05-01-2017, 06:15 AM
On another TMT thread, a commentator wrote: universal question "why can’t we all just get along?"
To which Kalakoa replied briefly: “Because money.”
Exactly. I would not suggest that Kalakoa intended to bolster the position of TMT opponents, but the answer stands by itself, IMO.
Money=Power and Money=Land and Land=Power and so the circle goes. George Cooper’s and Gavan Daws’ 1990 book Land and Power in Hawaii provides useful instruction on the past flow of power in our state.
And native Hawaiians were not--and are still not--prominent in the equation. And their general dissatisfaction relates to their opposition to TMT.
A crude analogy: In the 1992 Rodney King riots, you did not want to be a white guy in the black neighborhoods. You were going to get your ass kicked. The rioters didn’t necessarily think you did anything. It didn’t matter. They were going to target any party remotely associated with the people causing them grief, even if they were just the same race. (They could not effectively challenge the rulers in the courts, the police and city hall who caused their problem: out of control cops.)
The TMT plan, a big-money project that would involve a fair number of educated, well off people coming here from different parts of the world, is contestable, challengeable. Native Hawaiians are going to contest some things as a matter of course. One thing relevant to them is how many things they cannot effectively contest.
Can’t contest all the new mainlanders taking over the shorelines with their big houses. Public access blocked (Kailua); landowners building mega-mansions (North Shore Kauai), landowners planting vegetation to keep people from walking in front of their homes (Waimanalo). On some coasts landowners persuaded officials to put in public parking limits. The mainlanders’ big money ensures that planning officials either collude or acquiesce.
Most people who arrived in Hawaii recently do not fathom the importance of shorelines to local culture. In the past 30-40 years the level of damage and disruption to the “coastal commons” has been extraordinary. (Now here are natural sites of spiritual value.) Native Hawaiians have long revered shorelines as gathering places (i.e., gathering to meet others). Many mainlanders are downright dismissive. The shoreline fronting their McMansion is now their new front yard.
Can’t contest the military’s appropriation of some Hawaiian land.
Can’t contest the disproportionate number of native Hawaiians who have fallen through the cracks--homeless or in prison.
Can’t contest a key issue for many working native Hawaiians: affordable housing. The lecture to them runs something like this: What’s your grievance, cheap housing? The problem, Hawaiian, is that you are lazy. What? Rents have close to tripled since 1980 while wages have risen only some 60-80%. That’s just the way it is. What, people in 1980 could have a fair life working 40 hours a week? We don’t care.
Look at yourself; you’re fishing on the weekends. That’s not cost effective. Want more food? Work longer hours and then go to Safeway. And you’re surfing. Surfing. We told you back in the 1800s and we’ll tell you again: There’s no value in that. Get a weekend job, Hawaiian.
The list could go on.
Contestable TMT happened to come into the sights of native Hawaiians, IMO. Perhaps the native Hawaiians perceive that the telescope community is commandeering the mountain.
There might be some religious belief being trampled here. IMO, the TMT supporters are correct: 1) Mauna Kea’s spiritual value has been much exaggerated and 2) the physical and historical evidence that would demonstrate such value is slim.
Be that as it may, the opposition is likely to persist. TMT might be a clear benefit to our state, but somehow I can’t help but sympathize with the native Hawaiians.
To which Kalakoa replied briefly: “Because money.”
Exactly. I would not suggest that Kalakoa intended to bolster the position of TMT opponents, but the answer stands by itself, IMO.
Money=Power and Money=Land and Land=Power and so the circle goes. George Cooper’s and Gavan Daws’ 1990 book Land and Power in Hawaii provides useful instruction on the past flow of power in our state.
And native Hawaiians were not--and are still not--prominent in the equation. And their general dissatisfaction relates to their opposition to TMT.
A crude analogy: In the 1992 Rodney King riots, you did not want to be a white guy in the black neighborhoods. You were going to get your ass kicked. The rioters didn’t necessarily think you did anything. It didn’t matter. They were going to target any party remotely associated with the people causing them grief, even if they were just the same race. (They could not effectively challenge the rulers in the courts, the police and city hall who caused their problem: out of control cops.)
The TMT plan, a big-money project that would involve a fair number of educated, well off people coming here from different parts of the world, is contestable, challengeable. Native Hawaiians are going to contest some things as a matter of course. One thing relevant to them is how many things they cannot effectively contest.
Can’t contest all the new mainlanders taking over the shorelines with their big houses. Public access blocked (Kailua); landowners building mega-mansions (North Shore Kauai), landowners planting vegetation to keep people from walking in front of their homes (Waimanalo). On some coasts landowners persuaded officials to put in public parking limits. The mainlanders’ big money ensures that planning officials either collude or acquiesce.
Most people who arrived in Hawaii recently do not fathom the importance of shorelines to local culture. In the past 30-40 years the level of damage and disruption to the “coastal commons” has been extraordinary. (Now here are natural sites of spiritual value.) Native Hawaiians have long revered shorelines as gathering places (i.e., gathering to meet others). Many mainlanders are downright dismissive. The shoreline fronting their McMansion is now their new front yard.
Can’t contest the military’s appropriation of some Hawaiian land.
Can’t contest the disproportionate number of native Hawaiians who have fallen through the cracks--homeless or in prison.
Can’t contest a key issue for many working native Hawaiians: affordable housing. The lecture to them runs something like this: What’s your grievance, cheap housing? The problem, Hawaiian, is that you are lazy. What? Rents have close to tripled since 1980 while wages have risen only some 60-80%. That’s just the way it is. What, people in 1980 could have a fair life working 40 hours a week? We don’t care.
Look at yourself; you’re fishing on the weekends. That’s not cost effective. Want more food? Work longer hours and then go to Safeway. And you’re surfing. Surfing. We told you back in the 1800s and we’ll tell you again: There’s no value in that. Get a weekend job, Hawaiian.
The list could go on.
Contestable TMT happened to come into the sights of native Hawaiians, IMO. Perhaps the native Hawaiians perceive that the telescope community is commandeering the mountain.
There might be some religious belief being trampled here. IMO, the TMT supporters are correct: 1) Mauna Kea’s spiritual value has been much exaggerated and 2) the physical and historical evidence that would demonstrate such value is slim.
Be that as it may, the opposition is likely to persist. TMT might be a clear benefit to our state, but somehow I can’t help but sympathize with the native Hawaiians.
