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.
Abigail Kinoiki Kekaulike Kawananakoa, the so-called last Hawaiian princess whose lineage included the royal family that once ruled the islands and an Irish business executive who became one of Hawaii’s largest landowners, died Dec. 11 at her home in Honolulu. She was 96.
Her death was announced Monday morning outside Iolani Palace, America’s only royal residence, where the ****************
Ms. Kawananakoa held no formal title but was a living reminder of Hawaii’s monarchy and a symbol of Hawaiian national identity that endured after the kingdom was overthrown by American business executives in 1893.
On Jan. 17, 1893, Queen Lili`uokalani of the independent kingdom of Hawai`i was overthrown as she was arrested at gunpoint by U.S. Marines. For more, see The Illegal Overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom Government. A bogus "Republic" was declared, that five years later petitioned for annexation to the U.S. While normally I decry "West bad, everyone else good" this annexation seems to be a stain on the United States. Again, that is the only narrative available to me, but it seems that the Kingdom was self-sufficient and not in need of seizure or colonization.
All part of the White Mans Burden as exemplified in the 19th century poem by Rudyard Kipling. We did the same thing in the Philippines after the Spanish America War. The White Christian moral obligation to lift up and civilize the little brown people of the world and make them almost like us. But not exactly equal.
All part of the White Mans Burden as exemplified in the 19th century poem by Rudyard Kipling. We did the same thing in the Philippines after the Spanish America War. The White Christian moral obligation to lift up and civilize the little brown people of the world and make them almost like us. But not exactly equal.
The Philippines was a wholly different situation. They were ruled by Spain. Also, being at the western edge of the Pacific it wound up being a good thing, preventing the Pacific from becoming a Japanese or Chinese lake. Then again, the same logic would apply to Hawaii.
It was the way of the world. Might makes right. Stinks for those who were taken over against their will, but such considerations were not given much weight back then. By today's standards, what the United States did to Hawaii was wrong. But I'm not going to apply today's standards to yesterday's actions.
In any case, when the question of statehood was put before Hawaii's voters in 1959, it won 93 percent of the vote. So it doesn't sound like they were dragged into the Union kicking and screaming.
It was the way of the world. Might makes right. Stinks for those who were taken over against their will, but such considerations were not given much weight back then. By today's standards, what the United States did to Hawaii was wrong. But I'm not going to apply today's standards to yesterday's actions.
In any case, when the question of statehood was put before Hawaii's voters in 1959, it won 93 percent of the vote. So it doesn't sound like they were dragged into the Union kicking and screaming.
Quite true. Also, there was the fact that England and Spain were declining colonial powers at the time. The calculus was absolutely not giving independence to available colonies; those were simply scooped up.
About the only exceptions I can think of during that period were Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. What all of those had in common was a population that was used to self government at the local level. Very similar to the United States. Local self government was a lot less common in most other societies. Even that did not always work out so well. Newfoundland was given Dominion status, similar to the Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Britain resumed direct rule over Newfoundland in 1931. In 1949 it was given to the “option” of joining Canada.
I also agree that this action was unjustifiable and happened to serve as an arguable prelude to the whole " Banana Wars " era of American interventionism .
That typed I can highly recommend that everyone interested in learning more about this subject read Niklaus R. Schweizer's " His Hawaiian Excellency " , Ralph Simpson Kuykendall's " The Hawaiian Kingdom " , and of course the very last Queen's book entitled " Hawaii's Story by Hawaii's Queen " .
One consideration was that the navies of the second half of the 19th century ran on sail, but also on coal, necessitating the acquisition of far-flung coaling stations and naval bases. The naval empires sought out natural harbors around the globe, and Pearl Harbor at Oahu was one of the best harbors in the central Pacific.
Yes, it still sucks that the US, abetted by American businessmen based in Hawaii for the sugar trade, pretty much overthrew the Kingdom of Hawaii, but I posit that it was just a matter of time before either the United States or some other European power snatched up Hawaii as a possession.
One consideration was that the navies of the second half of the 19th century ran on sail, but also on coal, necessitating the acquisition of far-flung coaling stations and naval bases. The naval empires sought out natural harbors around the globe, and Pearl Harbor at Oahu was one of the best harbors in the central Pacific.
Yes, it still sucks that the US, abetted by American businessmen based in Hawaii for the sugar trade, pretty much overthrew the Kingdom of Hawaii, but I posit that it was just a matter of time before either the United States or some other European power snatched up Hawaii as a possession.
England was eyeing Hawai'i at the time. So was Japan, which was shipping thousands of workers to the sugar plantations.
Yes, it still sucks that the US, abetted by American businessmen based in Hawaii for the sugar trade, pretty much overthrew the Kingdom of Hawaii, but I posit that it was just a matter of time before either the United States or some other European power snatched up Hawaii as a possession.
Good post.
And Grover Cleveland basically tried to protect Hawaii from predation, but..
My opinion, Cleveland had a very wise & modest approach to the presidency & power in general.
Some locals still consider Hawaii to be an independent kingdom, wrongly and illegally annexed
On a lighter note, more than a few locals didn't consider Kawananakoa to be a "princess," even in an honorific sense. They felt that others were more deserving of the title.
On the history of the Hawaiian monarchy in general, I highly encourage visitors to tour Iolani Palace if they get the opportunity. It truly is a beautiful building.
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.
