07-31-2015, 02:48 PM
So many here, especially since the beginning of the Hawaiians taking a stand on Mauna Kea, have voiced their opinions on the rights of the Hawaiian verses the USA, and in so many instances have sighted history as a justification for their point of view. The overthrow right or wrong, what took place when and by whom, with reams of URLs pointing to acts and laws and all sorts of references to back up whatever point is being made.
One interesting thing about all the history sighted is the thought that history itself is malleable and often what has been said needs to be considered along with who's doing the telling, and when we consider the history of the overthrow we rarely stop to reflect on who's version of the overthrow are we referencing?
Further, a lot of folks here (PW) seem to cast the native Hawaiian as less educated, less accomplished, and the people that were overthrown less worthy of the right to governance than the conquering powers. As if there is some evidence that the Hawaiian people at the time of the overthrow were not wholly embracing modern society, not seeking higher educations, not capable of self determination. Though I have not heard anyone reflect on the source of this point of view. It is just held up as fact, as reason to further justify their belief that American dominance of the islands is justified.
Recently Dr. Ronald Williams Jr. presented a whole different viewpoint that comes clear when Hawaiian history is researched from preserved Hawaiian-print archives. And, further shows that for nearly a century the story of Hawaii's past has been told through an exclusively english language narrative that has worked to silence the voices of its native people. A recent talk given, in Puna, by Dr. Ronald Williams Jr can be watched here:
http://youtu.be/OOvxSxAXi20
This talk is such an eye opener. This should be required viewing to all of us before we form our own opinions imo.
One interesting thing about all the history sighted is the thought that history itself is malleable and often what has been said needs to be considered along with who's doing the telling, and when we consider the history of the overthrow we rarely stop to reflect on who's version of the overthrow are we referencing?
Further, a lot of folks here (PW) seem to cast the native Hawaiian as less educated, less accomplished, and the people that were overthrown less worthy of the right to governance than the conquering powers. As if there is some evidence that the Hawaiian people at the time of the overthrow were not wholly embracing modern society, not seeking higher educations, not capable of self determination. Though I have not heard anyone reflect on the source of this point of view. It is just held up as fact, as reason to further justify their belief that American dominance of the islands is justified.
Recently Dr. Ronald Williams Jr. presented a whole different viewpoint that comes clear when Hawaiian history is researched from preserved Hawaiian-print archives. And, further shows that for nearly a century the story of Hawaii's past has been told through an exclusively english language narrative that has worked to silence the voices of its native people. A recent talk given, in Puna, by Dr. Ronald Williams Jr can be watched here:
http://youtu.be/OOvxSxAXi20
This talk is such an eye opener. This should be required viewing to all of us before we form our own opinions imo.