It has been 6 decades since Hawaii officially became the 50th state within the United States of America.
At the time, there was much enthusiasm and excitement.
But since then? Nothing, nada!
There aren't going to be any celebrations of statehood this time around. There wasn't even any when the 50th anniversary came up one decade ago.
Circumstances have changed drastically since the time leading up to statehood.
In the years leading up to statehood, memories of the Pearl Harbor attacks were still fresh in people's minds! With this type of fear, people get very clingy to who they view as a protector. The US was seen as a protector against Japanese warplanes. Even though Japan was no longer a threat by the time statehood came around, it was the Cold War, and there was a fear of a potential Russian takeover. The clinginess to the US as a protector was still there.
The clinginess to the US as a protector is still here being that people are now afraid of Chinese and North Korean attacks. I will write more about that issue later in this blog post
---------
Much of the world has changed since Hawaii gained statehood.
When many people in Hawaii were lobbying for statehood, much of the world was still under the control of European empires.
At the time, many countries of Asia has recently gained independence from the European overlords.
However, much of Africa, Caribbean and Pacific Islands were still under European control when Hawaii gained statehood.
That was all about to change in the following 2 decades.
In the 1960s and 1970s, the majority of Africa went from being European territories to being newly independent nations. By 1979, Rhodesia became Zimbabwe, and most of Africa was now under African control, with the exceptions being South Africa & Namibia, both controlled by descendants of European settlers instead of being directly controlled by a European country. By 1994, both countries were now under African control.
The British Empire, with holdings in every continent, was once so huge that the saying "the sun never sets in the British Empire" wasn't much of an exaggeration. However, since 1959, the British Empire has basically withdrawn from even much of their smaller possessions in the Caribbean & Pacific Islands, giving independence to places like Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad & Tobago, Fiji, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Solomon Islands and more. The British also gave up possession of Hong Kong to China, though in that case, they should've given them independence instead.
The French still have island possessions in the Caribbean (Guadeloupe, Martinique) and the Pacific (Tahiti, New Caledonia).
That leaves the world's last superpower, the United States of America, as the main colonizer of the Caribbean (Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands) and the Pacific (Guam, Saipan, American Samoa, and of course, Hawaii). While much of the Micronesian islands are technically "independent", the COFA treaty which is known for allowing easy migration, also gives the US ultimate control of their military & trade policies.
With the worldwide decolonization since 1959 and the US civil rights movement and the anti-war movement occurring at the same time, there has been a change of consciousness in Hawaii, especially among the Native Hawaiians. With other places becoming independent, many Native Hawaiians started to question why they remain under the control of a colonizing superpower that treats people with non-European ancestries as second-class citizens. They started to be more assertive in protesting the military abuse of their lands, which includes the bombing practices in Kahoolawe (which ended in 1990) and the continued live-fire training in Makua and Pohakuloa.
The 1970s was an era of the Hawaiian Renaissance, a time of increased cultural pride inspired by the Black Power Movement in the US. There was also the rise of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement, with different groups with different demands (ranging from a desire for a tribal government similar to the Native American reservations, to full independence).
As with every movement, there have been radicals known to alienate the general public. In the 1990s, the most notorious figure in the Hawaiian sovereignty movement was Haunani-Kay Trask who called those in Hawaii of non-native ancestries "uninvited guests" and expressed zero sympathy for those of European ancestries who were victimized by hate crimes. Being that Native Hawaiians in Hawaii are outnumbered by Japanese, Filipino and European-American ancestries, basic math should tell you that alienating the non-native population just isn't going to give you the results that the sovereignty activists want. You actually have to convince the non-native population that Hawaiian independence is a good idea, and you can't do that by yelling "f------ haole" or "uninvited guests" all the time.
Idiot activists allegedly aligned with social justice movements sometimes yell "it's not my job to educate you" when confronted by disagreement from those of different races. But if you actually want results, then it is your job to educate others!
If you want better results, you have to educate others in the why and the how to get the results you want.
Some say that's not fair. Life isn't fair! Therefore, in an unfair life, you have to be strategic in figuring out how to best get your results.
That means educating others instead of whining "it's not my job to educate you" when confronted by even the most minor disagreement.
The reason the anti-TMT movement on Mauna Kea has been getting support is that the organizers have set protocols to keep the movement not only nonviolent but also inviting towards people of all ancestries. In general, the leaders on Mauna Kea have avoided anti-haole rants and instead emphasized the respect for the sacredness of Mauna Kea and the respect for indigenous cultures.
(online comments have been a different story, as online forums allow people to hide behind fake names while saying the vilest things towards people who dare even express the mildest of disagreement).
====================
Going back to 1959, statehood was put up for a vote. The only choices presented were to
- remain a territory
- become a state
What wasn't an option on the ballot was independence.
Statehood was seen as an improvement over being a territory, being that at least you can send senators & representatives to US Congress, you can now vote for US president.
But the fact remains that as a state, your senators & representatives are only a few of many who decide on the taxes you pay to the empire ruling over you.
As an independent nation, our tax revenues stay here. We no longer have to send our tax revenues far away to have senators & representatives from other states argue over what to do with them.
Many in Hawaii fear independence because that means no more federal funds. We have a drug-like dependency on federal funds. Even in the organization I work at depends on federal funds for which we pay for our resources.
A transition towards independence would ideally require that the amount we're taxed by the federal government would instead be added to the amount we're taxed by the state government. So (I'm just saying random numbers as an example), if we're currently taxed at 15% by the state and 8% by the feds, then in our transition towards independence, we should just be taxed 23% by the newly independent government.
This would also require lobbying of our representatives in the newly independent government to pay for the resources that were once paid for by the feds.
So if your local school is currently using federal funds for resources, then in the transition, we have to lobby the newly independent government to provide those same resources that were once provided by the feds.
As time goes on, the independent government would adjust the tax rates and the resources provided according to the changing circumstances of our times.
But at least by then, we no have to pay for projects outside of Hawaii (ie the border wall, overseas wars, etc), so in the long run, we might even be paying less in taxes.
With independence, we are no longer under the restrictions of the Jones Act, an outdated law from the 1920s that require only US ships go from one US port to another. With independence, any ship can from Hawaii to any US port. This means lower costs to us.
With independence, we are also no longer hostage to Trump's tariffs. Those tariffs (which allegedly "protects" US jobs) forces higher prices on imported goods on us, and they don't really protect jobs here in Hawaii. With all due respect to workers on the continental US, "protecting" their jobs shouldn't be Hawaii's priority. If individuals in Hawaii want to continue buying goods from the continental USA, then that's their choice which I respect. But many of us in Hawaii are dealing with our high cost of living, and if that means buying goods from China, Mexico, Philippines, etc is more cost-efficient to us, then we should be allowed to access those goods without interference.
==========
The other major reason many people in Hawaii are reluctant to become independent is the fear of being unprotected by the US military. There is a fear that if we're not under the umbrella of US protection, we would be conquered by China. That is a legit concern.
However, the US involvement in foreign affairs also makes Hawaii vulnerable. There's a reason North Korea hasn't threaten to shoot nuclear missile towards Tonga or Fiji. Both are independent nations that mind their own business. However, Hawaii (as well as Guam) is a potential target for retaliation because of our imperial overlords keep getting involved in other people's business.
Hawaii has a National Guard, so we do have some military infrastructure we can build upon. As I mentioned in previous blog posts, an independent Hawaii can collaborate with other Pacific islands in providing for our own defenses.
Convincing Hawaii's population about how this defense plan would benefit us would be THE greatest challenge in getting them to support independence.
====
My other blog posts on the topic of Hawaii independence
"personal evolution on my thoughts on US foreign policy, patriotism, imperialism and Hawaii independence"
https://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2018/05/personal-evolution-on-my-thoughts-on-us.html"Hawaiian independence movement: venting strategically vs venting recklessly"
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2018/01/hawaiian-independence-movement-venting.html"It's time for Hawaii to declare independence (post-Trump election)"
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2016/11/its-time-for-hawaii-to-declare.html"A petition to Make Hawaii Independent Again"
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2016/11/a-petition-to-make-hawaii-independent.html"my letter to the newspaper: Hawaii, independence and prosperity"
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2016/12/my-letter-to-newspaper-hawaii.html====
News articles recently published about Hawaii's statehood
from today's newspaper
Susan Essoyan, “Hawaii Hits 6-0 as a State Without Fanfare,” Honolulu Star-Advertiser, August 16, 2019,
(note: on the print edition, the article is titled "Holiday Ho-Hum")
https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/08/16/hawaii-news/hawaii-hits-6-0-as-a-state-without-fanfare/?HSA=94a8ca1c9823459e5ff9d36fe56b11051c548dcf
A quote from former Hawaii governor John Waihee
In an interview, Waihee remembered when news of statehood arrived in his hometown on the Hamakua coast of Hawaii island, when he was 13.“What I remember most about statehood was the celebration,” Waihee said. “The people literally celebrated. I remember taking off to go walk around Honokaa town and listen to the cars driving up and down the street, honking and celebrating.”“Nobody said we were celebrating because we are now part of the United States — we were already part of the United States,” he said. “What we didn’t have was equal rights like the rest of the country.”
Hawaii residents couldn’t elect their own governor and had just a nonvoting delegate in Congress, not their own senator or representatives. Statehood changed that and many other aspects of life in the islandslater in the article, more from Waihee
Waihee said another factor also puts a damper on the subject of statehood.
“There are some people who claim that the arrival of statehood for Hawaii somehow justified the illegal overthrow of Queen Lili‘uokalani,” he said. “I think that’s kind of revisionist bunk.”
“People like my father and other Native Hawaiians worked very, very hard supporting the concept of statehood,” Waihee said. “If they believed for a second that it had anything to do with the overthrow, they would not have been supporting it. What they believed was we would finally have a better deal.”
The article mentioned that there is only one celebration of statehood publicly scheduled for today, this hosted by Eric Ryan, a local right-wing conservative.
That last sentence reminds me of the controversial statement by retired abusive basketball coach Bobby Knight who claimed that if you're being raped, you might as well enjoy it.A group of Republicans, disappointed that they could not find any official events, have booked space at Bubba Gump Shrimp Co. at Ala Moana for a reservation- only dinner for about 60 people in honor of Admission Day.“We’re a state now for 60 years, and it seems like we ought to set off some fireworks or something,” said Eric Ryan, president of the Hawaii Republican Assembly and an organizer of the event. “It’s kind of a shame that everyone’s hiding under their desks. … We are still very proud to be American and proud to be Hawaiians in the statehood sense. There’s no real turning back, so we might as well enjoy it.”
More from Eric Ryan
Ironically, Ryan, who is is staging the Bubba Gump celebration, says his mother was one of the 6% who voted against statehood in 1959. “She didn’t want Hawaii to be hooked on federal money,” he said.
Ryan's mother was correct, Hawaii has become too hooked on federal money since statehood. If Eric Ryan was serious about fiscal conservatism, he would advocate for Hawaii's independence as a way for Hawaii to become more fiscally conservative. The only way to end the addiction to federal funds is to cut off the supply.
Also from the article, comments from U.H. dean and pro-independence activist Jonathan Osorio.
Jonathan Osorio, dean of the Hawai‘inuiakea School of Hawaiian Knowledge at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, harks back to the overthrow to underscore why statehood is not celebrated today as it was in 1959.
“The most important change from then has been the issue of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement that understands the fraudulence of statehood and discusses it openly — and it’s not just some fringe movement,” he said.
“It starts with the intimidation and the takeover of a nation state that was fully recognized by all the other nation states in the world,” Osorio said. “It then moves on into the way in which Hawaii was taken off the list of non self-governing territories in 1958, which allowed the United States then to present Hawaii as eligible for statehood when in fact Hawaii was eligible for decolonization.”
“There is no way you can have a ‘celebration’ of this without then running into a good deal of pushback,” he said. “It’s really kind of similar to the way people think about Columbus in the 21st century.”===================
An article from yesterday's newspaper.
Kioni Dudley, Leon Siu, and Poka Laenui, “Statehood Questioned at Hawaii’s 60th,” Honolulu Star-Advertiser, August 15, 2019,
https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/08/15/editorial/island-voices/statehood-questioned-at-hawaiis-60th/.
In 1945, the United States, as a founding member of the United Nations, accepted all U.N. Charter obligations. As a nation with Territories, under Article 73 of the Charter, it took on, “as a sacred trust, the obligation to … develop self-government” for the descendants of the nations it had occupied. The U.S. did this for some territories. But in Hawaii, it did just the opposite. Our people achieving “the full measure of self-governance” was never mentioned. The statehood vote offered only movement from a U.S. Territory to a U.S. state. Total absorption rather than required liberation.The ballot wording was bogus. U.N. Resolution 742 (VIII), adopted in 1953, required that plebiscites offer “freedom of choosing between several possibilities, including independence.” The wording of the statehood ballot question was: “Shall Hawaii immediately be admitted into the Union as a State?”The only possible answers were “Yes” and “No.” No option for independence was provided. The vote did not comply with the Charter or Resolution 742.
more from the article
The official report states that 94% of voters supported statehood, but the facts are quite different. The 94% only counts the “yes” and “no” votes cast.
When blank ballots are included, only 77% of those who voted actually voted for statehood. But even more shocking is that, in the most important election ever held in Hawaii, only 35% of those of eligible age actually registered and turned up at the polls. Sixty-five percent “voted with their feet” against statehood by staying home. When the blank votes and “votes with their feet” are factored in, only 27% of eligible voters cast a “yes” vote, far below the 50% required to win.
America knew that the UN would soon pass its “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonized Countries and Peoples.” Great pressure would mount to liberate Hawaii. The statehood vote was a sham to quickly secure United Nations approval for U.S. permanent retention of Hawaii — just 12 months and two days before the Declaration was passed.
