I was musing in a recent Honolulu Weekly column about the difficulty in dealing with Hawaiian issues. The community at large has trouble, as does the Hawaiian community itself. So I was quite interested in the the statement issued by several Hawaiian groups criticizing actions of the group calling itself the Hawaiian Kingdom Government and ” its claims to be heirs of the Hawaiian Kingdom.”
At first I was hopeful that this would be a moment of sanity, but no such luck, as the four “royal societies” were simply restating their own claims to represent the true heirs of the kingdom.
It’s too bad that in the present context, sovereignty presumes monarchy, and “sovereignty” devolves into a food fight over who should be recognized as The Sovereign or reigning monarch.
I’m not keen on monarchies. It’s bad enough that we sometimes have to endure an unpopular governor for several years until another election comes along. Place a crown on the governor or one of the OHA trustees, or even one of the royal wannabees, and look out!
One thing that didn’t make it into my list of factors that make Hawaiian issues hard to deal with is the huge class divide among Hawaiians. You can see this clearly in the divide over the Akaka Bill and elsewhere in the competing sovereignty movements. I don’t know whether the gap between rich and poor is worse among Hawaiians, but it certainly can be seen playing out in the issues of the day (note to file–check out census data re the income gap).
Maybe I’m just grouchy this morning. It can happen. So I turned to my friend, the Internet, for inspiration.
Ah, the whole sovereignty issue has come up previously in Texas, with many of the same pseudo-legal claims heard among sovereignty circles here. Here’s an article worth reading for its parallels to the islands– “Still True Today: ‘The Republic of Texas is no more‘. ”
Here’s one listing of “seditionist and sovereignty movements” in the U.S. It’s really not a pretty picture.
But it’s Sunday. I’m off to make breakfast.
Why expect Native Hawaiians to agree and be unified any more than the rest of us???
Over in North America there is a big battle underway with three factions wanting to control the country. It is characterized by a huge class divide between the extremely rich on one side and the rest of us on the other. In fact, none of the candidates could be described as working class, you gotta be at least in the millionaire class to play in that game.
Ian, I’m surprised at you implying that the disagreement over who represents the true royal heirs represents insanity. What is not sane is going around the world overthrowing governments and believing that this is a correct course and that others are somehow inferior if they object to it. Or that they are insane if they can’t agree on something we think they should agree on after we’ve put them down.
I hope you’ll grant that any people, given the right of self-government, have as much ability as we do to choose how they want to be governed. It may turn out to be monarchy or not, but it is not our place on this planet to dictate that to them as though we know best. Look at the behavior of our current government and the death and destruction it is causing today, even as you sit down to breakfast.
All the soverignty groups do agree on one thing- the want their land back.
But you nailed it Ian- it’s a class struggle within the kanaka maouli community typifed by the royal societies on one end and the and the various “people’s” groups on the other.
I’m pretty big on democracy but I’m not so sure a philospher king wouldn’t be better than what passes for democracy in the US and especially in Hawai`i.
I’m always amazed that every Hawaiian is Ali’i. That’s going to be a very top-heavy system.
Hey, this Hawaiian would rather have western-style democracy imposed on him by the white man than keep the indiginous monarchy that executes people for getting their damn shadow on them.
Don?t know why so many expect the issue of sovereignty to be uni-dimensional. Sovereignty issues (or statehood issues for that matter) are as vast as any political spectrum. Just as there are some that seek a return to the monarcy, there are others that see self-determination to be de-militarization or de-colonization, while others, subscribe to a version of self-determination that is more parliamentary.
The idea of agreeing to disagree in a parliament seems far more representational than our current two-party system.
The most rewarding system of governance is one that encourages real debate. I for one, might not agree with Mahealani Kehau, but I applaud the theatricality of her actions, and if this bit of theater is what it takes to ferment more engagement from the spectrum of sovereignty groups, then all the better.
Finally got to read your Honolulu Weekly piece and your premise is a bit short of fully accurate. A constitutional monarchy can be a far cry from a despotic monarchy. And the fact that the Hawai`i Constitution was foisted at gunpoint previous to the overthrow makes those latter consitutions as illegitimate and invalid as the post-overthrow government.
Just because there are some with a Napoleonic complex- which runs the gamut from the Royal Societies to some of the “I am the king/queen” sovereignty groups- doesn’t mean a constitution-based independent nation with a monarch (even like Great Britain) can’t be a valid 21st Century entity in the islands. There are “democracies” that are as bad or worse than any monarchy as far as having a single despotic leader who pulls their country into plunderous foreign wars, takes away citizens’ rights and leads them to financial ruin for their own and their cronies’ enrichment.