Check out this paper from the The Hawaiian Journal of History “‘Aole Hoohui ia Hawaii’: U.S. Collegiate Teams Debate Annexation of Hawai‘i and Independence Prevails, 1893 to 1897” by Ronald C. Williams, Jr.
Conclusion
There is absolutely no doubt that at the time of the proposed annexation of Hawai‘i by the United States, voices of opposition, in both nations, were present, numerous, and made heard in a plethora of differing forums ranging from the popular to the academic. These voices were neither hidden nor made inaccessible to historians. How then, could our late 20th century national narrative speak of a trouble free and accordant union?
In the Hawaiian language newspaper account of the 1894 George townColumbian debate, the editor of the paper, after translating the Washington Post story, wrote:
HE HOAILONA KEIA
E ka lahui Hawaii; ke olelo nei makou: E like me ka hana ana a na kula o Kaleponi i paio ai no keia ninau o Hawaii, a hoole lakou mamua: mahope mai koho ka Ahaolelo Makaainana o Amerika e apono ana i ko Cleveland hoole i ke kuikahi hoohui aina; pela no ke koho ana ma keia ninau ma ka Aha Senate mahope o ka apono ia ana o ka ke kula o Georgetown.
THIS IS A SIGN
To the Hawaiian people; We say: Like where the schools of California debated this question concerning Hawai‘i, and negated it beforehand: following that, America’s House of Representatives voted to approve Cleveland’s refusal of the annexation treaty: The vote will go the same on this question in the Senate, following the approval from those at the University of Georgetown.
The overjoyed editor of Nupepa Ka Oiaio, in telling the story of debates held in a foreign country over the fate of his nation, implored his fellow citizens to see this result as a hoailona [sign]. He urged his countrymen to action and hoped that this victory would be carried on to the halls of the United States Senate and that his paper would soon be able to print the headline “LANAKILA” [VICTORY]. Yet imperial passions, fanned by the Spanish-American War in 1898, were to over power the morality and justice arguments and bring about the taking of the Islands.
These voices, this testimony, were silenced in order to justify a United States governmental policy that many Americans had seen as valuing pragmatism over morality. A need to stifle future debate concerning these decisions led to the production of “clean” histories concerning the taking of Hawai‘i. Photos of smiling crowds attending Annexation Day ceremonies quickly made their way to the U.S. and celebratory headlines filled newspapers throughout the country.
Less than two months after Annexation Day in Hawai‘i, representatives from the United States and Spain met in Paris to negotiate a treaty that would end the Spanish-American War, cede former Spanish colonies to the United States, and signify America’s emergence as a dominant power on the world stage. Hawai‘i’s role as a coaling station and staging point during the war would be trumpeted. The budding national narrative would praise the decision to take Hawai‘i and leave behind any mention of contention. As later involvement in World Wars I and II demanded a unified nation, this cohesive narrative was amplified as leaders in the United States and Hawai‘i sought to represent the islands as truly an American place. Popular and academic histories, including newspapers, radio and television shows, tourism materials and school textbooks, drove the production of the harmonious narrative and worked to displace stories of dissension. These voices were left behind in order to convince newly “annexed” peoples to leave the love of their own lāhui [nation] behind, to further a cry for statehood, and to conceal a stolen nation from modern day claims of Kānaka Maoli seeking recognition of the occupation of their nation.
But those voices, and many others, are being heard clearly today.
[…]
A big Mahalo for this article…I’m always pleasantly suprized by what I read here…well, when there is encouraging posts. Now, I work at the Hilton in Waikiki; and I believe this is not a thing that needs to be kept secret. Anyway, I have been meeting tourists who have volunteered in conversation, about the history of Hawai’i, by using the word “occupation” and “occupied” by the United States when describing the history of Hawai’i. You could have knocked me over with a feather! I did nothing “by thought word or deed”-to use the old Anglican phrase to encourage them to say this or reach this conclusion. They did it all on their own….and it’s happened several times….kupaianaha!
Glad to see the debate going on out in the open.
May Puakea Nogelmier be successful in getting the Hawaiian Newspapers transcribed. They’re very important reference material.
And the whitewashing of History goes on. And what’s being covered up? American greed, control and dominion. Take and call it something else. Destroy and make money on it. Kill and give it a holiday. Truth? Not relevant.
As a first time visitor to Hawai’i last week, I have to say that the most memorable and most eye opening experiece we had was visiting Iolani Palace on Tuesday. Here on the mainland, we don’t hear about the occupation or about the groups of people who are trying to gain independence from the US. When people started gathering, I was approached by someone (I think his name was Nine?). He was very friendly and open about explaining what was going on without being aggressive. I was impressed by how peaceful and organized everything was, how friendly everyone was to this outsider, how beautiful the singing was and how beautiful everyone looked in their native dress and tattoo’s. I’m so glad my children and I were able to experience this and learn about it. Now we can point it out to others who don’t know. Mahalo!