Statehood opposed - by wealthy/racist landholders

[randomq]

Read this article with an interesting perspective on the statehood vote:

http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/ArticlesM...rican.aspx

It seems historical evidence shows the small opposition to statehood was from wealthy landowners that didn't want their Japanese and Chinese workers to have a vote! And there was mostly pro-US sentiment at the time, because the US had ended the practice of indentured servitude to the ali'i and plantation owners. Most anti-US sentiment started in the 1970's from anti-war and marxist movements.

quote:

---

There is no continuity between the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, 20th century opposition to Statehood, and the modern Gramscian construct known as the “Sovereignty Movement.” Hawaiians embraced the United States in 1902 when Prince Jonah Kuhio, heir to Liliuokalani, abandoned Robert Wilcox’ Home Rule Party, joined the Republican Party and was elected Territorial delegate. In 1903 the Hawaiian-Republican territorial legislature passed its first pro-Statehood resolution. In 1919, Rep Kuhio presented the first Hawaii Statehood bill to Congress.

The modern “Sovereignty Movement” is the product of the late 1960s-early 1970s campus Marxist upsurge. Its origins at Kalama Valley are directly tied to the activities of Vietnam-era radicals at UH Manoa.

---

Interesting that we always hear about Queen Liliuokalani signing away the kingdom, but never about her heir Jonah Kuhio striving for statehood!

[kander]

Everything always boils down to money, and those who stand to make money. Nothing- I mean nothing happens because of goodwill. Even if they say it is. Someone is getting their hands greased.

Nothing is changed, other than how the plantation is organized.