Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hawaiian Encyclopedia is a great resource for people interested in Hawaiian history. I've been reading all about Kamehameha's rise to power, his alliances with certain chiefs, his rivalries with others, and the many fights and battles he went through on his way to creating himself as the supreme monarch over all the Hawaiian Islands.
And then came the dramas of the family dynasty he created, as it weakened and became corrupt over the next 70 years or so and then finally played out with K5's death in 1972, and the following trudge toward the end of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893.
In the process I came across some figures about the demographics of Hawai'i at the end of the 1800s that startled me. Without having any information to the contrary, it's easy to populate my mental picture of the Hawaiian population of the day with the kind of people I see around the state today. But in fact the demographics were quite different than they are today. So much so that I wonder if the people of this Hawaiian Separatist movement have considered other alternatives to their dream of putting Native Hawaiians back in charge via the International Courts.
First, Native Hawaiians were already a minority in their own land by the end of the century, comprising only 25% of the population by the time of the 1900 Census. The largest demographic group were the Japanese, at 40%; followed by the Chinese at 16%; and Portuguese at 12%; while Caucasians, surprisingly, were only 5%. The way Native Hawaiians stayed in power in their "democratic monarchy" of a country was to deny the vote to the Japanese, et al.
So follow this... if in some alternate universe the International Courts were to intervene on behalf of Native Hawaiians and roll the calendar on Hawaiian government back to 1893, they would certainly also impose the ideals of a true democracy on the situation and give everyone the vote equally. That would put the Japanese into the majority, and with a little coalition building they could easily become a super-majority, able to do whatever they wanted to politically, no matter what the Native Hawaiians wanted, including the possibility of having Hawai'i become a territory... of Japan!
Think that's a crazy idea? That was a real fear in many quarters in the early 1900s.
My point being that the basic premise of Hawaiian nationalists, that somehow by a miraculous court order we could magically go back to an earlier, simpler time, with Native Hawaiians in charge, could actually turn out very differently than they imagine if it were ever to come to pass.
...
So follow this... if in some alternate universe the International Courts were to intervene on behalf of Native Hawaiians and roll the calendar on Hawaiian government back to 1893, they would certainly also impose the ideals of a true democracy on the situation and give everyone the vote equally. That would put the Japanese into the majority, and with a little coalition building they could easily become a super-majority, able to do whatever they wanted to politically, no matter what the Native Hawaiians wanted, including the possibility of having Hawai'i become a territory... of Japan!
...
Excellent point OpenD. Wish I could rep you again!
I wonder if Iowaloha is going to read this and decide that they better go ahead and learn some Japanese just incase!
Hawaiian Encyclopedia is a great resource for people interested in Hawaiian history. I've been reading all about Kamehameha's rise to power, his alliances with certain chiefs, his rivalries with others, and the many fights and battles he went through on his way to creating himself as the supreme monarch over all the Hawaiian Islands.
And then came the dramas of the family dynasty he created, as it weakened and became corrupt over the next 70 years or so and then finally played out with K5's death in 1972, and the following trudge toward the end of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893.
The Kamehameha dynasty would've never been established without the assistance of Isaac Davis and John Young. Along with military "know-how", Davis and Young introduced the idea of a "British-style" monarchy to Kamehameha. As I mentioned in an earlier post, it's a little difficult to maintain a hereditary dynasty when there are few "legitimate" heirs. And, Kamehameha V died without naming a heir in 1872, not 1972.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenD
In the process I came across some figures about the demographics of Hawai'i at the end of the 1800s that startled me. Without having any information to the contrary, it's easy to populate my mental picture of the Hawaiian population of the day with the kind of people I see around the state today. But in fact the demographics were quite different than they are today. So much so that I wonder if the people of this Hawaiian Separatist movement have considered other alternatives to their dream of putting Native Hawaiians back in charge via the International Courts.
First, Native Hawaiians were already a minority in their own land by the end of the century, comprising only 25% of the population by the time of the 1900 Census. The largest demographic group were the Japanese, at 40%; followed by the Chinese at 16%; and Portuguese at 12%; while Caucasians, surprisingly, were only 5%. The way Native Hawaiians stayed in power in their "democratic monarchy" of a country was to deny the vote to the Japanese, et al.
Considering that few Japanese men were eligible to vote in Japan until the General Election Law of 1925 and that Japanese women were denied suffrage in Japan until 1946, the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi wasn't prepared give "resident aliens" more rights than they possessed in their native country. Unfortunately, the 1887 "Bayonet Constitution" of Hawaiʻi did just that -- give "resident aliens" (except for Asians) the right to vote. The "Bayonet Constitution" was authored by Lorrin A. Thurston who pretty much "ran the show" (along with his cronies) right up to the death of Kalākaua.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenD
So follow this... if in some alternate universe the International Courts were to intervene on behalf of Native Hawaiians and roll the calendar on Hawaiian government back to 1893, they would certainly also impose the ideals of a true democracy on the situation and give everyone the vote equally. That would put the Japanese into the majority, and with a little coalition building they could easily become a super-majority, able to do whatever they wanted to politically, no matter what the Native Hawaiians wanted, including the possibility of having Hawai'i become a territory... of Japan!
Think that's a crazy idea? That was a real fear in many quarters in the early 1900s.
My point being that the basic premise of Hawaiian nationalists, that somehow by a miraculous court order we could magically go back to an earlier, simpler time, with Native Hawaiians in charge, could actually turn out very differently than they imagine if it were ever to come to pass.
Hawaiian nationalists that want to roll the calendar back to 1893 haven't studied Hawaiian history in-depth. Lili'uokalani wanted to roll the calendar back to 1887 by abrogating the "Bayonet Constitution", which was one of the main factors that led to her overthrow.
Whats interesting is when Cook arrived there were about 800,000 Native Hawai'ians on the islands. At the time of the vote for statehood there was 82,000 Native Hawaiians, big difference from 800,000. What happened?
we might consider that the 1950 census for the population of Hawaii was 499,769 while the 1960 census for the population of Hawaii was 632,772, the median age being 38. Not taking into account the population growth from the date of the plebiscite vote (June 27th 1959) to 1960 when the nearest census was completed, or the breakdown of age eligibility for voting, that leaves about 500,000 people (total) unaccounted for. Although the census does not include the military, many of whom did participate in the vote, roughly only about 35% of the total population actually voted "yes" or "no" on the plebiscit
f we conservatively remove 250,972—a third of the population—as being ineligible to vote because of age, we are left with roughly 381,859 eligible voters. Examining the data, one could argue that out of the 474,580 who were eligible to vote in 1959, 341,800. —or roughly 65%— did not vote in favor of statehood.
What this suggests is that those who did not participate in the primary election either did not care about the statehood results, or were not informed about the process enough to participate in the vote. The underwhelming turnout for something so important is of concern. Considering that the State of Hawaii cites this plebiscite vote as determinate proof of public support for statehood.
Whats interesting is when Cook arrived there were about 800,000 Native Hawai'ians on the islands. At the time of the vote for statehood there was 82,000 Native Hawaiians, big difference from 800,000. What happened?
Do they not really teach you about the population impact when Cook arrived in school here in Hawaii?
Because of European contact, contagious diseases such as cholera, measles and gonorrhea, decimated the Hawaiian population. The population was estimated at between 250,000 to 1 million when Captain Cook sailed into Kealakakua in 1779. By 1848 Hawaiians numbered 88,000.
Because of European contact, contagious diseases such as cholera, measles and gonorrhea, decimated the Hawaiian population. The population was estimated at between 250,000 to 1 million when Captain Cook sailed into Kealakakua in 1779. By 1848 Hawaiians numbered 88,000.
Mahalo viper i know, i wantted to have people think. Out of all the negative events in history to the native people of Hawai'i. What do all the events have in common?
Whats interesting is when Cook arrived there were about 800,000 Native Hawai'ians on the islands. At the time of the vote for statehood there was 82,000 Native Hawaiians, big difference from 800,000. What happened?
There is a dvd I recommend you watch called, "Conquest Of Hawaii".
The Kamehameha dynasty would've never been established without the assistance of Isaac Davis and John Young. Along with military "know-how", Davis and Young introduced the idea of a "British-style" monarchy to Kamehameha.
Thanks, Jonah. You always illuminate the discourse beautifully with your in-depth knowledge.
Quote:
As I mentioned in an earlier post, it's a little difficult to maintain a hereditary dynasty when there are few "legitimate" heirs. And, Kamehameha V died without naming a heir in 1872, not 1972.
Thanks for catching the typo. Darned spell-check never catches my "wrong century" errors.
Quote:
Hawaiian nationalists that want to roll the calendar back to 1893 haven't studied Hawaiian history in-depth. Lili'uokalani wanted to roll the calendar back to 1887 by abrogating the "Bayonet Constitution", which was one of the main factors that led to her overthrow.
I have not found an abundance of scholarship in any of the activists' websites or postings. They each seem to have a different version of the history they want to believe, and a different version of how they think it should get fixed, and in particular version of who (them) should be in charge in this fairytale world, based on what I would call a completely unrealistic fantasy about how it was and how they hope it will be.
Whats interesting is when Cook arrived there were about 800,000 Native Hawai'ians on the islands.
With respect, that's not likely. Captain Cook recorded an estimate of 400,000 in his journal in 1778, and some experts now think it that was probably too high, because the the first documented count in 1805 was 264,160.
Quote:
1890—It is estimated that less than 40,000 native Hawaiians remain, down from the estimated population of more than 300,000 people in the Hawaiian Islands at the time of Western Contact
The main cause of the decline of the native Hawaiian population is the introduction of foreign diseases including measles, smallpox, Asiatic cholera, whooping cough, scarlet fever, diphtheria, influenza, syphilis, gonorrhea, bubonic plague, dysentery, and numerous other maladies. Hawaiian Encyclopedia*:*Population and Visitor Statistics
That population then remained fairly constant until about 1920, when it began to rise.
Quote:
At the time of the vote for statehood there was 82,000 Native Hawaiians, big difference from 800,000. What happened?
In 1959, at the time of the plebiscite, StatehoodHawaii.org says the count of Native Hawaiians was 10,502, and part-Hawaiians were counted at 91,597, for a total of 102,097, a strong comeback from 40,000 a few decades before.
Although the census does not include the military, many of whom did participate in the vote, roughly only about 35% of the total population actually voted "yes" or "no" on the plebiscite.
And your point is? People are given their opportunity to exercise their democratic right to vote, and they either use it or they don't. Every election, at every level, on every topic, everywhere in this country, lots of people don't vote, for whatever reason. But if you don't vote, you give up your right to complain about the result. 94% of the people who voted on the plebiscite question voted yes to become a state instantly. So now it's a done deal. There's no do-over on that vote more than 50 years later.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
