|
Afro/Asian-Am Studies 443 - Mutual Perspectives in inter-minority
relations: Japanese Americans, Kanaka Maoli and the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement Page 2 |
|
The times of territorial rule over Hawaii represent a time of great racial and ethnic tension. Here the dynamics between Kanaka Maoli and Hawaii-born Japanese is again unified under the scrutiny and distrust applied to all non-Haole residents by the US government. In the case of the 100th battalion formation of Hawaiian-Japanese serves as a strong example for RCT as Hawaiian-Japanese redefine themselves as a group to prove their loyalty to the United States not merely as a source of greater positive social identity, but as a means of competition for a better stake in the American pie. There is one piece of information that weakens the RCT claim to this example: the fact that a significant number of "nisei" soldiers in the 100th and 442nd were of various ancestry, including Okinawan, Chinese, Portuguese, Korean, and of Native Hawaiian blood. -- Democratic Revolution, Statehood (1954-1972) Following the end of WWII, Hawaii-born Nisei (2nd generation Japanese) returned from both the European and Pacific Theaters war heroes. Either serving in the MIS (Military information services) or the 1399th Engineer corps in the Pacific, or the 100th Battalion or highly decorated 442nd Regimental Combat Team in Europe the Hawaiian Japanese returned to the islands and America in extremely favorable light proving their loyalty as Americans despite racism as seen in Roosevelt's 9066 relocation order, and overall anti-Japanese sentiments felt nationwide. Taking advantage of the GI bill, many attended college and returned to the islands with Bachelors degrees, which they used to establish successful businesses and professions. Others continued onto earn medical degrees, Law degrees, and PhDs. Here we begin to see a shift in the positive relations of the super ordinate goal as the power. In pursuit of an end to the last remnants of the plantation culture, the Democratic Party pushes the new cash cow industry of Hawaii, taking advantage of the exotic beauty of the islands and its culture. Tourism is addressed with the new booming American economy as Hawaii becomes the well packaged and commercialized vacation destination of the US. Backed by an powerful ILWU (International Longshoreman and Warehouseman Union), various trade unions, the Democratic Party, (consisting of an overwhelming majority of Nisei) wins the territorial election of 1954, and in 1959, Hawaii becomes the 50th state of the United States. It is a victory for the Democratic Party, one that Hawaiian-Japanese had been pushing for especially after the conclusion of WWII, as the only sure way for Hawaii-born Japanese to ensure their entitled rights as US citizens was through statehood. The final blow for the Kanaka Maoli, and an additional blow to the former Kingdom of Hawaii. And in 1962, a Nisei-backed Haole Democratic Governor is elected, both the house and the senate of the state legislature are Democratic, and a Nisei is sent to the US Senate, one Daniel K. Inouye. In the days post-statehood, a new Hawaiian-Japanese dominated economy began to push for the new alternate of the Sugar industry, namely that of Tourism. As the newly admitted state, aggressive advertising, and promotions, Hawaii became the vacation spot of many as the now booming US economy. For the Kanaka Maoli, it was the beginning of yet another exploitive force of the Native, feeding into capitalistic desires. However this time it was the new Nisei Democrats packed and sold the exoticism of Native Hawaiian culture, distorting and commercializing Hawaii. A total exploitation of culture, Trask says. In more recent years, visitors from the mainland US declined tandem with an increase in another rich tourist from another part of the world: Japan. In a study on Japanese investments in Hawaii circa 1970, the authors provide subtle evidence of favoritism towards Japanese investors, quite possibly due to the large (and now politically influential) Hawaiian-Japanese state government.
Also notable is the fact that between 1964 and the time of this study in 1972, liberalization of Japanese tourism under the formerly tight Foreign exchange and foreign trade control law, the spending limit for each citizen abroad was raised from $500 per year to $600 per person, and then to $3000 in 1971, and ultimately eliminated in 1972. in 1973 the requirement that all transportation fees were to be paid in yen was also eliminated. It is almost safe to say that the Nisei Democratic party had something to do with this liberalization.
It would appear that the Hawaiian-Japanese sold out to their Japanese counterparts as a result of implied loyalty based on blood ties to the mother country. The RCT shift here is arguably apparent as the new exploiter of the Kanaka Maoli is in fact their former fellow recipient of Haole oppression. -- Tourism, Hawaiian Sovereignty (1972-present day) Inspired by new visions of self determination from the American civil rights movement on the mainland fueled by what was known as the "Hawaiian Renaissance" in the 60s and 70s, when Native Hawaiians began to search and rediscover the "old" ways of their culture, previously hidden and damned by Christianity and western imperialism, commercialized and exploited by modern day capitalism. In recent years young Kanaka Maoli activists have verbally attacked the not only the institutions, but the people that have emerged over the past 200 years since first western contact with Hawaii, gradually decimating Kanaka Maoli in every aspect of existence, cultural, religious, economic, socially, to the point that they find themselves strangers and second-class citizens in their own ancestral lands. This time was marked with a resurgence of ancient dances, chants, song, art, ocean voyaging, language and religion, as well as economic and political revival as Kanaka Maoli gained legislative support towards the perpetuation of the Hawaiian culture and future. It was also a time of activism, as Kanaka Maoli rallied in defense of Hawaiian residents in Kalama valley faced eviction at the hands of the powerful Bishop Estate, established communities on ancestral lands ceded to the Federal government during the overthrow, as seen in the much regarded peaceful occupation of Kaho'olawe, the smallest island in the chain that had been turned over to the US military for target practice. The conflict between the groups in modern times is very well expressed by Haunani-Kay Trask, political firebrand, tenured Professor, intellectual activist for the Hawaiian Sovereignty movement on her views of non-natives in Hawaii:
The paradigm presented in discussing the Hawaiian sovereignty movement is to put myself, as well as every person of color from such a context as beneficiaries of "white privilege" at the costs of the indigenous peoples, namely Native Americans and Native Hawaiians. When it comes to the rights and sovereignty of indigenous peoples, the large majority of Americans suddenly find themselves as either exploiters, or beneficiaries of western imperial privilege. The plight of the native Hawaiian and the Native American is all too often cast aside or brushed under the table, diluted in the "melting pot" with an overwhelming mixture of not just Anglo-Saxon, but Asian, African, and Latino stocks. As we come to modern times in Hawaii, the apparent power shift in the racial hierarchy in Hawaii has gone throughout history from that of the Kanaka Maoli, the indigenous people, to the western American and British plantation owners and missionaries, and then finally to the Hawaii-born Japanese. Throughout this journey the unifying quality of RCT pertaining to unions of different groups rallying along a common goal can be seen as both the Kanaka Maoli and the Hawaii-born Japanese are oppressed by the Haole, and we see today that the Hawaiian Japanese have become the "new Haole" so to say, further holding back the Native. However I am not convinced entirely by the explanation that RCT provides outside of this micro-level example of super ordinate unity of the Native and the Japanese against the Haole that was once apparent, but then lost. My first contact with Hawaiian Sovereignty came in 1991 when activists and demonstrators all over Hawaii anticipating the 100th anniversary of the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom began to make their presence known. It was moving times in retrospect; one of rediscovery and learning of the course of history that had brought the islands to the status that it exists in today, as the 50th state of the United States of America. Well instilled through the educational institutions as well as through our family was the origin of contemporary Hawaiian society seen today as remnant of the Haole (White) dominated plantation system, the ironical promoter of a the racist and paternalistic system of divide and conquer that eventually gave way to a hybridized blend of more than a dozen different ethnic groups including the Haole. Though time and struggles, the descendants of former coolie laborers and contracted workers have found themselves at an elevated status in society, no longer under the complete domination to the Haole. Supported by legislation spearheaded by the Hawaiian Democrats and largely with the National influence of Senator Daniel Inouye, with cries of "Imua" (Forward!) and "Onipa'a" (stand steadfast) it seemed fitting that finally the people representing the native Hawaiian culture who had been dispossessed almost a century ago, could have a chance at reclaiming their dignity as well as expressing their sheer anger at the wrongs of an imperialistic and racist time. My further study and interest in Hawaiian Sovereignty came on a more intellectual level came at the University level in doing a Persuasive-Informative speech for a Communication class; responding to the somewhat apathetic feedback I got from the class inspired me to become more active in the student organizations on campus, and in time had the chance to address issues of Hawaiian Sovereignty with other groups who shared a similar interest as indigenous people themselves, namely the Native American and Native Chicano/a groups. Yet still attempting to learn and understand the racial climate of the mainland US in inter-minority relations prevented me from pushing blindly in an attempt participating in the Native Hawaiian cause. Namely it was the overall question of my motives for pushing the cause came into internal scrutiny for a simple, yet somewhat painful fact: I have no Native blood. In the eyes of sovereignty activist such as the Trask sisters, the non-native has no place in the movement towards the Kanaka Maolis' self-determination. Following a similar RCT approach, Haunani-Kay goes as far as to say that all non-native help is ultimately fruitless, and detrimental to the cause.
Trask mentions "White people" specifically. Applying the theories of RCT to the current inter-group dynamics between the Kanaka Maoli and Hawaii-born Japanese within the context of Hawaiian Sovereignty is extremely difficult for a number of reasons. On many facets as the theory applies to a more traditional model of two-group interactions, given the complicated history of race relations in the islands as well as the overlying presence of not only a third, fourth, but 7th 8th and 12th parties stand as a statement that both theories are limited in their explanations, although evidently useful. One cannot ignore of course, the most influential outside group that influences the interactions between Hawaiian and Japanese, namely the Haole. As a Yonsei (4th generation) descendent of Okinawan, Chinese, and Japanese ancestry I enjoyed a solid middle-class upbringing, living in the affluent neighborhood of Manoa valley. I have uncles who served in the 100th and the 442nd who benefit today from not only their GI bill-financed college educations, but from the respect and loyalty that the local community instills upon them. I had the privilege of attending and graduating from Punahou, the prestigious Honolulu school that traditionally served the children of the elite Haole Missionaries and Plantation Owners, which without a doubt directly assisted me in attending the college up here in Madison. In almost every aspect I do represent the prototype for Kanaka Maoli animosity of the Japanese-American continues the institutionalized oppression and racism against the native people formerly inflicted by the dreaded Haole. From the perspective of a Hawaiian-Japanese, the target of potential Kanaka Maoli animosity according to RCT-I stand convinced, and almost afraid, guilty perhaps. However, I am still not convinced that things are this simple. I must add that it came with a wave of initial frustration in the similarities of a western theory of RCT and a native saying of the 'alamihi, as I have always been disturbed by theory that contradicts personal examples, especially exceptions to the rule. However a second glance and interpretation of the saying brought me to a more unifying light-as that interactions between groups exist as a natural part of existence, theories such as RCT serve as but one perspective, and that alone. In search of evidence in history in support of RCT I have in a sense created an argument that sits quite soundly with an idea that quite possibly be as foreign and exploitive as the diseases that were brought by Captain Cook aboard a great white ship set sail in the pacific more than 200 years ago. I have actually struggled and searched for examples to support claim to this theory in the history of interactions between but two of the dozens of classifications that can be drawn in the construct of Hawaii. The fact of the matter is that although I may have found some evidence to support these claims, there is no doubt another layer and another example to be found that may in fact be the exception to the rule. Valid and invalid points can be brought to light in any explanation, any theory-yet at the end of this semester in a class on race relations, discussing countless examples of ambiguous interactions between people of a variety of different colors, backgrounds, ethnicities, shapes and sizes, I can't help but sometimes wonder which is the bigger and more dangerous 'alamihi crab in this bucket of ours, the Hawaiian Japanese, the Kanaka Maoli, the Haole? Or is it the idea? Ariyoshi, George R., With Obligation to All, Ariyoshi Foundation of Hawai'i, © 1997 Burrows, Edwin G., Hawaiian Americans: an account of the mingling of Japanese, Chinese, Polynesian, and American Cultures, Yale University Press, © 1947 Chang, Uncle Joe, "Racism and Hawaiian Sovereignty", Ke Kia'i September 30, 1992 Haas, Michael, Institutional Racism: The Case of Hawaii, Praeger Press, © 1992 Heller, H. Robert, Heller, Emily E., Japanese Investment in the United States: With a Case Study of the Hawaiian Experience, Praeger Puvlishers, © 1974 Inouye, Daniel K., Elliot, Lawrence, Journey to Washington, Prentice-Hall, Inc., © 1967 Kanahele, George Hu'eu Sanford, Ku Kanaka Stand Tall: A search for Hawaiian values, University of Hawaii Press ©1986 Nakanishi, Don T., Hirano-Nakanishi, Marsha, The Education of Asian and Pacific Americans: Historical Perspectives and Prescriptions for the Future, Oryx Press, © 1983 Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Onipa'a: Five Days in the History of the Hawaiian Nation-Centennial Observance of the Overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, © 1994 Ogawa, Dennis, Kodomo no tame ni: For the sake of the children The Japanese American Experience in Hawaii, University Press of Hawaii, © 1978 Pratt, Richard C., Smith, Zachary, Hawaii Politics and Government: An American State in a Pacific World, University of Nebraska Press, © 2000 Rampell, Ed, "Three Faces of Sovereignty: Hawaiian Nationalists Debate the Nature of Self-Rule and Indigenous Citizenry", Hawaii Magazine, April 1995 pg 74-79 Sakamoto, Edward, Hawaii No Ka Oi: The Kamiya Family Trilogy, University of Hawaii Press, © 1995 Stockes, Brian, "Senate Committee passes Hawaiian recognition bill", Indian Country Today (Lakota Times), September 27, 2000 Tamura, Eileen H., Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity: The Nisei Generation in Hawaii, University of Illinois Press, © 1994 Tehranian, Majid, Restructuring for Ethnic Peace: A Public Debate at the University of Hawaii, Spark M. Matsunaga Institute for Peace, University of Hawaii, © 1991 Trask, Haunani-Kay, From a Native Daughter: Colonialism and Sovereignty in Hawaii, Common Courage Press, ©1993 Trask, Haunani-Kay, Light in the Crevice Never Seen, Calx Books, Corvalis, Oregon, ©1994 Twigg-Smith, Thurston, Hawaiian Sovereignty: Do the Facts Matter?, Goodale Publishing, © 1998 Various Reader Letters, regarding Hawaiian Sovereignty, Honolulu Star Bulletin, 1997-2000 Whittaker, Elvi, The Mainland HAOLE: The White Experience in Hawaii, Columbia University Press © 1986 Wittermans-Pino, Elizabeth, Inter-Ethnic Relations in A Plural Society, Geboren Te Surabaja, Indonesie, 1964 Wood, Houston, Displacing Natives: The rhetorical production of Hawaii, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, © 1999 Yamamoto, Eric, Ilima, Chris, "The Colonizer's Story: The Supreme Court violates Native Hawaiian Sovereignty - Again", Colorlines July 7, 2000< < < < < Page 1 |