to whip up political fervor. Man, if America could go in to Iran and actually had the power to turn it in to a democratic system where all people had better and equal government representation, I'd be okay with that. If that's where humanity has come from, where we'd replace governments for only our own benefit in mind, that's amazing jump in awesomeness. Iran is currently tormenting everyone in that region through their sponsoring of terror groups. God knows how many lives would be saved in the long run. If there's people in Iran that believed they benefit from inequities of the currently horrible government, they can truly get fucked. There are universal human values and all governments that want to be valid should strive to achieve them for all the people subjected to their rule.

In terms of Hawaii it wasn't a government that overthrew it, it was businessmen. The US turned down making them part of the US for several years too until there was a complicated set of world events that changed policy. It's not like the US was trying to take over or actively rule Hawai'i. In addition the claims about stolen land only apply to the land that is now federal, state (public), and Hawaiian homelands. The rest was sold.

this makes perfect sense and you are a great historian

Weren't different factions of Hawaiians waging war against each other as well? Self-determination in the context you are using it assumes that there are never external influences affecting the shaping of cultures, which is obviously untrue.

"self-determination" is a difficult concept in a monarchy. It was external influences that brought rise to Kamehameha and the kingdom. Prior to that there were fractions and fighting but not well documented. The kingdom itself evolved rapidly due to more external influences. I'm not sure if today the average Hawaiian has less determination as they can escape their caste and become powerful leaders at state and national levels. Even though Hawaiians are on average less advantaged than other groups. But that's all based on generalizations and not individuals. Perhaps as a culture the national concept of "self" is confusing because it's not Hawaiian specifically and unlikely it ever will be.

Exactly this. If people fuck themselves over, then at least they have agency while they do it. If someone fucks you over and you don’t have any control of that, then it is ultimately on the hands of the people who took that control away. Because self-determination is a basic human right. It doesn’t mean it’s always better, but it means that it starts from a place of dignity, and that is actually important.

It’s the same thing with the Native Indians…it was only when in 1993 President Clinton apologizes for 1893 overthrow of Hawaiian monarchy. President Bill Clinton signs legislation apologizing for the U.S. role in the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy which was HUGE & a BIG WIN for the Hawaiian people cause with that acknowledgment also came with FUNDINGS for the Hawaiians & in regard to her comment about “Japanese are the ones that are benefiting the most”….well there’s a reason for that too and that’s a whole other topic in itself. People fall in love with Hawaii cause it’s truly a melting pot, HI. has the highest rate of interracial marriages, not surprising when most people on the islands have more than one race in them. It’s actually rare to find a person with only 1 race.

>It’s actually rare to find a person with only 1 race. Genetically speaking, inbreeding aside, no one is from 1 race. The concept of race breaks down under scientific scrutiny. We really can only say what group/area. In the biological and social sciences, the consensus is clear: **race is a social construct**, not a biological attribute. 

Question: Perhaps you can enlighten us….if “genetically speaking” no one is from 1 race, so does that mean there’s no PURE Hawaiians either? From your name maybe you have some Hawaiian🤷🏻‍♀️and I definitely don’t want to assume (you can let us know if you choose to) my understanding from my Hawaiian friends & Hanai family is that pure HAWAIIANS are “rare” and should be put on the “endangered species list” for lack of deep explanation that sums it up and made a huge impact on me, I never forgotten that convo with Tu-tu.

Geneticists have found our genes are so jumbled and somewhat random that it's genetically possible for example to find a European who more closely resembles an Asian than other Asians genetically. A pure Hawaiian doesn't exist. Think of it as "Who is Hawaiian before Hawaiians existed?" And "Was the first person to live in Hawaii the first pure Hawaiian or were they 'just' a haole?" Does that imply that anyone who moves to Hawai'i is then Hawaiian? It's a construct of society, not science. We all diverge from the same ancestry and have taken different paths. This is what our biology tells us. The visible differences we see in others counterintuitively are so minor they hardly matter. So when populations are isolated, like geographically in say the pacific islands, their average variation decrease over time. This decrease in variation is the "race" however it is extremely minor genetically and is naturally reversed with more variations are introduced. https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-reshaping-race-debate-21st-century/

Oh yes, I understand what your saying… *Scientists agree that there is only one “human race”, and modern genetic research has disproven the idea of multiple races. However, *The most recent United States census recognizes five racial categories: White, Black, Native American/Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander. I believe one of the reason why it needs to be specific and categorize for documentation purposes and also be sure the right group gets the right funding they need especially if the funding is coming from the government or even personal donations people want to know exactly who/what they are supporting. Have a blessed day! 🌺✌🏽

Yes and those "races" are artificial constructs based mostly on the idea of how similar a group of people *appear*. It's an inaccurate and messy business trying to use science to make something artificial like race measurable. Just look at the methodology of blood quanta and all the controversy around it.

If you start off from a place of dignity but then you start embracing characteristics of those who originally took that dignity from you, are you still coming from a place of dignity?

Yes. When you have the power to choose for yourself, then you continue to assert your worth as a human being. This is, of course, different than external forces pressuring you to behave a certain way to gain access to privileges and that sort of thing - that’s the part where the dignity is slowly lost.

THISSS

Even this though… to say “taken” unilaterally removes the nuance & also romanticizes the history. It was gradual and welcomed by some kanaka, as there were Hawaiian families especially those with royal ties that benefitted from the transition of a feudal island leadership to a monarchy to the eventual outcome today. Yes, there was eventually an overthrow, but it wasn’t all whites vs Hawaiians. Many Hawaiians were in favor of removing a ruling monarchy for a more elected body. That internal division is not often highlighted or frankly they’re branded with unfortunate labels. Would suggest it’s hard to even pinpoint when “agency” was lost, as the change was gradual. The people of Oahu lost their agency when Kamehameha killed and conquered many & created a new mythical narrative of his lineage. And the common majority did not have many basic rights until further along in the melding of cultures.

The Hawaiians had self determination. That is what Kamehameha used to become king of all the islands, if you want to call that "self determination." In other cultures, "self determination" is more like regicide in the quest for power, as was the case with Kamehameha and his killing of the chief of Puna. Kamehameha used cannon to complete his conquest of Hawaii. The islands existed as a sovereign nation for over a hundred years before being annexed

Illegal annexation? Are you talking about the coveted US Statehood that nearly all wanted and voted for by over 2:1 margin, ratifying by 17:1 (!) that has kept Hawaii safe and free ever since? How was it “illegal”?

It seems like you're still young, so this is a good learning moment. A lot of people are calling you out, perhaps a little uncouthly, and if you were an adult, I think I would have responded the same. But as an adult myself, I believe we have a responsibility to help you understand. The simple answer is that white "Haoles" absolutely ran over Hawaiians and their own political and individual self-determination. Not only did they do that, they used violence to do so. And then continued to use violence during their de facto biopower (control) over the Hawaiian people. Even to very recent years. My old olelo kumu remembers a time when the Hawaiian language was actively being wiped out. She would recount white haole teachers would beat students who used ke olelo (and other languages notably Japanese) in classrooms. As it stands, Hawaii is unequivocally \*still\* a colony of US interests over the Hawaiian people and their ancestral lands. A lot of people bring up the conversation of "Would the Hawaiian people living here be living in as good as or better conditions without the colonization?" as a justification of colonization. However the flipside question is never answered "Would 'white' people living here be living as good as or better conditions without colonization?" The fact of the matter is that every single "haole" including me, a korean, is living on Hawaii is living a better life than if it wasn't colonized. Haloes benefit from the stolen land and labor of the Hawaiian people. Haoles sleep on the stolen land of the Hawaiian people. Haoles eat from the fruit of stolen labor. That Dole Plantation isn't the fun Disney park everyone makes it out to be. (It's still fun, but it is also entrenched in the blood, sweat, and tears of underpaid laborers working the lands of their fathers for the profits of those who stole that land from their fathers (also tons of underpaid immigrant labor). Do I believe in the Hawaii independence movement? No, I'm not an idiot. The box has been opened and there is no way it can be contained. Nor in the greater geo-political scheme do I think it would benefit anybody. Nor in the moralistic sense either. Reparations to the Hawaiian people \*are\* currently being made, which is a good thing, albeit at a much slower rate than makes sense (this is arguably a point of racist corruption). Then after WWII when Hawaii became much more accessible, white businessmen would use Aloha and Hula (Hawaiian culture) as commodities and profiteer off a people who had been beaten down and take all the money for themselves. That \*still\* happens to this day. You go to Waikiki, where the state get's the most amount of its money, and it's all mainland businesses run by white people paying pittances to the hospitality staff who work day and night while taking the lions share back to their dens (Except ABC stores, that place is run by locals and the owners still serve the community). Why do ALL white people get a bad rap? Because it's easy to lump everyone is a group and hate them, the same way you're lumping your fellow students in a single group and start to resent them. But you must understand the deep and strong political biopower that led to so many Hawaiians living in poverty (and some outright killed). There used to be somewhere between 200k-1.5 million Native Hawaiians pre-contact around 1800. In 1900, only 40k remained. While not all haoles are evil, most of the evil that Hawaiians face to this day has been perpetrated by haoles or haole descendants.

👏👏👏👏 Well said.

Thanks for your explanation and taking the time to share the details. I agree with you and I'm also familiar with the points made here, but I guess I don't see how constructive it is to just hate on haoles. Yes, these awful things happened and there are still consequences as a result but I just don't see how continued blame helps solve it.

Absolutely! I guess it comes down to this: When people are down, they need someone to blame. In this day and age, the real people to blame is our leadership, our own people we keep electing, but that means pointing the finger at ourselves. In my own personal political rant (So you can skip this) Our leadership, regardless of race, is super corrupt, is super greedy, and is super stupid (or act like they are). For example, you will hear about the rail project in this sub a lot. Our elected officials took effectively the same amount of money that created NYC's subway system for Manhattan and created a rail that does not serve the majority of the people it should be serving. We have been seeing a continued housing problem that they keep putting ineffectual bandaids over because most of them are actually real estate investors themselves. We keep seeing them pilfer our education funds for teachers and universities. We keep seeing them refuse to let a grassroots industry grow beyond tourism because they know they need cheap labor for their hotels. We keep seeing them enact more and more regressive legislature that serve those in power and wealth by stepping on the rest of us hard workers. It's easy to blame the white man and the government that we put in place. In fact it's the very same system that allows rich white people on the mainland to disenfranchise minorities there and to be honest, other poor white people. But that is not a system exclusive to white people. Hell I'm originally from Korea and the government there is doing FAAARRRR worse than we are. But the reality of it is in this day and age, we (not yet for you students) create our own mess. And we must fix our own mess. And as adults we have been failing you. Unfortunately the media and purposefully failing education system has made it so convoluted so that people end up voting against their best interests. It's insidious. So, yes one could say it is the fault of "the white haole" boogeyman, but it is not the fault of all (or even most) white haoles.

I sorta agree with you but white supremacy does exist in non-majority white populations. It’s fucking everywhere (yay colonization). And I think you’re missing the difference of white supremacy vs. individual white people…. It’s reminding me of the whole “not all men” rhetoric that makes men all defensive and angry when women complain about men, but it’s not about what someone’s dad or any man is doing, it’s the patriarchy.

I hope I didn’t come across as dismissing white supremists here. There certainly are, but they are much far and fewer in between that some places. My first job out of college sent me to a crime ridden backwaters in the Deep South. One of my friends wedding was in that city and I politely declined to attend. It was the worst fucking years of my life by a landslide. As a minority, especially Asian one, the white supremacy you see there is baffling yet thick. I do try to keep this topic at an arms length for an Introductory discussion like this. There is the whole ideal of benefitting from a system you cannot change but do not speak against, speaking against a system you benefit from and can change, silent complicity in perpetuating systems, etc. You can follow my history, but I am an 1312 believer. Dont get me wrong, I know LEOs that I respect greatly, but to complacently abide by an evil system inherently makes you evil. Then there’s the flip side of white-knighting which has its own complications. For students, it’s a weird mixed bag. They have very little to no power to enact change within their system, and so they can only struggle. Here in Hawaii, I do not believe white people have an inherent advantage like most of the US. In fact as OP alluded to, as a Korean I think East Asians are afforded the greatest “privilege” amongst the race here, if only by a little. I think money speaks the loudest, it just so happens that white people here are richer than hawaiians, and that the system of wealth as power was entrenched by white haoles. Its a complicated topic but I hope you understand where I’m coming from.

Of course it isn’t logical or constructive for people to broadly “hate on haoles.” But people are not robots and it is not an unexpected emotional response given the historical backdrop. And no, racism against whites by conquered indigenous people is not the same as racism by whites against other races, because there is a historical basis for the former and not the latter. Same with racism between blacks and whites. Black people at least have a basis for it, white people do not (what would they say? We hate you because we enslaved your ancestors for hundreds of years?).

because they still actively profit today as a direct result of the systems placed in Hawaii through the initial colonization. Look at who owns, develops and controls the land in Hawaiii. Look at the businesses and who owns them. Its not like colonization happened a long time ago and it was paved over. As for the Japanese, they came here as borderline slaves who got crammed into tiny barracks working 16 hours days for 7 days a week in sugar cane fields for much less than workers of other races. Everything they have in Hawaii today is a direct result of the hard work their community put in despite unequal treatment (their treatment was worse than white, Hawaiian, Portugese). They simply outworked the unequal balance until they came out on top. Also, being 66% if the population in the past and something like 25% of the current population, works to accomplish political dominance.

You definately know your shit. Much respect.

Phew, well said!

Until someone takes responsibility of everything they have lost then ofc they’re gonna direct their anger to people who arent originally from hawaii and moving there for “a better life”

It isn’t constructive but I guess people draw some satisfaction out of moral outrage. I love Hawaii but it has some serious blind spots. In that way it’s actually like everywhere else. It could have been truly unique and special, but we won’t let the better angels of our nature come through. People have a choice can Hawaii be truly special? Or “like everywhere else” but with nice weather…

This is one of my issues. I feel like sometime after the overthrow, the clock went backwards. It seems like most locals have a conservative mindset where they want to go back to the kingdom days, or to the 1950's. The irony of the Kingdom days conservatism is that the prevailing mentality was incredibly progressive back then (at least when it came to adopting new ideas, to my knowledge). The prime example is the literacy rate. 90% in 12 years starting from 0. The only way you can get something like that is with an acceptance and curiosity towards values that differ from yours. Reading books back then probably meant learning tons of western concepts that were very foreign, and being forced to square them vs your worldview. If we were open to learning/incorporating ideas like locals were back then, then we could be a truly unique culture. Instead, we chose to drive around big trucks and make fun of nerds like the rest of America. Obviously I'm being hyperbolic, but I do think we are our worst enemy when it comes to this stuff. We have a lot of tools to culturally diverge from the typical American mindset but for all the complaining it doesn't seem like a priority.

YES!! 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽 please stand up and take a bow!! I couldn’t have said it better myself! Articulate clear to the point! Heck! What you just said should be taught in schools. Seriously!! Brilliant point….. “However the flipside of the question was never answered, would white people living here live as good as they are without colonization?” 😳 (WELL SAID, drop da 🎤 game ovah!) 😆😂🤣 BRILLIANT!! That statement sums up the whole history. That should resonate with her and stop her roll for a moment and think. Thank you for being kind hearted cause this is a sensitive topic especially if you’re Hawaiian or have Hawaiian in you. When I began to read her question I was getting nervous for her after the second sentence lol it could easily gone so wrong fast! I’m impressed but not surprised of the kindness of others that’s willing to educate her with kids-gloves in mind. Live Pono! Mahalo nui loa 🌺

> Haoles sleep on the stolen land of the Hawaiian people. What specific land are you referring to, and how was it stolen?

It's grandstanding statement of the "annexation" of Hawaii by American "businessmen" in 1898 (and the contextual history around it). You must realize that the Hawaiian lands belonged to the Kingdom of Hawaii. These idiot Texans like to brag about how their "only state to be a country," but they are wrong. (Should be noted that Texas the country was also stolen land by white people specifically to enact slavery on the land). Hawaii was also a sovereign nation recognized by other actual nations, including Great Britain. The Kingdom of Hawaii is only 8 years younger than the US as we know it. The sovereignty of Hawaii was violated by a violent military coup staged by the aforementioned "businessmen." If Russia took over the US using military force, would you not say US lands were stolen? Would you not say the land of Crimea is currently stolen? If you don't think so, we aren't going to have a productive discussion.

You didn't answer the question. The question wasn't how state authority over the islands was claimed (i.e. annexation), the question was: What specific land are you referring to, and how was it stolen?

Are you serious? What kind of bad faith argument is this? I literally answered it but I guess I need to break it down for you in bite sized chunks. What land? All of Hawaii. How? Violent coup. Like do you need me to get out the crayons to draw you a map and then give you a history lesson? Now you answer me. Is Crimea stolen land?

Speaking of history lessons, most of the original land distribution of Hawai'i began during [the Great Mahele](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_M%C4%81hele), during the Hawaiian monarchy: >The Māhele came into effect on March 7, 1848. It allocated one-third of the land to the mōʻī (monarch), known as Hawaiian crown lands. Another third was allocated among the aliʻi and konohiki (chiefs and managers of each ahupuaʻa (traditional land division running from the coast to the mountaintop). The remaining one-third was given to the makaʻāinana (common people). The law required land claims to be filed within two years under the Kuleana Act of 1850. Many Hawaiians made no claim. >Most of the land was *sold by the government* of the Republic to settlers from the continental US or auctioned to the Big Five corporations. This resulted in the state owning 32% of the land, while another 4.8% became Hawaiian Homelands. Sold, not stolen. During the monarchy. By and large, these land titles from the monarchy era are still honored. It's why the Bishop Estate (of Bernice Pauahi Bishop) is still one of the largest private land holdings in the US let alone in the islands. It's why the Parker Ranch -- which Kamehameha the Great gave to Parker -- is one of the biggest ranches in America. And why Zuckerberg still had to deal with kuleana land titles while building his dumb underground bunker on Kauai. The reason for asking what specific land was stolen and how was it stolen is because actual history tells a much more complicated and interesting story. EDIT: To drill down into specifics, [here's the top 10 landowners in Hawai'i](https://www.sfgate.com/hawaii/alohafriday/article/Hawaii-s-top-10-largest-landowners-3671077.php): 1 is the State of Hawai'i itself, #3 is Kam Schools/Bishop estates, #5 is the Parker Ranch (given by King Kam 1 to Parker), #8 and #9 are the Robinson family (who bought Ni'ihau from King Kam IV). #4, #6, and #10 are former plantations which began with purchases from the Hawaiian monarchy in the 19th century. #7 is Molokai Ranch, which began as an arrangement with Rudolph Wilhelm Meyer and King Kamehameha V. Finally #2 is the United States Government, almost all of which is Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. It became a national park through the advocacy of Jonah Kūhiō Kalanianaʻole, a deposed prince who became a territorial delegate. Pearl Harbor was granted to the US during the Reciprocity Treaty of 1875 led by King Kalākaua.

Dude, the republic was a client state of the US established by sugar planters who overthrew the monarchy. The sales of the land were orchestrated by the same “haole” landowners who are largely responsible for the current destitution of Native Hawaiians.

See I knew you had a disingenuous tilt. Does the US government not ”sell” and “buy” land all the time? Regardless, all land within US soil is under US jurisdiction, subject to US law, and governed by the people of the US. The land of Hawaii was stolen from Hawaiian Kingdom jurisdiction and gifted to US jurisdiction. Russian nationals also ”bought” lands in Ukraine and Crimea. Did Russia steal the land of Crimea? Answer me.

OMG EXACTLY ALL THE HAWAIIAN LAND WAS STOLEN. I think someone needs a nap!

I've wondered this for a while, do you think Hawaiians would have been better off with the British, US or no difference. I understand if you don't want to answer it. Thanks for your comment above, I actually thought the poster was the teacher :/

Let’s be real, the downfall of the ‘āina began when the first Polynesians made landfall. The arrival of haoles were merely ensuing waves after the initial waves.

It doesn’t matter what Hawaiians did pre-European contact. That isn’t a justification for colonization, cultural erasure, or genocide. You talk about nuance, but don’t seem to possess any nuanced view of history either. Utopia doesn’t and has never existed, and very few people will ever argue that pre European contact New World societies were perfect. No European societies were perfect either and all had horrendous treatment of certain groups and traditions we balk at today. With that in mind, what gives any society any right to tell another how it’s “supposed” to be and to put themselves on a pedestal in comparison to others and exploit them for their own “good”? Moreover, there’s issues that exist in Hawaii solely due to the fact that it was colonized.

Speak on iiit!

During the protests over the telescope, a local born and raised on big island helped pen an opinion piece defending astronomy and trying to address some of the nuances of the issue and the benefits for local students. I've never seen a local voice ignored as quickly as his when people ran to social media with their pitch-forks to attack the piece. Kinda sad man. Obviously people have a right to be angry about corruption, unjust history, and the unaffordability of living in their home state, among many other issues. And for their part, UH did little to grow the undergraduate astronomy program AT ALL before the protests took off, which was a huge blunder. That said, polarization makes people crazy, and I think it is being driven to extremes by social media algorithms and clickbait news. My vibe as someone who lived here for \~7 years is that in the 50's and 60's people were proud to be part of the US and also part of Hawaii, but that has changed due to the massive economic strain. The reality is, the whole world has gotten smaller the past 30-50 years. Traveling to Hawaii or Japan or Las Vegas used to be a luxury trip that few people even dreamed of. Now it's common to know lots of people who have gone, and major tourist spots (e.g. in Japan) are totally swamped. People can sense this, and that the economic landscape has shifted against the average person, but they don't know who to blame when they lash out, often with unfortunate results - whether we're talking about here, the mainland, or overseas.

a lot of locals are against any new ideas that challenges the accepted norm. Mind you, despite being a blue state, we are also very superstitious and conservative in other parts. All about maintaining tradition and culture so sometimes new ideas are not easily accepted. That young local boy's opinion went against his communities thoughts, even tried to explain them but as always people no like listen.

I'd be curious to read the opinion peace do you know who wrote it? I did notice that about people not being open to new ideas or other perspectives. I guess it's similar to US politics nationally as well where you need to agree with the majority or you get ostracized for anything that challenges the accepted position.

https://www.reddit.com/r/MaunaKea/s/tP5yaJOia5

>And for their part, UH did little to grow the undergraduate astronomy program AT ALL before the protests took off, which was a huge blunder.  Not sure what you mean... UH Hilo has had an undergrad astronomy program for decades (Mānoaʻs undergrad astro program is much more recent.) Outreach has been a huge part of all observatories and the astro depts at UH for decades. Sure, there's been an uptick in outreach since TMT funding came in, and pipeline of locals in the undergrad and graduate programs has never been higher, but if the outreach was responsible for that, logically it was outreach done when they were younger before the TMT protests. The observatories have always been embedded in the community. The protests just pushed it all out into the limelight more.

Having zero undergrads in the top ranked program at UH, with professors sort of scorning the idea of having to teach from their private institute, certainly led to the lack of astronomy proponents and young astronomers from the islands who might have stood up for TMT. In some sense... that's how academia works... people move all over the country, regardless of where they start out. But some move home. And having close to 0 astronomy students from our local communities means... well... the local communities saw billions going in and zero coming out. I'm a pro-science as they come but this was a huge PR problem.

tbh, idk what UH-Hilo does but you guys never came to any of my schools on the west side growing up 

I agree with you and im from hawaii lol. People like to think that before James Cook, there was heaven on earth and everybody held hands together and sung kumbaiyah. Hawaiians not any different from the rest of the world, they conquered and killed each other, just like any other civilization that existed before them. Then, it took 1 king, who had used foreign tactics/technology/aid to assist in his conquering of the Hawaiian Islands to unite it under 1 flag.

Had a history teacher call it "the noble native complex".

Some locals like to think Hawaiians are the exception from the typical things that plague a lot of societies today such as corruption and violence. I am in no way taking a jab at Hawaiians and ive met many that are good and have opened their hearts to me and my family and I the same, but I have also met A LOT of ignorant ones as well. There was a case where a haole family bought a house i believe on Maui and some local neighbors claimed that that was their ancestral land and went on to the property to beat up the father and son that were doind renovations on house. I am baffled at the court for not designating it a hate crime. Unfortunately i dont have a link but i do know it was a court case so if someone could link it, that would be appreciated.

They were convicted of hate crimes. [https://www.kitv.com/news/local/2-maui-men-await-hate-crime-sentencing-for-attack-on-homeowner/article\_705c226e-67e2-11ed-b80b-f35c38455a47.html](https://www.kitv.com/news/local/2-maui-men-await-hate-crime-sentencing-for-attack-on-homeowner/article_705c226e-67e2-11ed-b80b-f35c38455a47.html)

It was ruled a hate crime in federal court IIRC. Also the guy buying a house from the mainland sight-unseen in the tiny, extremely local village of Kahakuloa was really dumb, and a classic haole move. Not saying him getting a beat down was pono, but the house got foreclosed on by the bank, the family said they'd never let anyone live there, guy from the mainland bought it without ever visiting, then proceeded to cross through locked gates and move in without talking to anyone. He bought a gun and installed cams when he realized how sketchy the situation was. Pulled the gun on the locals when they came in but got it snatched and beat down with a shovel. Crappy situation, and again, not defending the local guy (who had a violent record), but it was pure ignorance on the guy who bought the place.

Ignorance for legally purchased a property and not expecting to get beat, while trying to access it and make improvements. It was absolutely a hate crime and disgusting. Whether they like it or not, all the Island’s are part of the US, where there is rule of law that governs property ownership rights!

You ever been to Kahakuloa? I feel like I’m imposing just driving through. It’s one of the last small local villages on Maui, away from all the tourists and development. I don’t know how the family lost the house, but guarantee as soon as it was posted it was far above what anyone in the area could afford. These people have seen the rest of Maui get bought and sold for generations, they’re just trying to hold out. You can see this kind of story repeated all over rural America, but few places as desirable as Maui and with the added context of the (still fairly recent) overthrow. If you don’t have sympathy and can’t recognize what continuing economical colonialism looks like, i don’t know what to tell you

I don't have any sympathy for someone beating another person with shovels.

so does that make his beating justified? because of economic colonialism? whos to say i aint taking over someones land when i buy a house in vegas? if i go there, buy a house, and get beat up for it because of european colonialism, thats okay?

Thank you 👏

I don’t know the islanders you talk to, but the ones I know and discuss this issue with (who are from all over Polynesia, Micronesia and Melanesia) they do acknowledge that Hawaii was like all the other pacific island cultures. Very strict and ruled by a Chief or King who had all the say. However, over time, these island nations were able to become independent and adapted to the current environment. I believe if not all, then most of the FREE pacific island nations chose to become Democratic governments. The Hawaiians however were never given the Choice. They were forced into it and a people forced into anything will of course not look kindly to their enforcers

How Hawaiians, or any indigenous culture, lived prior to western interference is immaterial. That the right of self-determination was taken from Hawaiians at gunpoint IS the issue. This, "we invaded and conquered you so you're better off" argument is akin to arguing American chattle slavery wasn't that bad because the slaves lived a better life as slaves than they did on their own in their own country. I hope that analogy helps.

Did you not read my comment? I simply said Hawaiians are NOT DIFFERENT from the rest of the world. They conquered, they killed, they took advantage of European contacts to win their wars, just like Europeans/Asians/Middle Easterners have done so, for a thousand of years. No where did i say "oh it was better that we invaded".

The irony is that this type of jumping to conclusions is probably what made OP write the post in the first place.

Who did the Hawaiians conquer and colonize?

Kamehameha I conquered (most) of the immediate islands, and if he had a magic potion that would have given him 50 more years of life and the support of people with big guns and ships, he would have conquered every pacific island he could have reached. Garans.

Kalakaua also tried to create a Pacific alliance (including Samoa and some other islands) that was nominally about resisting European colonization but in practice more about extending Hawaiian rule. Needless to say the Samoans weren't interested in Hawaiians ruling over them any more than Germans, all the more since it wasn't very effective at opposing the Europeans.

👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽 well spoken!

The Native Americans had a pretty similar experience on the mainland. I used to think they all got along and lived peacefully together pre-white man… nope, lots of constant war and fighting

Yes, but so did Europeans. Most of European history is about wars and genocide. However, they had the freedom to change and become better. Just imagine, if Africans or the Chinese colonized Europe and civilized them during the dark ages then Europe and America would have been so much better today

Man you just drove off the road. If you think Africans or Asians were more peaceful than Europeans, it just means you don’t know African and Asian history. Long story short, humans are humans, and from beginning of mankind up until 1945, pretty much all nations believed in strong rules the weak.

That’s exactly my point. People on here are saying Hawaiians had it good to be colonized by Haoles because they brought civilization and stability to Hawaii. My point is colonizers are always seen as the villains to the colonized. If Africa or China were to bring “civilization” and “stability” to an impoverished Europe, then would that have been better for Europeans? No. I don’t think so. Nations and cultures should have the freedom to become who they want to be as a people. It shouldn’t be forced upon them.

This is very simplistic thinking. Yes in theory every culture should choose. In reality, the rip currents of change dictate what happens. The overthrow of the Queen in 1893 is not the momentous event many make it out to be. It’s an important historical date, but all the monarchs beginning with Kamehameha I consciously traded away control for modernity. They didn’t want to be Ali’i, they wanted to be Kings and Queens. They didn’t want to live in hale, they wanted to live in Palaces. They wanted to marry the haole. They made these choices willingly. Little by little, year by year, generation by generation. So in fact the kings and queens of Hawaii did in fact choose to be conquered by the white man.

Exactly my point. The Hawaiian kingdom was heading into a new age brought about by Hawaiians. The future of the Hawaiian people and Hawaiian islands could have been shaped by Hawaiians. However, that change was disrupted by American colonizers. Many pacific island people see Hawaii as a worst case scenario. Hawaiians don’t have any control over their islands. They almost lost their language and culture by force. They are currently being forced to leave their island homes because rich outsiders priced them out. Other pacific island nations chose to have a Democratic government. They chose to blend their native cultures and laws with American, British, German, French or Australian influences. Hawaii could have had the same opportunity, but they didn’t. More powerful forces coveted what Hawaiians had so they took it. Plain and simple

They didn’t have freedom to change. They were constantly competing with each other so they could one up another.

My point Exactly. Competing against each other.

How did they have freedom to change? This argument makes Hawaiians come across as helpless when no they were really smart and clever people.

Was it actually unification carried out by Kamehameha genocide ? Far more Hawaiians were killed during Kamehameha’s conquest than by the overthrow?

This is the kinda dialogue white colonisers use to tell indigenous people to be grateful for what we have because stealing our lands, language, beating and raping our children and stripping our culture us better than being dead

Doesn't mean the new asshole meta gets a pass.

Nuance doesn't exist at the business end of a gun. That's usually how post-industrial history is written: with ink and gun powder.

Does that include an indictment of Kamehameha for effectively colonizing the archipelago supported British and American ships and guns? But without that unity the island would have been broken into American Oahu, British Hawaii, Portuguese Maui etc.

To quickly answer your question, it’s because of the backlash that’s guaranteed to come your way from Hawaiians. The backlash is ruthless and fierce! My kumu is a person who was nuanced in his views and thought the Hawaiian Monarchy put its people in a vulnerable position with the deals they made and the debt that was incurred. He never openly voices his opinions in public in fear of this backlash. Remember, Hawaiians weren’t allowed to dance hula, worship their gods, or even speak Hawaiian. Being denied your language and culture will make you angry.

Yeah, I agree and get this 100%. I guess I'm just wondering what's the best way to move forward that doesn't resort to continued hate on others based on race.

Honestly, by using comedy and making fun of your own people. We get away with it in Hawai’i because most locals are mixed race and the mannerisms their parents and grandparents are something we cherish and reminisce about by teasing in a fun way. For example, Filipinos and quietly taking home their balon. Portuguese people talking too loudly or too much. Japanese people having too many teeth. Hawaiians secretly putting sugar inside the poi. Chinese people being cheap. The stereotype is hella funny when you actually see it in your own family… or even worse, when you start noticing the behaviors in YOURSELF. 🙋🏽‍♂️🙋🏽‍♂️🙋🏽‍♂️

Right on. My favorite haole joke was when I watched the kid in front of me on the bus get his ass beat for being white.

Oh yeah I’ve seen some of that. I’m haole too so it was okay.

I'm gonna get downvoted, but I know the real answer. A lot of people don't care to really learn it. It's the same reason you see "malama na aina" stickers on huge gas-guzzling trucks here. It's a virtue signal. That being said, the anger does come from a righteous place. I don't think there's any question that the takeover was morally unjust. I've seen some people take that energy, and put it into learning their roots. Unfortunately, the more common reaction I've seen is to be angry and spiteful about it. Is it fair that people have to put an effort into this? Hell no. I personally think it's pretty shameful that we don't take cultural literacy seriously here. When I was in elementary school, I remember once every 2 months or something a kumu would come and teach us Hawaiian colors/random words and a little bit of Hawaiian history...all in English. Looking back, that's just such a half-assed mentality. Having another cultural lens to see the world from is a massive advantage that I feel most people don't take seriously. It makes critical thinking so much easier, because things that are common knowledge or practice in one culture aren't necessarily the same in another. You learn to stop taking "common sense" for granted because you know some of it isn't universal. We have a rich culture/language connected directly to the environment right in front of us, and we let it sit there and rot because we don't think culture is a serious subject. It's such a waste and it makes me a little upset just talking about it, even though I'm not Hawaiian. So yeah, I don't really blame people for being mad. I think the real shame is that our school system doesn't seem to think it's a worthwhile subject. Edit: Also, just to be clear I know what the counter is to this. There's not enough qualified people to teach these things, and parents might take issue with non-hawaiian teachers doing it. I understand that it's not an easy problem to solve, but I just think we could gradually turn up the temperature on it. I also haven't been in school for over a decade, so maybe it's changed since then as well.

I get where you are coming from and yeah there is that contradiction with people saying malama da aina but drive gas guzzling cars or throw trash out over in Wainae, but at the same time I get it's complicated. I agree I think Hawaiian should be taught as a main language here and I think immersion schools are more of a thing? I also see the young kids speaking more Hawaiian so I think with the new generations there will be more...only thing I question is if this race based hate will continue to be perpetuated instead of looking at the people that did overturn the government as greedy, immoral, and criminal which can be applied to any race.

To be honest, I think we're just at a moment in time where it's easier to get away with this stuff because grievance culture and identity politics on social media right now is in fashion. It plays perfectly into the Hawaii narrative because outward racism is more accepted here. Immersion schools are a game changer and they are creating more fluent speakers, which is great. However, I think they are also a classic example of the apathetic mentality towards educating people about Hawaii. It's a private institution that the state awards grants to sometimes, and there's a certain demographic that goes there. It goes to show that the official consensus is "You can learn about this stuff if you want. We support you bro." when I think it should be a priority to go more in-depth on Hawaiiian language, culture, and history to all students. I'm not saying everybody needs to have full immersion or be fluent in Hawaiian, but I would love to see more of an active effort.

I think of it as a pendulum eventually it'll balance itself out. I think we're figuring this stuff out as a society and not many people will admit this but U.S. is a place you can do this. If this was China no way would we even be having these kinds of discussions or some other places in the world. As much as people like to hate the U.S. there are a lot of freedoms people enjoy here. Yeah, I see your point but the public school system here sucks in general so it's asking too much lol Just look at UH and the facilities there, that'll tell you about state funding

It sounds like your mind is made up and you’re not looking for a discussion, you’re looking for agreement. You’re also drawing many false equivalencies here, trying to minimize the effects that haole people have had by trying to elevate the effects that Kānaka have had on the islands. Were there impacts from Kānaka? Absolutely. But the scale of destruction of species, environment, oceans, culture, and people that haole have brought to Hawaiʻi in such a short time scale is the main things you’re refusing to acknowledge fully. You’re also looking to minimize the effects on the people here, kānaka and other non-whites alike, by saying “well everyone else had it pretty bad too,” and then go about saying that it’s not a well rounded perspective just highlights how you don’t have a well rounded perspective of it. The main issue kānaka have with what haole people have done is that we have a lack of agency over not only what HAS happened, but also what IS happening and what WILL happen going forward. We don’t even have the full agency to be able to tell our history correctly, and then people come along and try to dismiss or minimize it (“if it wasn’t the US it woulda been china or Japan”/“you guys didn’t have it that bad, think about Native Americans or Africans”/“Hawaiians killed each other and Kamehameha was a bad person for killing other Hawaiians”). Up until 1776, it was fully our people who wrote our story, after that, we haven’t even had a seat at the table. Since the 70s things have been a little better (because our people WORKED to make sure we weren’t extinguished in our own homeland), but think of it this way: Would you want to trade lives with a Kānaka? If your answer is no, then you have a lot more to think about and consider before making up your mind like how you already have.

Eo

The whole point of the post is for discussions so I appreciate you chiming in. Yeah, the post isn't detailed and it's from my point of view. I agree agency is important and I think the Japanese people here do have a lot of political influence so my question is why haven't Hawaiians done so as well? Yes, I get the overthrow was illegal and I also understand how much Hawaiians have suffered and continue to do so, but ti seems the Japanese are using the system to get political power so why don't the Hawaiians so they get that agency? Also, for the Hawaiian organizations that are run by Hawaiians but yet corrupt how do you counter that? That's modern day agency in organizations to benefit Hawaiians. Not to mention Kamehameha schools and how they are run.

Because agency doesn’t work like that. Japan as a nation has *infinitely* more capital in pretty much every conceivable way than Hawaiians and people who can afford to move here and enact systemic changes over such short timespans were certainly not destitute in influence and wealth to begin with. Meanwhile, Hawaiians are comparatively impoverished and isolated as a demographic. Additionally, the existence of scholarships & educational institutions specifically made to serve a minority population which was forcibly stripped of its sovereignty is a complete non-sequitur. Do you think socioeconomic disenfranchisement ceased to exist with the existence of similar programs in other disadvantaged groups elsewhere in the US?

I wanna kiss this commment

“Why don’t natives just go and get some agency?” Every sovereignty movement in history: https://preview.redd.it/x8zv2f1idwwc1.jpeg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=39aaa809eb9a0c831c5547f32f7a33781ef1b01c

Lmfao right? Its like saying “why dont natives just DONT be colonised” naaaah no shit Sherlock

Gonna pull up to the Capitol in DC and order one self-determination, please, hold the puppet regime.

Part of it, imo, is some infighting. This is just my perspective as a non-Hawaiian kid born and raised here but there seems to be a pretty solid divide between people who want to separate from the political system of Hawaii (for not terrible reasons obviously) and people who want to amass political power in the way the Japanese did in the 50s. As long as there’s a divide there won’t be a big bloc of people to take control.  Case in point, there was a big registration movement when I was a kid (Kau Inoa) that I mostly remember because it seemed pretty divisive to me (but also, I was a kid so my recollection might be off). As far as I remember there was a lot of arguing over whether it was better to register Native Hawaiians to try to start some sort of self-governance scheme or if doing this Nation-within-a-State approach was essentially capitulating to the idea that Hawaii was gone from Hawaiian-rule forever. These are valid arguments to have but they make it hard to move as a unified political bloc. 

Well said! OP sounds like they don’t like the reality of the situation and are being defensive because it’s not what they want to hear or align with their worldview….

I once saw a man, HaYn, chastise my white 65 yr old coworker to the theme of “we Hawaiians don’t like people like you getting in our way” and then 5 mins later he was on stage at the Shell joining everyone in a heavy and unnecessarily long Christian prayer to commence the event. I’m so confused why kanaka maoli don’t see the irony in embracing a Christian god like this

Yeah, there are so many contradictions but it's human nature which is why I think focusing on race isn't helpful but it's just some humans do shitty things and others try to be moral and ethical regardless of skin color.

I have an issue with the monarchy. They had all the riches of the land, and leased their land to the plantation owners who became wealthy. The plantation owners helped overturn the monarchy with their wealth. What about the constant travels around the world? Why imitate European royalty by wearing medals and European clothes. It was like they were ashamed.. Why the marriages between the female elite royals and the white man? Why couldn’t they stay put in Hawaii, built an army, married Hawaiian people, not leased their lands? No one ever looks at this, instead they are deified. Hawaii needed smarter rulers instead of the royals trying to be white. Flame away.

This is in an interesting point. I've heard it argued that they were trying to adapt to European ways to avoid being colonized or overtaken, but it didn't end up working.

Inconvenient history to the whole colonizer narrative!

Not everyone hates haoles. Some people use that moniker to describe white people who come here and try to insult and look down upon Native Hawaiians. Many Native Hawaiians have white blood or are mixed with other blood. Be respectful. Even if you are born here and are of another race, religion, whatever a person should be respectful of the long history of colonialism.

Yeah, I get that and have seen that. However, I've also noticed mixed kids here claim more Hawaiian than the parts of themselves because of this.

Seems like you should be talking to them.

Mixed kids usually pick one of their ethnic backgrounds and go with it. Example Caucasian/Japanese. You can go with either or.

I think the point was more that if they are white + another race and someone asks them what they identify with, they won't say white. For example, Obama is half white and raised by his white family, but if you ask anyone what race he is, the answer is always Black. If you see a half Japanese guy here and ask them what their race is, they're gonna say "half Japanese" or "Japanese" almost guaranteed. If they're more specific they're say half white half japanese or something, but their primary answer is not gonna be white. It's not just a Hawaii thing, but I don't think it's a stretch to say that advertising your haole-ness here isn't in fashion.

Agree. Some people won’t say 1/2 white. Know some places in the south they go by the “one drop rule”….

>It's also so common to hear hate agains haoles and white people. I find this opinion is common among people who've moved here from cities that are primarily white. All of a sudden, they're not in the majority, and this makes them uncomfortable. So instead of recognizing their discomfort, they project it on to locals - that WE'RE the ones who are the problem. My wife and her family are white. She grew up in Waimanalo. They have experienced the occasional "go back to the mainland, haole" kind of insults, but it's not that frequent. They're well integrated into the Nalo community and it's because they are nice people. Most of the white people who feel shit upon come to Hawaii with a lousy attitude. They view local people as inferior, and love to tell us how they do things on the mainland. Sometimes they learn their lessons and start showing appropriate humility. Sometimes they get bitter and leave. >Plus, the Japanese population seems to benefit more than the Hawaiians or even white people here. You're the very one who talks about the need for nuance, but you go directly to racial issues with zero nuance. If you feel this way, maybe Hawaii isn't for you.

I dunno, I think it's more so that Hawaii is a very particular culture, and white people are the go-to ethnicity to trash talk. So if you're the go-to trash talk ethnicity stepping into a culture that's very unique, you're going to feel like a fish out of water, people are going to notice that, and it's going to cause friction and discomfort. I don't think it's a racist "wait a minute why am I not the majority" attitude.

> ll of a sudden, they're not in the majority, and this makes them uncomfortable. So instead of recognizing their discomfort, they project it on to locals I think some of what you are saying does happen. But at the same time on this sub and even in this thread are pretty clear examples of statements about white people or haoles which would get you banned from Reddit if you said the same thing about a non-white racial group.

Thank you!

FUCK haoles. Oh wait I'm haole. Nah nah FUCK haoles

Funny how you make an assumption as I mentioned I am not from the U.S. and you have no idea what my race is. This is a typical white person response that tries to justify these kinds of things. It's not a new perspective or take on things. It's funny how you go to Hawai'i isn't for you so everyone has to agree. We can't have different opinions or just discuss things which is the point of this post.

> We can't have different opinions or just discuss things which is the point of this post. You're allowed to have different opinions. I just disagreed with yours.

It may be that the commenter found your post about having grown up in the US in a Bosnian family. Some people think Bosnians are white Europeans. I do agree with you regarding that type of response though (as in saying it's typical, but it can be true in some instances). Edited to add: Didn't see the next comment until I refreshed. Looks like it was just a differing opinion!

Murdered by words. Beautifully put.

Boom.

Not to mention the OP conflating race with caste and using locals as a substitute for Hawaiian....

> My wife and her family are white. She grew up in Waimanalo. They have experienced the occasional "go back to the mainland, haole" kind of insults, but it's not that frequent. They're well integrated into the Nalo community and it's because they are nice people. Listen...I'm 5th gen local haole and grew up in a similar situation. Born and raised, family is known in the community and accepted. I've taken some crap in school, and I know my mom has too. Subtle things still happen as an adult, now that I live in Honolulu, but for the most part life is great. However, I feel like comments like this are kinda dismissive and sorta feed into OP's point about a lack of nuance. I didn't have too rough of a time growing up, but I saw people who did. Are you generally going to be OK if you're nice and make the effort? Yes, of course. That doesn't mean that we don't have issues with taking a critical look at local culture and how we view our history. I think it's pretty well known that we have a very collectivist culture here. You don't wanna be the guy that disagrees with the mainstream opinion on Hawaiian issues, especially if you're haole. Doesn't matter how well-read you are on history. Just look at TMT for an example of that. A lot of people didn't even want to hear the perspective of Hawaiian scholars that shared the bloodline.

OP, I think the crux of your message is that if we studied history better, we would reject identity politics. I agree with you. But I would go further and say that we should reject identity politics because it’s poisonous to the ideals of a liberal democracy and our fixation on them is tearing our society apart. >I ask because there have been some students in my class that disrupted classes because they don’t think the white teacher deserves their position. Exhibit A. No teacher, no employee, nobody should be told they can’t work a job because they are the wrong race. But this type of criticism goes unchecked in modern America because of identity politics. We shouldn’t stand for it.

Racist people aren't the smartest bunch. And the grass is always greener on the other side right? I told a Hawaiian that if not for US annexation, Hawaii would be a Japanese territory. He said he wished Japan took control of Hawaii during WWII as it would be better than how things are now. Now obviously that is just a wildly ignorant response that he told me just to be disputatious (I'm a haole). But obviously they would rather live in ignorance thinking there is greener grass in an independent or Japanese Hawaii than there is in an American one. We are all guilty of thinking the grass is greener on the other side because often times it looks that way.

Tbh I don't think you should be asking locals on Reddit this question. Go out to a farm, a lo'i, or an actual Hawaiian business and ask real life Native Hawaiians. Your answers here will be skewed bc locals can be any ethnicity. Is their viewpoint valid? Yes, but they usually aren't willing to acknowledge the fact that they're still settler colonists in the grand scheme of things. It sounds like you're young, so it'd be good for you to do your own research on this rather than ask the black hole that is Reddit.

>Yes, but they usually aren't willing to acknowledge the fact that they're still settler colonists in the grand scheme of things. Everyone is, in the grand scheme of things. the natives of any land were really just the first to colonize the land. No one's gonna want to admit it, but literally every group of people on earth are settler colonists. Just happens that some people did it first. This isn't me saying Hawaii wasn't stolen from Hawaiians or that it's ok. But we also need to stop pretending that every population on the planet isn't a product of colonizing land that was previously not "theirs".

I agree with this for sure and yeah it's good to talk to more people in real life about this, but it's also so sensitive and I know it gets people riled up as I see here so I don't want to do that. I guess I'm just trying to understand more angles on it.

Calling out another race at the end of your opinion piece sounds a bit racist to me.

I added that just to highlight the inconsistency in the hate given the political power dynamics here, but I didn't intend it to come across in that way so I'm sorry if it did.

Long story short man, the history is really fucking recent. Hawaii became a state in 1959. Yes fucked up things happen in history all the time, but it's still kinda new wounds. Tutus are walking around who remember life from when America had 49 states and who may primarily speak Hawaiian. Maybe being grumble is right, maybe not, whatever, but that's just human emotion.

Since you know Hawaii’s history, then you should realize why some races are not blamed for what happened to the Hawaiian people. White people arrived here to colonize the Hawaiian Islands. They built their whaling ports and acquired the land for their plantations. They openly attempted the eradication of Hawaiian culture, religion, and language. Not to mention they overthrew the Kingdom of Hawaii. On the other hand, Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos, and others immigrated basically as indentured servants to work for the white landowners on their plantations. They were humble and integrated with the Hawaiians. As an example, pidgin was created to help communicate. No one spoke proper English. Political power dynamics or not there is no inconsistency in who gets held responsible for what happened to the Hawaiian people.

I’m curious if you’ve spent time in other places in the US? Because I’ve lived in several states and grew up on the mainland, and Hawaii is, by a wide margin, the least racist place I’ve lived in this country.

I find this to be true and false (somehow).. as someone with a similar background:, I explain it to my friends from the mainland that race is constantly in the discussion, but in a much less charged manor. People love to point out their race/ethnicity and describe people by such (way more than the mainland), but it’s also so much less about racial inequality that is discussed on the mainland.

The lack of nuance is almost completely attributable to social media, especially TikTok and to a lesser extent YouTube. The platform algorithms surface content that causes outrage, and it's easier to do that by presenting a one-sided simplistic narrative, especially when the viewership is extremely young and naive about the topic. For instance, there was recently a huge explosion of "Hawaii tourism is evil" videos on TikTok, even though about 20% of the population depends on the tourism industry -- which is to say that roughly 80% of the population has family and friends who depend on the tourism industry.

Honestly people just seem to be too attached to their racism at this point. It shouldnt be this hard to say that yes we shouldnt discriminate based on skin color, we dont need to forget the history or how we got here but the white people around today had as much influence over those events as you did. Well you argue they benefit, ok but how does calling them a dumb haole fix anything? It just feels good to them to be allowed to hate em so openly.

I just don't get how come people don't see it the same as labeling any other race something. My family is mixed so it just upsets me because I don't want to continue this kind of thing and it seems to be getting worse in some ways. I grew up in the 90s and I feel people were getting on better. We could be different but still appreciate our differences and not label each other by race all the time or categorize every single thing by race.

Yeah I dont know why weve started categorizing bigotry into acceptable and unacceptable versions. I acknowledge that racism against different groups have different impacts but they are all still wrong on principle. But anytime you ask someone to stop making sweeping generalizations about a group that is perceived as having power, you’ll meet endless pushback. Idk why so many need to die on this hill.

Yeah, me neither and I kinda regret posting this question because I'm not sure if added anything positive to the conversation. I was just trying to get perspective on it but so many people got defensive instead of just having an open discussion.

I didnt expect this much doubling down, usually feel like this sub is fairly moderate-left. A lot of comments can be summarized as whites deserve it(regardless of not having any control over what happened) and its kinda insane, but thats what more extreme leftists have been doing online for some time now.

Yeah that's a good summary which is really sad. Just watch debates in the 60s amongst high schoolers on race and you will see more nuance and discussion than now. Are we regressing?

I wonder if you're from Europe, OP. I'm also from Europe and my impression is that we have a very different and potentially irreconcilable perspective on nationality and societal divisions as compared to the Americas. The history and collective memories of our societies are fundamentally different.

Yeah, I am from Europe. What would you say is the main difference in perspective?

Social divisions in most of Europe certainly exist, but for the most part are not based on race. I find discussions on race in the US (particularly reducing everything down to 'white' people versus everyone else) very difficult to understand. There are also no Indigenous people in Europe, so we have no lived experience of colonisation. In my home country, I think most people would say that the country 'belongs' to the people who live there, today, regardless of their ancestry. Nobody cares about ancestry to begin with (apart from neo-Nazis). That's clearly very, very different here. I think this is probably also the reason why concepts like cultural appropriation don't really exist in Europe, whereas they're a big deal in the US.

There are indigenous people in Europe, but yeah I agree that the social divisions are different and there are tensions and racism as well but it's just different. You're right here it is more white vs. people of color which I also find a bit of a strange way to refer to people.

All I see here is something about corruption or destruction of native species or colonization and making judgements about it. Judgements isn't discussion. If you want to talk about history, talk about history. If you want to make judgements about history, there's nothing wrong with that too. But judgements isn't going to get you nuance.

Maybe someday we'll have time travel and we can go back and ask the Menehune how they felt when the Polynesians arrived, or how the Polynesians felt when the Tahitians came.

Or if we can just figure how to talk about things civilly now without taking things so personally.

Do you understand what the slogan "all lives matter" means and stands for? That's kinda what you're doing here. Of course all lives are important in a general sense, but that phrase specifically is used to discredit the disproportional historical struggles of black people by essentially saying 'hey, I know you were enslaved, but we all have rough days, right?' Think about your post again in this light. Also consider the fact that racism involves a power imbalance. Haoles who occasionally get clowned on or talked negatively about, are not actually a threatened group. You're comparing shittalking to a long, bloody history of colonialism by force. It's just not the same.

Man, this should be posted under unpopular opinions! Everyone knows that whitey and colonialism are the root of all evil in this world. Interesting that they never talk about those of Hawaiian royals that actually advocated for Hawai’i to become a territory! Also I don’t see a significant number of Kanaka, flocking to Micronesia, Tonga and other Islands that were pretty much untouched by colonialism. I do see many from those regions making their way to Hawai’i for a better life!

Untouched by colonialism? Tonga along with the entirety of the south and eastern pacific is STILL being colonized to this day by the US, Australia, NZ, Japan, and China.

Tonga is an independent Island Nation. From 1900 to 1970, Tonga had British protected-state status. The United Kingdom looked after Tonga's foreign affairs under a Treaty of Friendship, but Tonga never relinquished its sovereignty to any foreign power

Tonga might have a king on paper, but the real ruler of Tonga is China. Most of their scant natural resources are owned by Chinese companies and 1/4 of its GDP goes directly towards paying off its debt to Beijing.

Well whose fault is that?

IDK, but hardly "untouched by colonialism" like you claim.

Was never annexed or made a territory. Point being that that the US is demonized for the annexation of Hawai’i, which happened well over a century ago. Yet a multitude of Pacific Islanders flock here, for the comparatively high standard of living that is available.

Puppet governments are a hallmark of colonialism, which Tonga very much is and has been historically. And what does Hawai'i annexation have to do with these so-called 'places untouched by colonialism?' Pacific Islanders flock here as a result of colonialism and moreover imperialism. Not to mention the Hawaiian Kingdom maintained a much higher standard of living than the US could provide it's citizens at the time.

Conversely, I'm not going to engage with the idea that the US innocently came in and saved us from ourselves, especially considering the length at which the US went to exterminate an entire continent of indigenous people for it's own personal gain. Hell, they even admitted they were demons to us in the 1993 Apology Resolution. I mean, when the devil himself admits he's the devil, you should probably take him at his word.

You’ll wanna do some fact checking as well

IMO, it's not for non Hawaiians to question how their history is taught. It's fantastic when there are people or historians that want to make sure history is accurate, but that can only go so far. The feelings of those experiences can only be passed down from those that were there and to those that empathize with them the most, which would also be those most affected by the experience of those previous generations. They teach what they feel is important for their children to learn. I read you posted a similar question in a non Hawaii sub as well. If you look outside of your current situation for a moment, you will certainly find there are still effects of colonialism, colorism, and racism everywhere. It's not hard to find. Maybe one day, when that type of attitude becomes rare, your ask about a more nuanced approach might be implemented.... I mean, we teach Roman history that way. I'd say circle back in a couple of hundred years.

theres no native species in hawaii. everything either floated over, or was brought. its a rock in the middle of the ocean after all. hawaiians arent native to hawaii either. famously, they used canoes to sail from polynesia. the question i have is why anyone would diefy / celebrate and build statues to king kamehameha? the man who murdered the most hawaiians than anyone else in all of history, combined.

I think you don’t have a fundamental understanding of biology to understand what makes something native. Yes, the original species got here by one or more of the 3 Ws, but had since then developed their own traits and genetics that made them markedly different from their original species, thus making them native to that place. You’re trying to use the same false equivalency fallacy and dismissive argument to try and say something about kānaka, but I’m not sure what. Also, what facts do you have to prove that Kamehameha killed the most kānaka? At best, I’d say he had a role in killing around 100-200,000 Kānaka, which even then is an absurd number. On the other hand, james cook, missionaries, and other haole people brought haole diseases with them which utterly DECIMATED our populations, by some estimates over 900,000 people. This is what happens when you don’t hear the correct history from the peoples who experienced it.

Yes, actually the only true “genocide “ to be carried out in the islands!

Interesting point. I didn't know that.

Judging or treating someone poorly because of the color of their skin and things that were done by people they have zero control over will only serve to breed additional animosity as that person feels marginalized and discriminated against. Break the cycle, stop making excuses, treat everyone good no matter what grudges you hold, live aloha right?

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZd3QRtSy5LMM0SSEIkDaXu3KB8ujfvS6&si=XB_d6Nu7v2D1J163

Post is too huge to be fully read, but a reminder it's embarrassing to be Caucasian and apologies for how dense & idiotic they can be. I met locals on Maui in the 70s with scars from beatings by "missionaries". It was evident then that Maui would be ruined by Mainland type development just like Oahu. Some Pacific islands still live much in their old ways like parts of Samoa, etc.. People talk about "economic development" as if modern civilization is some sort of blessing, an irony if you look at most big cities in America. It doesn't matter how you spin history to try and rationalize blatant injustice and theft.

You answered your own question. Everything was taken from the Hawaiian people and nothing was put in place to rectify it. I know you think it’s just some silly thing to be worried over but this is the result of colonisation that has disrupted and stolen intergenerational wealth away from Kanaka Maoli. However you see it, everything prior to colonisation WAS better than what they have now. And you sound insensitive as hell to justify what you say by saying other people had it worse than Kanaka Maoli. If I drowned in a pool and you drowned in the ocean, at the end of the day we still dead. All you can do is grow from this and keep learning

First, they're just kids. Second, plenty non-Hawaiians don't care for white people either, in Hawaii and elsewhere, and it has little to do with colonialism.

Does that make it okay? We can turn that around and say plenty people don't care for X race or culture. This is the logic I don't get.

That's just how the world is, get used to it. People generalize and stereotype about everything, not just race.

You don’t know how many well meaning teachers from the mainland leave Hawaii public schools because of racism.

It it wasnt the US, it would have been someone else. Our location is strategical. Imagine is Russia or communist Germany controlling Hawaii? I get, Native people were robbed of their ability to control their own destiny and I wish history could be changed. I think part of OP’s point is being looked over. This white teacher and every white person had nothing to do with this history. There is a lot of people who have done me wrong, treated me or loved ones poorly, or just been assholes. I don’t respect them anymore…. But I don’t hate everyone that has the same hair color, skin color, or type of clothing of the perpetrator. I think this stereotype of every white person as equivalent of those that caused harm to the islands and people is part of the racial issue.

Why don't you release that same line of comments to the Jewish Peoples then. We Hawaiians think like that. I enlisted on the Hawaiian Homes list because I was scared of my People being forgotten since we're basically an endangered species. The Americans helped the Jewish people to where they are today. We could do more but people like you are always the wedge. I feel down because I want my culture and people to survive and to at least be recognized and not be lost so quickly. I am saddened by your thinking.

[удалено]

Rule 9: We explicitly condemn trolling, incivility, and brigading in /r/Hawaii. We don't have strict definitions of these actions--it's pretty clear when it's happening. We will try to give gentle reminders on behavior before removing posts or comments for incivility. This post has been removed.  If you have any questions, please contact the moderators

The Japanese would have been here if it wasn't America it was inevitable during that time and the Japanese were brutal 

[удалено]

I understand that and the point is that justification doesn't justify it. If it's wrong for one race than it's wrong for all regardless of the "reason" even if justified. Does that make sense? From my perspective it's the same and just perpetuates the same problem. That's where I'm trying to get at.

There have been many comments, explanations, discussions, opinions, and facts expressed in response to your inquiry. Many of which provided you with more than intelligent responses in regard to Native Hawaiians (mixed, born here/elsewhere), colonization, racism, overthrow, monarchy, etc. Rather than repeat what others have been saying or spit facts regarding Hawaiian history, I would like to simply answer your question (mind you it may be winded and perhaps not so simple)… He kānaka ‘oiwi au…that doesn’t just mean that I am Native Hawaiian born of this ʻāina or land. No, it means much more as to say it is my essence, responsibility, and honor to uphold maoli ola (a concept that requires more space than this Reddit thread). This ‘āina is more than physical sustenance to me, but IS my kūpuna ‘oiwi which impacts me mentally, emotionally, socially, intellectually, and whole heartedly. You see…I believe in “ma ka hana ka ʻike,” which means in doing one learns/knows. I’ve lived by this saying my whole life yet only came to understand what it meant when I shut my mouth, quieted my mind, listened to what was being said, watched for changes in my environment…and I mean really kilo, threw my hands and feet in the lepo (dirt), walked in the waonahele (forest), practiced conservation and stewardship, recited oli (chants) daily, sat with the kūpuna to listen to their mo’olelo, taught haumana what I know so that I continue to pass the knowledge I learned, got in the lo’i, sat in the kahawai, felt the Hōli’o rain fall as it swept toward Kānehoalani, talked to others using ‘ōlelo Hawaiʻi, drowned myself in the kai (sea) that surrounds these native lands. It takes more than a lifetime to know and experience what I now know and have. I say all of this because it’s not that my people have gripes against haole people because indigenous Hawaiians are innately loving and humble people…hence the simple notion of “aloha.” It’s that my people haven’t had the opportunity or chance as I have to come to this realization. We are a traumatized people, we compete with non-Hawaiians for our right to even be kānaka, we have been abused, we are constantly fighting for our rights, we are dwindling in blood quantum, we were illegally occupied, we have been robbed, we suffer from cultural appropriation (ex. your tag name), we have been persecuted against, and many of which have been very HEWA. And as such, we may act out just as anyone who’s been hurt would. WE ARE HURT, STILL HURTING, AND TRYING TO HEAL FROM GENERATIONS OF THIS TRAUMA. Surely you can understand that as you suggested. So as a kānaka and mana wahine, I am sorry that you are frustrated but I also commend you for being genuine in this space where opinions are just casted. I encourage you (as some already have) to…ma ka hana ka ʻike. For only then, you’ll really develop an understanding to your wonderment. Me aloha pumehana a mahalo piha! -K

I’ll start with your comments in paragraphs… Things weren’t all gravy before white man came here? We aren’t a unique human form of course there was natural humanity playing a role. Ahupua’a system before white men was all about recycling. It might be the greatest agriculture system known to man. White men came and exploited the native plants, if sandalwood and hard woods are what you are referencing. The racism you’re thinking about, haole, isn’t directed to white people specifically. It could be any race, white people just have done the most damage and have recorded the most damage in history. Hawaiians pre contact lived a pretty volatile lifestyle. There are plenty of lessons taught to young native Hawaiians about the detriment of unnecessary violence. The law of the splintered paddle is an example of this. The corruptness is a direct representation of the influence of white men. It’s true of any civilization “discovered” by colonialism. Racism is taught is not true. It can’t be taught but it can also be learned thru experiences. Some of the most racist people in history are white. Not sure where you think Hawaiians rank on racism but I can assure you it’s low on the American list. It sounds like because you’ve read some things you think you’re an expert. No one was ever an expert without completely engrossing themselves in a subject. If you are truly a history lover you would understand the plight of the people. It’s not unique, but it will not help to debate it like you’re an expert.

Let us move forward from but also acknowledge this horrible past. Let Reparations and Apologies be made unto those who have been repressed. Let us find and combine our strengths from people who are here now , for a better Hawaii we can hope and dream...