Hawaiian Kingdom Independence Blog

Sarah Vowell’s Unfamiliar Fishes is now available in paperback.

And here’s an interview with her in the LA Weekly, including this:

You mentioned some Hawaiians who carried signs that read, “We Are Not Americans” at a parade for the 50th anniversary of its statehood. Have those types given you any feedback on your book?

Oh, yes. There’s a pretty potent community of native activists there who have spent decades picketing and speaking out about Hawaiian sovereignty. To my delight, they have really embraced the book because someone with access to the American mass media is telling the story of how the United States took over their country and, in their opinion, wrecked it.

I also found those people to be an invaluable resource when I was researching the book. The nice thing about people who hold grudges is that they are exceedingly knowledgeable about the past and are more than happy to talk about it! One of the interviews I did with one of those protesters was supposed to be a half-hour lunch. It lasted six hours. I learned a lot.

Check out this paper from the  The Hawaiian Journal of History “‘Aole Hoohui ia Hawaii’: U.S. Collegiate Teams Debate Annexation of Hawai‘i and Independence Prevails, 1893 to 1897” by Ronald C. Williams, Jr.

Conclusion

There is absolutely no doubt that at the time of the proposed annexa­tion of Hawai‘i by the United States, voices of opposition, in both nations, were present, numerous, and made heard in a plethora of differing forums ranging from the popular to the academic. These voices were neither hidden nor made inaccessible to historians. How then, could our late 20th century national narrative speak of a trouble­ free and accordant union?

In the Hawaiian ­language newspaper account of the 1894 George­ town­Columbian debate, the editor of the paper, after translating the Washington Post story, wrote:

HE HOAILONA KEIA

E ka lahui Hawaii; ke olelo nei makou: E like me ka hana ana a na kula o Kaleponi i paio ai no keia ninau o Hawaii, a hoole lakou mamua: mahope mai koho ka Ahaolelo Makaainana o Amerika e apono ana i ko Cleveland hoole i ke kuikahi hoohui aina; pela no ke koho ana ma keia ninau ma ka Aha Senate mahope o ka apono ia ana o ka ke kula o Georgetown.

THIS IS A SIGN

To the Hawaiian people; We say: Like where the schools of California debated this question concerning Hawai‘i, and negated it beforehand: following that, America’s House of Representatives voted to approve Cleveland’s refusal of the annexation treaty: The vote will go the same on this question in the Senate, following the approval from those at the University of Georgetown.

The overjoyed editor of Nupepa Ka Oiaio, in telling the story of debates held in a foreign country over the fate of his nation, implored his fellow citizens to see this result as a hoailona [sign]. He urged his countrymen to action and hoped that this victory would be carried on to the halls of the United States Senate and that his paper would soon be able to print the headline “LANAKILA” [VICTORY]. Yet imperial passions, fanned by the Spanish­-American War in 1898, were to over­ power the morality and justice arguments and bring about the taking of the Islands.

These voices, this testimony, were silenced in order to justify a United States governmental policy that many Americans had seen as valuing pragmatism over morality. A need to stifle future debate concerning these decisions led to the production of “clean” histories concerning the taking of Hawai‘i. Photos of smiling crowds attending Annexation Day ceremonies quickly made their way to the U.S. and celebratory headlines filled newspapers throughout the country.

Less than two months after Annexation Day in Hawai‘i, represen­tatives from the United States and Spain met in Paris to negotiate a treaty that would end the Spanish-American War, cede former Span­ish colonies to the United States, and signify America’s emergence as a dominant power on the world stage. Hawai‘i’s role as a coaling station and staging point during the war would be trumpeted. The budding national narrative would praise the decision to take Hawai‘i and leave behind any mention of contention. As later involvement in World Wars I and II demanded a unified nation, this cohesive narra­tive was amplified as leaders in the United States and Hawai‘i sought to represent the islands as truly an American place. Popular and academic histories, including newspapers, radio and television shows, tourism materials and school textbooks, drove the production of the harmonious narrative and worked to displace stories of dissension. These voices were left behind in order to convince newly “annexed” peoples to leave the love of their own lāhui [nation] behind, to fur­ther a cry for statehood, and to conceal a stolen nation from modern­ day claims of Kānaka Maoli seeking recognition of the occupation of their nation.

But those voices, and many others, are being heard clearly today.

[…]