Customer Reviews

Hawaiian Apartheid - Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

It's an incredibly divisive issue, one that inspires, at best, persuasive and thought provoking discourse, and, at worst, intimidation and violence.

On one side is a diverse and divided constituency united only by a feeling that an injustice has been committed against Native Hawaiians by the presence of the United States. On the other side are those who feel the Native Hawaiian independence movement is a self-serving threat to all people in the United States, including Native Hawaiians.

Kenneth Conklin, a retired professor of philosophy, an outspoken opponent of race-based programs, powerful government and private institutions supporting them, and the current drive for sovereignty.

"Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State" is Conklin's self-published treatise on the "growing menace of Hawaiian racial separatism and ethnic nationalism."

In the book, Conklin describes more than 160 federal programs as racially exclusionary. He says the same about the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Department of Hawaiian Homelands.

"Race-based institutions have grown so powerful they now control Hawaii's political establishment," according to Conklin.

Of particular interest to Conklin is the Akaka Bill, which he calls a plan for racial separatist government. "Most support for the Akaka bill comes from Hawaii's large race-based institutions seeking to protect the vast wealth and political power they already enjoy."

However, Conklin said polls show that two thirds of all Hawaii's people, including about half of the ethnic Hawaiians, oppose the Akaka Bill.

"But the political establishment responds to the money and power of the institutions, and fears to go against a swing-vote of the 20 percent of citizens who have a drop of native blood and are regarded (wrongly) as a monolithic voting bloc."

Haunani-Kay Trask, the first full-time director of Hawaiian Studies at the University of Hawaii and an internationally recognized advocate of Native Hawaiians and other indigenous people, said Conklin's views are those of a typical right-wing settler who only sees things from his perspective.

"It never dons on him that there was an illegal overthrow of our government, and that the United States -- his beloved government -- has recognized that it violated international law by doing so. This is not a story that is hidden."

Trask, who said she has not read Conklin's book but is very familiar with him and his arguments, said Conklin is motivated by some kind of internal psychological problem. "He's what local people mean when they say, `he like be `sum-ba-de,''" said Trask. "He's just a crude person trying to get into the newspaper."

Conklin says "junk-science" victimhood claims of the Hawaiian grievance industry play upon public sympathy for the "plight" of an allegedly poor, downtrodden ethnic group.

"This argument is advanced by flaunting -- actually celebrating -- victimhood statistics which stereotype all members of the group as sharing the same demeaning racial profile, even when most individuals in the group have low racial blood quantum and are neither poor nor downtrodden," Conklin writes.

"Should we give credence to the highly touted victimhood statistics and thereby racially profile ethnic Hawaiians as poorly educated, impoverished, diseased, drug abusers, spouse abusers, likely to be incarcerated?" said Conklin.

"No doubt some are like that. Perhaps too many are like that," he added. "But most are just like everyone else, loving their families, working hard to pay the bills, getting wealthy or falling into poverty according to their efforts and abilities, and proud to be Americans."

Conklin says government assistance should be based on need alone and not race. "If one racial group is really more needy than others, then it will receive the lion's share of government help when help is provided based on need alone."

But Trask said statistics don't lie, and Native Hawaiians continually show up on the low end of socioeconomic statistics.

"Every year the Department of puts out a list, and every year it says our life expectancy is going down? Why is this?" she said. "We were better off as a nation before white people came here."

Conklin said the "evil empire" also uses historical grievances, many of which are false or grossly exaggerated. The historical grievances and victimhood statistics have even been used successfully in court, where judges relied on them to justify racial segregation at Kamehameha Schools under the guise of affirmative action to remedy past injustices or present deficits.

Trask said history does not lie. "Who forced the overthrow? Who introduced the diseases? Who forced the mahele?" she said. "The problem is, history started when Ken Conlklin arrived in Hawaii. If the federal government has recognized the overthrow, then so should he."

The self-published "Hawaiian Apartheid" is a controversial work which seeks to expose the Hawaiian sovereignty movement as ethno-political activism fueling racial discord.

Conklin is good at denouncing ethnic posturing and its use for political gain. He argues the Akaka Bill would give ethnic Hawaiians what some say would constitute political supremacy and goes to great length explaining how historical spin is used to influence politics. With focus mainly on the manipulation of language to influence public opinion, the chapters devoted to the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy could have made a solid endictment of historical revisionism. Sadly the author chose to spin the US takeover of 1893 as something most Hawaiians welcomed. There is danger in mixing personal bias with history.

Although filled with verifiable facts the section on history is equally replete with personal and often humoristic observations that seem inappropriate.

Nevertheless an excellent observation and analysis of the contradictions of the Aloha state and a thought-provoking view from one side of an ever widening racial divide.

Ken Conklin has done an admirable job over the years researching and reporting on the history of Hawaii, and the falsehoods and myths of the native Hawaiian sovereignty movement. His book represents the collection of years of knowledge seeking, and presents source material that directly refutes the claims of victimhood perpetuated by those who would divide Hawaii on the basis of race.

Reading the reviews from people who disagree with his stance but have obviously never read his work is all too typical of the reaction he has gotten for learning and sharing the truth. The truth is, the Kingdom of Hawaii was unified and founded by both Kamehameha and John Young. The truth is, the Kingdom of Hawaii declared all men to be "of one blood" in its first constitution, and treated the races equally over a hundred years before our own civil rights movement in the U.S.

As to the review which denigrates the Morgan Report and mistakenly cites Kuykendall for support, Kuykendall described Blount's report as a "lawyer's brief, making the best possible case for the queen and against Stevens." The historian said the Morgan Report "presented an equally effective case for the Provisional Government and Stevens, and against the Queen." Regarding assertions that no Hawaiian political activist has ever been violent, one must note both the Wilcox rebellion of 1889 and 1895, as well as the recent violent beating of a young white couple in a parking lot in Hawaii by a native Hawaiian and his family. Common? Thankfully not. Inspired by the hatred that Conklin describes? Certainly so.

For those interested in learning the truth, please, read on. You might also enjoy "Hawaiian Sovereignty:Do the facts matter?" by Thurston Twigg-Smith, and "The Unconquerable Rebel" by Andrade.

Whether you agree or disagree with Professor Conklin he presents an intelligent counter point to the Hawaiian Sovereignty movement. Some of the historical arguments he makes are correct. There has been much revision on the events surrounding the 1893 fall of the Monarchy and the role the U.S. government and nationals played both in first trying to put the Queen back on the throne and then later the annexation. This book does shed light on some of the sinister elements in The Hawaiian Sovereignty movement and much of the hate mongering that goes on against whites and other outsiders is very disturbing. Dr. Conklin does an outstanding job pointing out the role non Hawaiians had in founding the Hawaiian kingdom and making it a success for as long as it lasted. I think though the author is in slight denial over the injustices native Hawaiians have endured since the arrival of Western Explorers. Regardless of which side your on this book is a must read.

Being myself a student of contemporary political issues in the Pacific, I read Conklin's book with the intent to get an idea of how opponents of Hawaiian sovereignty rationalize their opposition to it. However, very early in the book it becomes clear that the author does not intend to provide a rationally based critical analysis of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement, but rather a polemic display of hatred against everything Hawaiian. The quality of the text is very poor, and the style astonishingly un-academic for someone claiming to have a Ph.D. Besides frequent repetitions of the same facts in different chapters, most astonishing is his referencing system: About half of the footnotes do not reference any outside sources but provide links to the author's own website. If there is no evidence supporting his point, Conklin simply cites himself.

His claims that the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom was legal and that there was no conspiracy between the local Caucasian leaders of the overthrow and the US military is in clear contradiction to historical facts. As the sole source for his erroneous and misleading narrative of the 1893 overthrow, Conklin references a website set up by himself and some of his friends about the Morgan report (which was a whitewash orchestrated by pro-annexationist members of the US congress in 1894) but does not even mention the diametrically opposed findings of the Blount report of 1893 that were based on a thorough investigation by a special commissioner sent to Hawaii by the U.S. president. Both the Blount report and Ralph Kuykendall's standard history of the Hawaiian Kingdom clearly point out that there was indeed a conspiracy between the insurgents and the US diplomatic representative who landed the US troops.

Conklin becomes even more polemic and un-scholarly when he describes contemporary Hawaiian activists. Movements to revive the traditional Hawaiian religion and the use of religious ceremonies in political protests are labelled "Hawaiian Jihad" and "Aggressive religious fascism", as if there was any similarity between a peaceful Hawaiian pule (prayer) for pono (righteousness) and aloha (compassion), and fanatics calling for holy war against non-believers. No Hawaiian political activist has ever used violence against anyone, let alone based calls for violence on religious fanaticism. In fact the total absence of violence in the Hawaiian movement is one of its striking characteristics that makes it almost unique in the world. Whereas in most other comparable situations of contested sovereignty in the world there are always radical elements at the margin of the movement that engage in violent struggle, even the most radical wings of the Hawaiian movement are totally committed to non-violence. Conklin's chapter on alleged violence is thus entirely humbug. In fact what he recounts is no violence at all but merely some statements that, if taken out of context, might under certain circumstances be interpreted as mere threats of violence. His most outrageous statement is his claim that the alleged racism of Hawaiian activists is "far more dangerous" than the historic racism by whites against blacks. Given the fact that no politically motivated violence has ever been committed by Hawaiian activists, does he intend to either ignore or insult the millions of African-Americans who suffered under slavery and the thousands that became victims of lynching?

Having lived in Hawaii for several years, I personally know most of the Hawaiian sovereignty activist labelled by Conklin as "Racists", "Fascists" or "Terrorists". None of them comes even close to any of those descriptions. Instead they are passionate community leaders, struggling for the welfare of their people, and intending to correct the tremendous injustices existing in present-day Hawaii. In doing so they display lots of aloha to everyone. Conklin states that he came to Hawai'i because "it was easier to feel the presence of the gods in Hawaii than anywhere else". This is true indeed. It just seems to me that Conklin doesn't want to feel it himself.

I am a Native Hawaiian meaning that I am part of the Hawaiian Geneology and I also have a Ph.D. I am not Hawaiian the same way I would say I am Californian if I lived in California. I mentioned the Ph.D. because Ken Conklin mentions his and I want to see more Hawaiians with Ph.D.s defining themselves and their history. I am also part white. I've grown up seeing at least two sides to every story. So imagine my hurt and disappointment when I see this side of the story. A story about somebody who wants to rob what little is left of the Hawaiian people: namely their identity. Hawaii was once it's own kingdom where the majority of people were Hawaiian, lived in harmony with the land, and spoke the Hawaiian language. Today they are minorities in their own ancestral home and frequently struggle with the ills that frequently accompany the long term consequences of colonization. It is hard for me to grow up and see my own people suffering the way they do (e.g. homelessness, health problems). I am not about to romanticize ancient Hawaii but I know a defeated people when I see one. Thank God Hawaiians still have their identity, pride, and ability to preserve some remnants of our culture. So here comes a non Hawaiian who moves from the mainland and works actively to strip what little is left of the Hawaiian people. This book adds insult to injury. You see, Conklin believes that the Hawaiians were not on Hawaii long enough to claim they are indigenous people. He feels that they are no more indigenous than he is. When Hawaiians work actively to hang on to what little is left for them he likes to call that racism and apartheid. I know non Hawaiians who have showed respect to the Hawaiian people and actually let us define ourselves. They actually know how to listen. These are people we have loved and welcomed into our own families. This is how my mother and father met. Perhaps Conklin cannot face his own privledge so he defends against these feelings by stating that it is he and other non Hawaiians who are the true victims of discrimination. With that attitude and lack of disrespect he will never be adopted into the Hawaiian ohana and will always feel like an outsider. Too bad.

This book Hawaiian Apartheid introduced this week on Molokai, the remote Hawaiian island that is considered the center of the Race based Hawaiian Sovereignty movement. It should cause people to re-think the future of Hawaii for everyone.

I think the book of the Year for everyone in Hawaii and across the Nation is "Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism," by Ken Conklin, Ph.D. It is essential reading for everyone who desires pono and aloha throughout Hawaii, Race notwithstanding.

More social myth shattering than "Broken Trust" and fully documented, this dramatic and informative expose of modern day Race based Hawaiian social engineering and historical revisionism will shatter the false images of Hawaii's status quo power brokers at Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Kamehameha Schools, University of Hawaii, DHHL, over 160 racially exclusive federal programs, charter schools, immersion schools; and a proposal for racial separatist government through the Akaka bill by corrupt lieing politicians and media using divisive tactics to maintain their power, as it brings the earthshaking facts that amount to nothing less than the development of Hawaiian apartheid in Hawaii against the makaainana of Hawaii, and what it means for people with no native blood.

At the end of Hawaiian Apartheid, author Conklin, who is fluent in Hawaiian language and obviously cares deeply for Hawaii-nei, offers soul searching, inspiring suggestions on how everyone can act to restore pono, unity, equality and aloha throughout Hawaii, regardless of Race.

Reading Hawaiian Apartheid may inspire American Citizens in Hawaii to make a revolution against the growing menace of the usurping-paux-governor and convicted felon Linda Lingle's Race Based Police State of Hawaii; and, to restore a true republican form of government, restore individual sovereignty and equality under law, guaranteed to each of us by the Constitution for the United States of America. Check it out at the Molokai Public Library now, or buy your own copy: Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State by Kenneth R. Conklin