United States – DP-1. Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000
Looks like although kanaka maoli are < 0.1% of the population, there are three groups even worse off: Other Pacific Islander Samoan Guamanian or Chamorro I guess we need some special programs for them, since they're really at the bottom of the list...
Were Samoa and Guam invaded by the U.S.? No. Hawaii was and Hawaiians were/are treated siginificantly different as well.
Hawai’i wasn’t invaded by the U.S. – In fact, the U.S. government under Grover Cleveland tried to do everything they could to turn back the clock of revolution and restore the Queen to her throne. But alas, it was not up to the U.S. to decide the fate of Hawai’i -> it was up to Hawaiians.
Kanaka maoli are treated different only insofar as the unfair, unjust, immoral and unconstitutional race based benefits they recieve.
http://ns.gov.gu/history.html
It seems that guam was actually invaded by the spanish from 1521 – 1898, when guam was lost to the US after the Spanish-American war.
If anything, guamanians can truly claim that they were conquered and subjugated -> kanaka maoli worked with haoles to unify the islands uner Kamaheameha the Great, and built up a multi-racial multi-cultural society that transformed into a constitutional monarchy with Kamehameha III, and that monarchy was overthrown internally by the Committee of Safety, who then founded a republic, who then voluntarily asked the US to make it a territory.
Big difference from being won in spoils of a war. Kanaka maoli shared the reins of power from the very beginning – guamanians had no choices.
Here’s another bit of history from Guam:
http://www.guam-online.com/people/people.htm
n April of 1672, Padre San Vitores and his Filipino assistant were killed by Chief Mata’pang of Tomhom (Tumon) for baptizing Chief Mata’pang’s baby girl without the Chief’s consent. It is also theorized that Mata’pang may have acted out of frustration Padre San Vitoresfrom being subjugated to the harsh rule of a foreign Spanish King. Whereas Padre San Vitores tried to carry out his mission in a peaceful manner, the Spanish military ruthlessly pressed theirs to protect their Galleon Routes. Regardless of Mata’pang’s motive, the death of Padre San Vitores lead to all-out war that nearly resulted in extinction of the Chamorro race. During the course of the Spanish occupation of Guam, sources have estimated Chamorro casualties to the fighting and disease to have reduced the population from 150,000 to 200,000 to roughly 5,000 by 1741, mostly women and children. After 1695 Chamorros were forced to settle in five villages: Agana, Agat,Plaza de Espana, Agana Guam Umatac, Pago, and Fena, were monitored by the priests and military garrison, forced to attend Church daily and to learn Spanish language and customs. The Spaniards imported Spanish soldiers and Philipinos to restock the population, marking the end of the pure Chamorro bloodline. In 1740 Chamorros of the Northern Mariana Islands, except Rota, were removed from their home islands and exiled to Guam. The skill of ocean navigation was extinguished. Mata’pang himself was killed in a final battle on the Island of Rota in 1680. Having been vilified for the incident that sparked tie decimation of the pure Chamorro race, the name Mata’pang has evolved to mean silly.
NOTHING like this ever happened to the kanaka maoli. The only similar suffering was that of disease. Kanaka maoli were not slaughtered by foreign militiaries, not moved to reservations, not forced to attend church, and did not have any wars except for the first one that Kamehameha the Great perpetrated.
The kanaka maoli INVITED the haole, the japanese, the chinese, the filipino. The kanaka maoli INTEGRATED VOLUNTARILY with the people they invited. The kanaka maoli converted WILLINGLY to christianity, and CHOSE to destroy the kapu and heiau.
Guamanians also apparently have a history that goes back to 2000 BC compared to the Tahitian conquerors who only came to the Hawaiian islands in 1300AD. Over three thousand years difference.
“Hawai’i wasn’t invaded by the U.S. – In fact, the U.S. government under Grover Cleveland tried to do everything they could to turn back the clock of revolution and restore the Queen to her throne.”
But did he? NO. In fact the U.S. still illegally occupies Hawaii.
” But alas, it was not up to the U.S. to decide the fate of Hawai’i -> it was up to Hawaiians.”
How so when the total population of Hawaiians plummeted from about 800,000 in 1778 down to about 401,062 in 2001. Even if the first figure was of Hawaiians with 100% pure aboriginal blood in terms of the Haole definition… that is still nearly half of the Hawaiian population decimated. Also in 1887 most Hawaiians lost their right to vote per the Bayonet Constitution which resulted in non-Hawaiians and non-Hawaiian nationals comprimising the majority of voters of the new quasi government. Not to mention the Marines and guns so it was not up to Hawaiians. And purposefully so. My question to you is why do you blame Hawaiians for being invaded?
“Kanaka maoli are treated different only insofar as the unfair, unjust, immoral and unconstitutional race based benefits they recieve.”
My question to you is which Hawaiian history books have you read? Also I would like you to point out which “privileges” you claim that Hawaiians supposedly have with sources.
“http://ns.gov.gu/history.html
It seems that guam was actually invaded by the spanish from 1521 – 1898, when guam was lost to the US after the Spanish-American war.”
But were they invaded by the US? NO. Guam was under Spanish control since 1668 then in 1898 the Battle of Guam took place and the U.S. took possession of Guam had its first possession in the Pacific Ocean. The U.S. did NOT overthrow their government like how it did with the Hawaiians’ government. This of course was obvious upon the Organic Act of 1950 which provided for the structure of the island’s government.
Then in World War II Japan invaded Guam. 1944. That is when the U.S. returned to recapture Guam from Japanese military occupation. The Organic Act of 1950 established Guam as an unincorporated organized territory of the United States and provided for the structure of the island’s government.
Even the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, section 307, granted U.S. citizenship to Guam’s population but the U.S. did NOT overthrow their form of government as it did to HAWAIIANS.
“If anything, guamanians can truly claim that they were conquered and subjugated ->”
Not quite as they have their own government while Hawaiians’ nation was overthrown and the queen was imprisoned.
” kanaka maoli worked with haoles to unify the islands uner Kamaheameha the Great, and built up a multi-racial multi-cultural society that transformed into a constitutional monarchy with Kamehameha III, and that monarchy was overthrown internally by the Committee of Safety,”
I agree.
“who then founded a republic, who then voluntarily asked the US to make it a territory.”
I agree but would add “greedily” as it was about money and power too.
“Big difference from being won in spoils of a war. Kanaka maoli shared the reins of power from the very beginning – guamanians had no choices.”
I disagree. Both Hawaiians and Chamorro have unique experiences… no one worse than the other. However the two nations experiences with the U.S. were and continue to be significant different as explained above.
How so when the total population of Hawaiians plummeted from about 800,000 in 1778 down to about 401,062 in 2001. Even if the first figure was of Hawaiians with 100% pure aboriginal blood in terms of the Haole definition… that is still nearly half of the Hawaiian population decimated.
Come now, let’s be more accurate…from 1778 throughout the Kingdom of Hawai’i, the total population of kanaka maoli plummeted from 800,000 to 40,000. From 1900 – 2000, the time when Hawai’i was part of the U.S., THE POPULATION INCREASED!!
Maybe if King Kamehameha III had gotten his treaty of annexation signed before he died, and became a part of the U.S. in 1854, and the kanaka maoli didn’t have to suffer through the wastrel spending of the Kalakauas, less kanaka maoli would have died.
Also in 1887 most Hawaiians lost their right to vote per the Bayonet Constitution which resulted in non-Hawaiians and non-Hawaiian nationals comprimising the majority of voters of the new quasi government. Not to mention the Marines and guns so it was not up to Hawaiians. And purposefully so. My question to you is why do you blame Hawaiians for being invaded?
So are you claiming that the Kingdom of Hawai’i was invaded in 1887? No U.S. marines landed then! Are you suggesting that the Kingdom of Hawai’i was somehow a puppet government from 1887?? Wow, you’ll REALLY stretch history to try and make it seem like you’re a victim! Not to mention, the 1887 constitution hurt Asians more than anyone!!
Remember, the Kingdom was not a democracy with universal suffrage, even before 1887. It wasn’t until it was a part of the U.S. that all citizens were given the right to vote, regardless of income and property (and eventually sex).
Why do you blame the U.S. for the 1887 constitution?
My question to you is which Hawaiian history books have you read?
Daws, Kuykendall, Twigg-Smith…any others that you would suggest, I woulud also love to read.
Also I would like you to point out which “privileges” you claim that Hawaiians supposedly have with sources.
Um, okay, let’s try OHA and DHHL. No other racial group gets a block of money from the government, or the ability to lease lands for $1 a year (lottery of course). Do you really need me to look up their websites, or can you find them?
And if you think those are “rights”, can you demonstrate how non-kanaka maoli in hawai’i have those “rights”, or explain why they shouldn’t have those “rights”?
But were they invaded by the US? NO.
Of course they weren’t invaded by the US…but they WERE invaded, unlike Hawaii. The Kingdom of Hawai’i never fought any foreign powers, the kanaka maoli were never forced onto reservations, and your contention that the U.S. overthrew the queen is pro-royalist/Cleveland dogma that ignores the facts found in the Morgan report.
Even the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, section 307, granted U.S. citizenship to Guam’s population but the U.S. did NOT overthrow their form of government as it did to HAWAIIANS.
Again, the Organic act of 1900 did the same thing for ALL the people of Hawai’i – it was the Hawaiian people who overthrew their monarchy, established a republic, and begged the U.S. to let them join as a territory, fulfilling the wishes of Kamehameha III.
Not quite as they have their own government while Hawaiians’ nation was overthrown and the queen was imprisoned.
Actually, guam was invaded, and subjugated to a foreign power – they lived under occupation the entire time Spain controlled them. The queen was overthrown by hawaiian nationals and residents, and imprisoned for aiding and abetting a counter-coup. Certainly there were no US marines in Hawai’i from 1894-1898, during which time the Provisional Government and Republic held power…in fact, the US during most of that time tried to undermine the government of Hawai’i!
I agree but would add “greedily†as it was about money and power too.
Should we also add that adjective to the conquest of the islands by Kamehameha the Great? Of course it’s about money and power, all governments are. Sigh.
I disagree. Both Hawaiians and Chamorro have unique experiences… no one worse than the other.
Sorry, but you’re on really thin ground there. That’s like saying that the experience of black slaves and white plantation owners are “unique experiences”, and “no one worse than the other”.