NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Racism in Hawaii At the close of the nineteenth century devastating social and cultural changes had all but annihilated the Hawaiian civilization. A seafaring society already thousands of years old when Europeans still believed the world was flat, Hawaiians had highly developed skills for cultivating the land and the sea. It's estimated that anywhere from four hundred thousand to nearly a million very healthy Hawaiian people were living in the island chain before the haole (white people) arrived. During that century of unprecedented Euro-American expansionism, Hawaiians suffered every malaise that could befall a small isolated island nation. From a population collapse, a direct result of foreign plagues, measuring in the ninety percentile, to the illegal overthrow of their democratic monarchy, within a few generations Hawaiians became a dispossessed people. They lost their land, natural resources, political voice, economic power and cultural autonomy, all of which was taken against their will.
The United States chose to knowingly twice deny the rights of the Hawaiian Kingdom, a neutral, internationally recognized member of the Family of Nations. The first time was when its representative Minister John L. Stevens participated in the conspiracy to overthrow the Hawaiian Kingdom, and again in 1898 through a 'joint resolution of the US Congress'. That resolution, an agreement between American politicians, had no legal or moral authority beyond US borders. However, the United States used it as justification to invade and occupy the Hawaiian Kingdom. Because of this, the US presence in Hawaii remains an illegal occupation with enormously far reaching colonial-like consequences for the native people. (Silva 15).
One such consequence is the confused political and national identity of Hawaiians. With all the drama but none of the resolution found in Shakespeare, Hawaiian identity became and still remains unclear. The supposition of Hawaiian assimilation into being 'American' was very common by the end of the 20 th century due in part to Asian and American in-migration to Hawaii, and Hawaiian out-migration to the US. The imposition of the American legal, economic and social infrastructure presumably played a large role in Hawaiians fleeing their homeland. The 2000 US Census listed 40 % of Hawaiians as living on the continent and the trend shows that Hawaiians continue to be the largest ethnic group migrating out of Hawaii. (Chomsky 11 - 12).
The historical evidence of a colonial style of racism and political oppression against the indigenous people of Hawaii is overwhelming. Hawaiians who remain at home still have the worst statistics of health and education, the highest rates of alcohol and drug addiction and disproportionate numbers in prison. Still there is overt refusal by the media and the political machinations of Hawaii to contend with the source of Hawaiian misery or to relate their suffering to a military occupation, even though Oahu, a 640 square mile island, is host to some of the largest military installations in the world. (Cole 14 - 16). The 2001 film, 'Pearl Harbor' encapsulated much of what Americans appear to believe about their history with Hawaii. Which is to say that to Americans, their connection to this place began with the bombing of US military installations on December 7, 1941?
That event became the stuff of nostalgic legends and lies about the American connection to Hawaii. But eventually, the US preferred to call Hawaii a 'territory', but it was in effect a colony. " But referring to Hawaii as a 'territory' or a 'colony' is a misleading step away from the reality of occupation. That Chomsky, one of America's most courageous and progressive critics of American foreign policy, would ignore the basic factual and legal context of Hawaii's relationship to the United States in favor of a false analysis that characterizes that political history as 'colonial' points to the depths of the US deception that has taken place here. The reality of occupation has been all but lost to history and in its place is only half the story, that being the colonial-like oppression of the indigenous people. (Hurley 27 - 8). An average American who comes to Hawaii, Hawaii is solely a tropical tourist destination and is not really America. It's likely that the criticism was also reflective of the general un-American look of Hawaii's residents and the realization by American tourists, the majority being haole, that a large portion of the population in Hawaii is quite visibly non-white.
Peculiarly absent, though, from the critique of Hawaii's supposed lack of patriotism was any acknowledgement of the US military presence here. Hawaii is the headquarters of the largest military command in the world, PACOM-Pacific Command. PACOM is responsible for protecting the policy interests of America, which are dictated by interests in natural resources and commodities, such as the price of oil in the Middle East. This enormous unified command was born out of the first US military occupation of Hawaii in 1893.
Everything since then has been a continual buildup that began with that US backed overthrow of the kingdom. Every transaction since 1893, be it private or government, has issued forth from that event. (Liliuokalani 35). In Hawaii near the end of the year 2002, government and private industry continue the theft of Hawaiian land and resources. American laws imposed during the ongoing occupation are used to condemn private land to benefit wealthy investors as well as land for military expansion. This practice of land control is a common measure of America's power here. Presently, the military expansion that is taking place in Hawaii is the largest since WWII.
The trust, established by the last reigning monarch of Hawaii for the benefit of Hawaiian orphaned and indigent children, uses money from land leased in Waikiki to condominiums and hotels. Condemnation would force the trust to sell the land to very wealthy people, at what may amount to less than a third of its value. No public interest would be served, but the most vulnerable Hawaiians would be adversely affected. Another issue about land control arises when expensive developments disturb burial sites.
The front page of a recent Honolulu Advertiser features a story about the Hokuli'a development. This multi-million dollar 1500 acre land development on the Big Island has been in and out of the courts for three years now over two issues: the iwi (bones), and a massive sediment spill in 2000 that caused irreparable damage to Kealakekua Bay, which until then was one of the most pristine bays in the world. Many iwi have already been moved from sites on the development despite protests from the Hawaiian community living in the area. But this article addressed one burial site that houses the remains of hundreds of Hawaiians, including those of Kamaekalani, grandmother of Queen Lili " uokalani and her brother King Kalakaua. (Chomsky 11 - 12). Later in the article, mention is made of a 1999 recommendation from the Hawai'i Island Burial Council for a six- foot wall around the base of the hill.
The response from John De Fries, president of the development company (1250 Oceanside Partners) was that a wall would be built if a descendant of Kamaekalani requested it, a disingenuous statement to make because it is known that several of the leading opponents to the treatment of the iwi are her direct descendants. (Hurley 27). These are just two of the hundreds of daily events that constitute the far-reaching consequences of the non-Hawaiian presence in Hawaii that sporadically appear in the press. These articles are mentioned here for the purpose of conveying the overriding value system in Hawaii and where Hawaiians are located in that system. A nuclear submarine bearing the name of a Hawaiian king garners support for monument status from a US congresswoman. But the bones of Hawaii's people and the ancestors of that same king's descendants will either be removed or become the matter mixed with earth and stone beneath the fairway of a golf course surrounded by 700 luxury homes. (Cole 14 - 15). The psychological and spiritual challenges Hawaiians face are overwhelming.
The contradictions they endure with regard to how they as a people cope with being cannibalized by the American system of law and government, though, unfortunately leads to litigious and costly court battles. And those battles as yet have done nothing to repair the damage of occupation, and have resulted in a diminished autonomy that ultimately divides Hawaiians as a people. The two men mentioned in the articles above illustrate this point: De Fries and Catalina are both men of Hawaiian ancestry, yet they are completely invested in a system that exists to the detriment of their own people. (Cole 15). The cost of being overrun by the United States goes beyond the outcome of a disconnected discourse of politics and economics that manage to talk about the disenfranchised majority of Hawaiians while ignoring them. It can be seen in the everyday choices that lead to betrayal of one's own people and culture for the sake of money or perceived power; one could even say that it's present in the betrayal of one's self that leads many Hawaiians to criminality, alcoholism, drug addiction and depression.
Yet, even under the weight of the US military, economic and political power in Hawai'i, the subject of independence can be heard in community dialogues more frequently now than in the memory of any living Hawaiian. The motivation for this appears to be due in part to the push from the state of Hawaii's congressional delegation in Washington DC (Senators Daniel Inouye and Daniel Akaka) to federally recognize Hawaiians as 'Native Americans'. The subject of Hawaiian independence from the United States, however, is still left outside of the political discussion in the mainstream media, federal and state policy making and in Hawaiian organizations that have established economic dependence on the US government. (Chomsky 12). Many Hawaiian non-profits, desperate to fund much-needed programs for Hawaiians, particularly in health care, depend on the state and federal government for funding or tax exemption. There is an unspoken exchange that takes place in these circumstances and the policy makers in these organizations and agencies that were established for Hawaiians remain silent on the subject of independence because it would threaten funding. One example of how Hawaiians are silenced in the process of trying to survive can be seen in the non - profit Hawaiian health care organizations that are deepening their ties to the federal government.
Some of those efforts are made via agreements linked to the military through the Department of Defense, as evidenced by recent DOD appropriations bills. This coalescing of the US Military and Hawaiian health care, however, adds to the psychological conflict Hawaiians endure. Negotiating health care needs with the military means that Hawaiians are confronted with having to deal with a source that historically represents the antithesis of Hawaiian well being. (Cole 16). In lieu of openly lobbying, though, some of the non-profit Hawaiian organizations have supported a group called the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement (CNHA). The CNHA is a relatively new organization, established in 2000, and it has close ties to Senator Inouye's office. CNHA advocates and lobbies for Hawaiian federal recognition and the founder and president of the organization are connected to Alaska Native Corporations, like the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation.
That corporation enthusiastically supports Hawaiian federal recognition, so they presumably have an economic interest in whatever they perceive the benefits will be to the Hawaiian people. (Hurley 27 - 8). In considering the future for Hawaiians, one question that comes to mind is whether or not Hawaiians (or anyone for that matter) can be loyal to two countries at once. Is it possible to embrace being American and embrace the political identity of being Hawaiian at the same time, or is that a type of social, political, cultural and spiritual schizophrenia? Hawaiians are in a precarious situation today. Their struggles to hold onto land and resources and to recover their cultural and political identity have inadvertently forced them into making choices about the entire future of their race. Words: 1, 964.
Works Cited: Chomsky, N. The State of Hawaii. Seven Stories Press, 2002 pp. 11 - 12. Cole, W. Saved for Hawaii, Honolulu Advertiser, 10 / 07 / 02, pp. B 1.
Hurley, T. Hokuli'a foes take stand over burial site, Honolulu Advertiser, 10 / 07 / 02, pp. A 1. Liliuokalani, T. Hawaii's Story, Charles E Tuttle Co. , Inc. , 1987. Silva, A.
Anti-Annexation Petitions 1897 - 1898, self published, Honolulu, HI, 1998, p. 15.
Free research essays on topics related to: drug addiction, federal government, natural resources, military occupation, military installations
Research essay sample on Military Installations Drug Addiction
