A Reminder: Hawaiian Sovereignty
U.S. President Benjamin Harrison, his state secretary James Blaine, his ambassador to Hawaii John L. Stevens, and his allies Christian missionary-turned-businessmen Sanford Dole and Lorrin Thurston are names Native Hawaiians will remember for all time.
When U.S. Christian missionaries came to the islands of Hawaii for the first time in 1820, the people were peaceful and prosperous under their kingdom (save for some political violence inherent in all central governments). But they were seen as savages by the U.S. Christians who sought to "Christianize" and "westernize" them.
By the 1880s this western Christian movement grew to a point where they became a violent competitor to Native Hawaiians, and the businessmen were allied to the U.S.
Among their goals were to elect members to "reform" the kingdom, make English the official language of Hawaii, make Christianity the predominant religion in Hawaii, control the education of children, adopt the U.S. flag as the official flag, form a private militia run by a nation-building general who forced the monarch to enact a new constitution, and, if all else fails, force the central government on the people at gunpoint under the pretense of spreading democracy.
It should be noted that this Reform Party advocated a system where Americanism and globalism went hand-in-hand - all in the name of big business via big government. Globalism and nationalism are cousins - both oppose individualism.
When the conspirators took control, successfully overthrowing the Hawaiian Kingdom marking the first time the U.S. orchestrated coups outside North America, they issued this statement in 1893:
"First - The Hawaiian monarchial system of government is hereby abrogated. Second - A Provisional Government for the control and management of public affairs and the protection of public peace is hereby established, to exist until terms of union with the United States of America have been negotiated and agreed upon."
All in the name of U.S. business interests. So excuse me when I don't buy into the U.S.-Middle East conflicts owned by Trump, Obama, W. Bush, Clinton, H.W. Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, and Eisenhower.
The only difference between what happened in the 1890s and the last sixty years is that the U.S. could not muster enough support to annex whatever land the U.S. government wanted to steal from the natives there.
Not all is grim, an active Hawaiian sovereignty movement has resulted in a small parcel of nearly-stateless land. Since the 1990s, thanks to a beach stand-off after U.S. President Bill Clinton signed a resolution admitting Hawaii was stolen by force, the village of Pu`uhonua O Waimanalo has much more autonomy - complete with its own crypto-currency, Alohacoin. It's a start. Mahalo.
Mahalo nui loa @kennykelly for sharing this. As a quarter Hawaiian, my heart remains to the 'aina. I was told that the US needed to secure the pacific before any one else does. Another one is that David Kalakaua signed a contract without fully understanding the language of it's terms. Like ending a lease for a rental unit. When the lease was up, they were evicted from their seat of power. It's pretty sad if it were true. :(
My partner is Native Hawaiian and she resents the U.S. for its treachery and attempts to erase her culture from the earth. It's sickening, and this is one reason why governments have no place in society. The three monarchs who had to deal with the constant back-and-forth of Dole, Thurston, and their political cohorts, were dealing with liars and thieves.
Ps,
Hawai'ian!
In practical terms, Hawaii's strategic value and importance meant it would have ended up in one empire or another. The possibilities were Japan, Russia, America, and maybe Britain.
Japan didn't tend to treat its colonies very well throughout history, to put it lightly. If Russia owned it, they might have built a navy to dominate the Pacific, and thus have a foothold in both Europe and throughout the Pacific. They probably would have lost it to America during the revolution anyway.
If Britain grabbed it at some point, it would have been exploited similarly to how America did, but would be the weakest link in the British Empire given the distance from the home islands.
So I think given the circumstances, America was and continues to be the least of all evils. The cultural destruction should not be apologized for, as that was not a good thing. It might have happened with most of the potential empire suitors however.
That does not justify the U.S. empire. And frankly, tell that to a Native Hawaiian and prepare for the worst. If the U.S. wasn't busy being a policeman of the world, Russia taking the Pacific wouldn't have been a big deal. And if the Japanese conquered Hawaii, like now, it's up to Native Hawaiians to take their land back. Sorry, but your neocon comment fails.
You can't pretend that Hawaii would have successfully defended itself against Japan. Hawaiians may have legitimate grievances with the United States as a historical political entity for things done in the past, but it is a U.S. state now and comes with all kinds of advantages and privileges for being one. To argue for Hawaiian independence is pissing into the wind.
Labeling me a neocon is pointless.
I don't pretend that, but you pretend that Hawaii is better off subjugated. Hawaiians don't want Americans there. "Statehood" is a death sentence because it is land stolen, and the U.S. has largely been successful is decimating Hawaiian culture.
You are a neocon based on the fact you support Hawaiian cultural genocide.
Nowhere have I said that.
same old underhanded corporate take over tactics used for time eternal to rob and steal from indigenous people