Posts: 311
Threads: 15
Joined: Jun 2010
Very interesting and thoughtful thread. Thanks to all who contributed to it. The points about religion were all well made. And the discussion regarding property rights, title to land, etc. what exactly do you buy when you buy property...? this thread provoked a lot of thought with regard to these ideas. We don't really own our land, do we? Politically, we have been given title to live on it by the United States. They could take it back if they wanted to. But all that is really just a fiction, an exchanging of paper and promises. And, as has been pointed out, one's title to one's land is not going to be revoked by the lava. You'll still own your parcel, no matter what happens to it. That said, I do feel the pain of those of my friends who are really unsure about their future. This discussion has heat because it no longer occupies the realm of the theoretical.
Two specific points however: First, 2liveque argues that transplants came here and now suddenly believe they have a right to "pretty much utter what they please." Well, they do. You do. I do. That is the very first right enshrined by the nation that supplanted the Hawaiian Kingdom. Lots of evil perpetrated by that government over the years, as many here have admitted to, but that one thing was, is, and always will be a good thing. We are exchanging ideas here on this forum because of it.
Second, I think Mtviewdude, with whom I do not share many views, has been given short shrift here. His point was not that the current government was pure and good. And he admitted that several times. His point was that other writers here were romanticizing the Hawaiians. And his arguments were salient and sound. It has in fact, been recorded by disinterested parties and generally agreed to that the Hawaiians themselves, shortly after a bloody war between the various island kingdoms, abandoned their belief system PRIOR to the arrival of Christian missionaries. It is also true that subsequent Hawaiian leaders wished to embrace the ways of European nations so as to avoid being marginalized by them. It is also true that our government supported some very dubious characters in the late 19th century and that led to the demise of the kingdom. I would rather live in a world where the Hawaiian Kingdom was supported as sovereign and allowed to coexist among the community of nations. But I don't. And that's not the point here, either.
Mtviewdude was perhaps not gracious, but he was also not wrong. And his point, I think, is that these conflicts (western vs. native) are not easily reduced to a struggle between Good and Evil. You can't paint this picture with that broad a brush. Learn the truth, tell the truth, repeat the truth to your kids, even if it's messy. That is the takeaway.
Posts: 1,100
Threads: 6
Joined: Nov 2010
quote:
Originally posted by Noeau
Or how our language wasn't in danger until the 1896 (3 years after the illegal overthrow) when the haole created a law (Act 57) which banned Hawaiian language from being taught in the school systems.
The language was already in danger long before that due to the declining native Hawaiian population and increasing numbers of not only haole but Asian immigrants, which by the early 1890s made Hawaiians a small minority in the kingdom. This was noted with concern well before the overthrow.
Posts: 13
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2013
quote:
Originally posted by DaVinci
Very interesting and thoughtful thread. Thanks to all who contributed to it. The points about religion were all well made. And the discussion regarding property rights, title to land, etc. what exactly do you buy when you buy property...? this thread provoked a lot of thought with regard to these ideas. We don't really own our land, do we? Politically, we have been given title to live on it by the United States. They could take it back if they wanted to. But all that is really just a fiction, an exchanging of paper and promises. And, as has been pointed out, one's title to one's land is not going to be revoked by the lava. You'll still own your parcel, no matter what happens to it. That said, I do feel the pain of those of my friends who are really unsure about their future. This discussion has heat because it no longer occupies the realm of the theoretical.
Two specific points however: First, 2liveque argues that transplants came here and now suddenly believe they have a right to "pretty much utter what they please." Well, they do. You do. I do. That is the very first right enshrined by the nation that supplanted the Hawaiian Kingdom. Lots of evil perpetrated by that government over the years, as many here have admitted to, but that one thing was, is, and always will be a good thing. We are exchanging ideas here on this forum because of it.
Second, I think Mtviewdude, with whom I do not share many views, has been given short shrift here. His point was not that the current government was pure and good. And he admitted that several times. His point was that other writers here were romanticizing the Hawaiians. And his arguments were salient and sound. It has in fact, been recorded by disinterested parties and generally agreed to that the Hawaiians themselves, shortly after a bloody war between the various island kingdoms, abandoned their belief system PRIOR to the arrival of Christian missionaries. It is also true that subsequent Hawaiian leaders wished to embrace the ways of European nations so as to avoid being marginalized by them. It is also true that our government supported some very dubious characters in the late 19th century and that led to the demise of the kingdom. I would rather live in a world where the Hawaiian Kingdom was supported as sovereign and allowed to coexist among the community of nations. But I don't. And that's not the point here, either.
Mtviewdude was perhaps not gracious, but he was also not wrong. And his point, I think, is that these conflicts (western vs. native) are not easily reduced to a struggle between Good and Evil. You can't paint this picture with that broad a brush. Learn the truth, tell the truth, repeat the truth to your kids, even if it's messy. That is the takeaway.
You sir are adding to statements are that false. Such as stating that Hawaiians gave up their belief system prior to the arrival of missionaries. That is indeed false and can be verified if you take a look at some of the sources I've listed above. Although I myself find Hawaiian Language newspapers even stronger sources due to the time in which they were written.
You said it yourself "Learn the truth, tell the truth."
And to Opihikao, mahalo nui ia oe no kou kako'o!
E ola ka ike kupuna 
Posts: 471
Threads: 68
Joined: Aug 2011
It's amazing how some folks like to "land" on a certain piece contextual Hawaiian history that best fits their western lens....and STAY there to make the same weak arguments over and over and over. If I had a dollar for everytime I had to hear a white person (mainly white men) say "it was the Hawaiians themselves who did it to their own people," I'd be a rich man. These folks like to take bits and pieces out of context to say "See! I told you so," totally disregarding the good Alii, and good stewards of the culture who were present in history also. Opihikao is right. There is no winning this one.
DaVinci -- you are right. The 50th star on the flag allows for you to utter anything you want. So does the first amendment of the constitution that flag represents. So go for it. Say anything you want. Go to the lava meetings and utter anything you want. You and the Mt. View guy should go. As a matter of fact, come to the next Hawaiian civic club meeting and utter anything you want. I'm sure you will be warmly embraced. After all, your country allows it....therefore, you can. Go for it.
In the far distance some white guy Punaweb reader is thinking,"There they go, playing the race card again." No my friends, the race card never left. And it came from a deck of cards that white people have printed and stacked in their favor. History proves it. And even in Pele's backyard, white folks still trying to dictate. And it drives them bananas when a Hawaiian Mayor, and local boy civil defense guy offers authority on the subject. Race is alive and well right here on this subject my friends. To deny it is irresponsible and dismissive of any argument that goes counter to your western lens. SMDH.
Posts: 1,406
Threads: 25
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 968
Threads: 74
Joined: Aug 2007
I think there are two clear sides talking in this discussion, though one of them does not hear the other, and this is a shame. I sense that the difference lies in that on one side it is assumed that the other has a different thought (industrialized point of view), while still believing that the minds of the two are the same. Whereas the real difference is that of the two cultures there are two fundamentally different minds, different ways of thinking entirely, rather than something so simple as a different thought.
Posts: 1,406
Threads: 25
Joined: Jun 2013
I feel that when two cultures interact; a third culture emerges. We can hope that the emerging culture would embrace the positive characteristics of each.
For example;
Western-Everyone has a voice
Hawaiian- resource conservation and sustainability.
It's discouraging to hear someone from either to assert superiority over the other. We are the grey area. It is up to all of us to maintain both the individual freedoms we enjoy and also to perpetuate the Hawaiian culture.
Posts: 1,168
Threads: 39
Joined: Jun 2005
Years ago a student of Zen shared a parable that struck me as apropos to any discussion about culture.
"Two tadpoles are swimming in a pond. Suddenly one turns into a frog and leaves the pond. Upon the frog’s return to the water, the tadpole sees the frog and asks, “Where did you go?”
“I went to a dry place, ” answers the frog.
“What is ‘dry’?” asks the tadpole.
“Dry is where there is no water,” says the frog.
“And what is ‘water’?” asks the tadpole.
“You don’t know what ‘water’ is?” the frog says in disbelief. “It’s all around you! Can’t you see it?”
The moral of the story (viewed through my lens anyway) is that you have to understand your own culture (=the invisible water) before you can communicate and connect with another. Learning how one is perceived (rightly or wrongly) by another culture helps you "see the water" so to speak, one reason why this thread is so valuable.
However you choose to interpret history, it's hard to sweep aside the influence of culture in the communications happening here and at the town meetings. As culture gaps go, this is about as wide as you're going to get. And with that disconnect comes a choice (lots of choices actually): we can choose to NOT learn from each other, focus on what divides us, while we disrespectfully address each other and accomplish nothing, OR we can respectfully reach out and find common ground to build on.
But even if we find that hallowed common ground, the deal would come with a long list of stuff we'll never agree on. Wouldn't it be great if we overlook that and tap into what binds us anyway?
I appreciate all the respectfully stated opinions in this thread, even those I don't agree with. It's a great topic to put up for discussion, very instructive, and I REALLY appreciate the reading list.
Tim
A superior man is modest in his speech, but exceeds in his actions--Confucius
Posts: 311
Threads: 15
Joined: Jun 2010
@2liveque: I don't remember advocating any position at all regarding the recent lava flows. My feeling is that we should not interfere with the lava or try to divert it. Not sure why you are suddenly making this a race thing. I think you are falling into the trap of seeing only two sides to this discussion. It is deeper than that. But I will take Noeau's advice and research the suggested source material to see if his/her assertion is correct that the Hawaiian belief system was intact when Christian missionaries arrived. I thought I understood that history, but I am always willing to examine new sources of information. I'm only interested in the truth. I have no interest in propping up a western bias, if it can be demonstrated that such a bias is incorrect. Likewise I have no interest in advocating a superiority of the native culture. It has been marginalized, and that was wrong. But placing it on a pedestal as remedy for the wrong is also not correct.
Posts: 311
Threads: 15
Joined: Jun 2010
@Noeau: I'm having difficulty with your bibliography. Could you perhaps identify the resources that deal with pre-1840 Hawaiian history? The first two volumes don't seem to cover that period, and I would be I your debt if you could point me directly at the source material that discusses the period of first contact, from, say, Captain Cook through the first landing of missionaries. Thanks.
|
