{"id":684,"date":"2023-12-09T23:25:20","date_gmt":"2023-12-09T23:25:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/?page_id=684"},"modified":"2023-12-11T02:29:45","modified_gmt":"2023-12-11T02:29:45","slug":"footnotes-bibliography","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/index.php\/footnotes-bibliography\/","title":{"rendered":"Footnotes"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t<div data-elementor-type=\"wp-page\" data-elementor-id=\"684\" class=\"elementor elementor-684\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-697297c e-flex e-con-boxed e-con e-parent\" data-id=\"697297c\" data-element_type=\"container\" data-settings=\"{&quot;content_width&quot;:&quot;boxed&quot;}\" data-core-v316-plus=\"true\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"e-con-inner\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-e1f94c2 elementor-widget elementor-widget-text-editor\" data-id=\"e1f94c2\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"text-editor.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t<style>\/*! elementor - v3.18.0 - 20-12-2023 *\/\n.elementor-widget-text-editor.elementor-drop-cap-view-stacked .elementor-drop-cap{background-color:#69727d;color:#fff}.elementor-widget-text-editor.elementor-drop-cap-view-framed .elementor-drop-cap{color:#69727d;border:3px solid;background-color:transparent}.elementor-widget-text-editor:not(.elementor-drop-cap-view-default) .elementor-drop-cap{margin-top:8px}.elementor-widget-text-editor:not(.elementor-drop-cap-view-default) .elementor-drop-cap-letter{width:1em;height:1em}.elementor-widget-text-editor .elementor-drop-cap{float:left;text-align:center;line-height:1;font-size:50px}.elementor-widget-text-editor .elementor-drop-cap-letter{display:inline-block}<\/style>\t\t\t\t<h1 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>Motivation<\/strong><\/h1><h5>[1] <em>Pro Se<\/em>&#8211; is Latin for \u201cself,\u201d it is used as a legal term for defending oneself on their own behalf. No lawyers are involved.<\/h5><h5>[2] It has been questioned as to whether or not \u2018Hawaiian\u2019 is the correct spelling, or whether or not it should be \u2018Hawai\u02bbian,\u2019 therefore it is necessary to provide a footnote on this concern:\u00a0 \u02bbHawaiian\u2019 is the common Americanized descriptor and is used regularly by scholars, politicians, pretty much everyone who is not a speaker of <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawaii<\/em>.\u00a0 It was also the terminology that was found in the English translations of Kingdom documents.\u00a0 The ending of a word with \u201can\u201d does not exist in <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawai\u02bbi<\/em>, neither does the possessive, \u201c\u2018s.\u201d\u00a0 As for the correct terminology for the place <em>Hawai\u02bbi<\/em>, Hawai\u02bbi technically is a shortcut version commonly used here both in the past and today, the actual place was called <em>K\u014d Hawai\u02bbi Pae \u02bb\u0100ina<\/em>, which means all the islands within the archipelago.\u00a0 Today, the Kingdom and the State only cover the inhabited islands, and the preferred terminology changed to just be Hawai\u02bbi. Sometimes <em>K\u0101naka Maoli<\/em> activist use the one referring to the Archipelago, sometimes not.\u00a0 As to whether it is Hawai\u02bbi or Hawaii, that is often debated today. In early Hawaiian documents there were no <em>kahak\u014d<\/em> (macrons) or <em>\u02bbokina<\/em> (glottal stops), this is because everyone spoke <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawai\u02bbi<\/em> and understood what was being said and how it should be pronounced.\u00a0 However, when the language was almost erased and there were fewer native speakers, Hawaiian language activists at the 1978 Constitutional Convention passed into law that all street signs, legal documents, legislation, etc; should use <em>kahak\u014d <\/em>or <em>\u02bbokina<\/em>.\u00a0 It is also the standard now in Hawaiian language education.\u00a0 Since fewer people were native speakers it caused too much confusion to the actual meaning of words that are dependent on differences in pronunciation, <em>kahak\u014d<\/em> and <em>\u02bbokina<\/em> clarifies that.\u00a0 This change occurred largely because absent this clarity the meaning and pronunciation would change. Hence you would not put an <em>\u02bbokina<\/em> in \u02bbHawaiian\u2019 since it is not pronounced that way.<\/h5><h5>[3] State of Hawaii vs. Patricia Villiarimo-Cockett. Case no. 2DTI-07-009297; 2DTC-07008105<\/h5><h5>[4] I use the <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawaii<\/em> (Hawaiian language) identifier for the indigenous people of Hawaii, <em>Kanaka Maoli<\/em>, rather than the Hawaii State legal terminology of Native Hawaiian\/part-Hawaiian which are Americanized words that make connotations towards blood quantum, and which were designed to erase and divide Native peoples. J.Kehaulani Kauanui states that blood quantum, a divisive, racist policy that \u201coperates through a reductive logic\u2026as measurable and dilutable\u2026undercuts indigenous Hawaiian epistemologies that define identity\u201d (<em>Hawaiian Blood,<\/em>3-7). The terminology Native Hawaiian is the governmental term in all legal documents: Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Dept. of Hawaiian Homelands, the census, etc. Hawaiian actually refers to citizenry, a nationality, not an ethnicity.\u00a0 In the time of the Kingdom there were Hawaiian citizens who were not <em>K\u0101naka Maoli<\/em>, many of those were white. So when <em>K\u0101naka Maoli<\/em> started gaining some rights back the terminology in such places as the state legislation\/federal legislature was to add Native in front of Hawaiian to designate the difference as to who were indigenous or not. Just as the Federal government put Native in front of American to generalize the Indigenous tribal nation\u2019s citizenry.\u00a0 As opposed to all citizens. This is why <em>K\u0101naka Maoli<\/em> activist often prefer to use the <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawai\u02bbi<\/em> descriptor because it is more accurate. <em>Kanaka Maoli<\/em>, which literally means the true people or original people, is most commonly used in Hawaii as a personal identifier, especially among sovereignty activists. Some also prefer to use <em>Kanaka \u02bb\u014ciwi<\/em>, which means the same thing, but is rarer in usage. Both terms represent the person\u02bbs geneological connection to <em>Papa <\/em>(earth mother) and <em>W\u0101kea<\/em> (sky father).\u00a0 When I use the <em>kahak\u014d<\/em> (macron), as in <em>k\u0101naka<\/em>, it represents plural rather than singular usage. \u02bb\u0100ina Momona, \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.kaainamomona.org\/post\/hawaiian-vs-californian-why-there-is-a-difference\">Hawaiian vs. Californian: Why there is a difference<\/a>,\u201d (Nov. 3, 2021).<\/h5><h5>[5] <em>Haole<\/em> is the <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawaii<\/em> identifier for anyone who is EuroAmerican, white, Caucasian. It was first used to identify foreigners, anyone not indigenous to Hawaii; however, since the first non-<em>k\u0101naka maoli<\/em> to come to Hawaii were from Europe and America, this term has come to define those white foreigners alone. The term is not derogatory. It is my personally preferred ethnic identifier, and most commonly used in Hawaii.<\/h5><h5>[6] The \u201cHawaiian Renaissance\u201d was a term that evolved out of the cultural, linguistic, and sovereign reawakening of the K\u0101naka Maoli.\u00a0 Following the wins and the strategies of the Civil Rights movement.\u00a0 Protest and activism, in many cases trained by the Black Panthers on the mainland, organizers began to fight for native rights, their lands, and recognition. As a result, by the late 1970s, Hawaiian language became an official language of the state, the university system authorized the College of Hawaiian studies and language, Hawaiian culture, language and history education was authorized, and native access rights were legislated. Haunani Kay Trask. <em>From a Native Daughter: Colonialism &amp; Sovereignty in Hawaii <\/em>(Maine: Common Courage Press, 1993). 205.<\/h5><h5>[7] I place quote marks around the \u201coverthrow\u201d primarily because in Hawaii it was not a true overthrow of a government.\u00a0 Overthrow is defined as being initiated by the citizens of the nation that is being overthrown. However, in Hawaii it was a conspiracy led by the business interests of four Americans, four American missionary descendents, three Naturalized Hawaiian citizens (who were American annexationists and the only citizens of Hawai\u02bbi), a Scotsman, and a German; a total of only thirteen and the complicity of the US military. Rich Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom <\/em>(Hawaii: Aloha Press, 1992), 105.<\/h5>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-9baa589 e-flex e-con-boxed e-con e-parent\" data-id=\"9baa589\" data-element_type=\"container\" data-settings=\"{&quot;content_width&quot;:&quot;boxed&quot;}\" data-core-v316-plus=\"true\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"e-con-inner\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-e02ad80 elementor-widget elementor-widget-text-editor\" data-id=\"e02ad80\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"text-editor.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<h1 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>Historiography<\/strong><\/h1><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Haunani Kay Trask, <em>From a Native Daughter: Colonialism &amp; Sovereignty in Hawaii <\/em>\u00a0(Maine: Common Courage Press, 1993), 21.<\/h6><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> In reviewing the literature, it was noticed that of the modern text that discussed the Great Mahele (the land laws of Hawaii), they all referred as one of their main sources were Levy &amp; Kuykendahl, however when looking at those sources they refer to the Revised Statutes of 1925, these are records that had be rewritten to benefit the ruling Oligarchy and then added into the Territorial Laws.<\/h6><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Helen Bauer, <em>Hawaii: The Aloha State<\/em> (Hi: The Bess Press, 1960), 92-96.<\/h6><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> The \u201cBig Five\u201d were the five major sugar planters that came to control the government, the largest tracks of land, a monopoly on the economy, control over the news media, economic corporations, the banks, the utilities, and the majority of business interests in Hawaii between 1893-1980s. They consisted of C. Brewer &amp; Company, Theo Davis &amp; Company, American Factors, Castle &amp; Cooke, and Alexander &amp; Baldwin.\u00a0 Linda Menton &amp; Eileen Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii <\/em>(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1989), 161.<\/h6><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Neil M Levy, &#8220;Native Hawaiian Land Rights,&#8221; <em>California Law Review<\/em> 63, no. 4 (1975): 848-85. Accessed Oct 11, 2022, doi:10.2307\/3479836.<\/h6><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> Budnick. 123<\/h6><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> Levy. 848<\/h6><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref8\" name=\"_ftn8\">[8]<\/a> Jon M. Van Dyke, <em>Who Owns the Crown Lands of Hawai\u2019i <\/em>(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2008), 11-18.<\/h6><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref9\" name=\"_ftn9\">[9]<\/a> I use \u201cNative Hawaiian\u201d here since this is how Kanaka Maoli are identified by both the State of Hawaii and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.<\/h6><h6><a href=\"#_ftnref10\" name=\"_ftn10\">[10]<\/a> The \u201cGreat Mahele,\u201d refers to Kamehameha III\u02bbs actions of addressing the Hawaii land tenure system.\u00a0 The debates surrounding this concept will be a major focus of my master\u02bbs project.<\/h6>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-6b9a062 e-flex e-con-boxed e-con e-parent\" data-id=\"6b9a062\" data-element_type=\"container\" data-settings=\"{&quot;content_width&quot;:&quot;boxed&quot;}\" data-core-v316-plus=\"true\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"e-con-inner\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-d25fec0 elementor-widget elementor-widget-text-editor\" data-id=\"d25fec0\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"text-editor.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<p>[1] <em>Pro Se<\/em>&#8211; is Latin for \u201cself,\u201d it is used as a legal term for defending oneself on their own behalf. No lawyers are involved.<\/p><p>[2] It has been questioned as to whether or not \u2018Hawaiian\u2019 is the correct spelling, or whether or not it should be \u2018Hawai\u02bbian,\u2019 therefore it is necessary to provide a footnote on this concern:\u00a0 \u02bbHawaiian\u2019 is the common Americanized descriptor and is used regularly by scholars, politicians, pretty much everyone who is not a speaker of <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawaii<\/em>.\u00a0 It was also the terminology that was found in the English translations of Kingdom documents.\u00a0 The ending of a word with \u201can\u201d does not exist in <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawai\u02bbi<\/em>, neither does the possessive, \u201c\u2018s.\u201d\u00a0 As for the correct terminology for the place <em>Hawai\u02bbi<\/em>, Hawai\u02bbi technically is a shortcut version commonly used here both in the past and today, the actual place was called <em>K\u014d Hawai\u02bbi Pae \u02bb\u0100ina<\/em>, which means all the islands within the archipelago.\u00a0 Today, the Kingdom and the State only cover the inhabited islands, and the preferred terminology changed to just be Hawai\u02bbi. Sometimes <em>K\u0101naka Maoli<\/em> activist use the one referring to the Archipelago, sometimes not.\u00a0 As to whether it is Hawai\u02bbi or Hawaii, that is often debated today. In early Hawaiian documents there were no <em>kahak\u014d<\/em> (macrons) or <em>\u02bbokina<\/em> (glottal stops), this is because everyone spoke <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawai\u02bbi<\/em> and understood what was being said and how it should be pronounced.\u00a0 However, when the language was almost erased and there were fewer native speakers, Hawaiian language activists at the 1978 Constitutional Convention passed into law that all street signs, legal documents, legislation, etc; should use <em>kahak\u014d <\/em>or <em>\u02bbokina<\/em>.\u00a0 It is also the standard now in Hawaiian language education.\u00a0 Since fewer people were native speakers it caused too much confusion to the actual meaning of words that are dependent on differences in pronunciation, <em>kahak\u014d<\/em> and <em>\u02bbokina<\/em> clarifies that.\u00a0 This change occurred largely because absent this clarity the meaning and pronunciation would change. Hence you would not put an <em>\u02bbokina<\/em> in \u02bbHawaiian\u2019 since it is not pronounced that way.<\/p><p>\u00a0<\/p><p>\u00a0<\/p><p>[3] State of Hawaii vs. Patricia Villiarimo-Cockett. Case no. 2DTI-07-009297; 2DTC-07008105<\/p><p>[4] I use the <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawaii<\/em> (Hawaiian language) identifier for the indigenous people of Hawaii, <em>Kanaka Maoli<\/em>, rather than the Hawaii State legal terminology of Native Hawaiian\/part-Hawaiian which are Americanized words that make connotations towards blood quantum, and which were designed to erase and divide Native peoples. J.Kehaulani Kauanui states that blood quantum, a divisive, racist policy that \u201coperates through a reductive logic\u2026as measurable and dilutable\u2026undercuts indigenous Hawaiian epistemologies that define identity\u201d (<em>Hawaiian Blood,<\/em>3-7). The terminology Native Hawaiian is the governmental term in all legal documents: Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Dept. of Hawaiian Homelands, the census, etc. Hawaiian actually refers to citizenry, a nationality, not an ethnicity.\u00a0 In the time of the Kingdom there were Hawaiian citizens who were not <em>K\u0101naka Maoli<\/em>, many of those were white. So when <em>K\u0101naka Maoli<\/em> started gaining some rights back the terminology in such places as the state legislation\/federal legislature was to add Native in front of Hawaiian to designate the difference as to who were indigenous or not. Just as the Federal government put Native in front of American to generalize the Indigenous tribal nation\u2019s citizenry.\u00a0 As opposed to all citizens. This is why <em>K\u0101naka Maoli<\/em> activist often prefer to use the <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawai\u02bbi<\/em> descriptor because it is more accurate. <em>Kanaka Maoli<\/em>, which literally means the true people or original people, is most commonly used in Hawaii as a personal identifier, especially among sovereignty activists. Some also prefer to use <em>Kanaka \u02bb\u014ciwi<\/em>, which means the same thing, but is rarer in usage. Both terms represent the person\u02bbs geneological connection to <em>Papa <\/em>(earth mother) and <em>W\u0101kea<\/em> (sky father).\u00a0 When I use the <em>kahak\u014d<\/em> (macron), as in <em>k\u0101naka<\/em>, it represents plural rather than singular usage. \u02bb\u0100ina Momona, \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.kaainamomona.org\/post\/hawaiian-vs-californian-why-there-is-a-difference\">Hawaiian vs. Californian: Why there is a difference<\/a>,\u201d (Nov. 3, 2021).<\/p><p>[5] <em>Haole<\/em> is the <em>\u02bb\u014dlelo Hawaii<\/em> identifier for anyone who is EuroAmerican, white, Caucasian. It was first used to identify foreigners, anyone not indigenous to Hawaii; however, since the first non-<em>k\u0101naka maoli<\/em> to come to Hawaii were from Europe and America, this term has come to define those white foreigners alone. The term is not derogatory. It is my personally preferred ethnic identifier, and most commonly used in Hawaii.<\/p><p>[6] The \u201cHawaiian Renaissance\u201d was a term that evolved out of the cultural, linguistic, and sovereign reawakening of the K\u0101naka Maoli.\u00a0 Following the wins and the strategies of the Civil Rights movement.\u00a0 Protest and activism, in many cases trained by the Black Panthers on the mainland, organizers began to fight for native rights, their lands, and recognition. As a result, by the late 1970s, Hawaiian language became an official language of the state, the university system authorized the College of Hawaiian studies and language, Hawaiian culture, language and history education was authorized, and native access rights were legislated. Haunani Kay Trask. <em>From a Native Daughter: Colonialism &amp; Sovereignty in Hawaii <\/em>(Maine: Common Courage Press, 1993). 205.<\/p><p>[7] I place quote marks around the \u201coverthrow\u201d primarily because in Hawaii it was not a true overthrow of a government.\u00a0 Overthrow is defined as being initiated by the citizens of the nation that is being overthrown. However, in Hawaii it was a conspiracy led by the business interests of four Americans, four American missionary descendents, three Naturalized Hawaiian citizens (who were American annexationists and the only citizens of Hawai\u02bbi), a Scotsman, and a German; a total of only thirteen and the complicity of the US military. Rich Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom <\/em>(Hawaii: Aloha Press, 1992), 105.<\/p><p>[8] I refer to \u201cRe-Awakening of Hawaiian Activism\u201d since the first Activist were those who first attempted to oppose the \u201coverthrow\u201d and restore Queen Lili\u02bbuokalani to the throne: <em>Hui Aloha \u02bb\u0100ina<\/em> (Hawaiian Patriotic League) and <em>Hui K\u0101lai\u02bb\u0101ina<\/em> (Hawaiian Political Association),1893-1898. Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom,<\/em> 117-167.<\/p><p>[9] Oligarchy is the term used in the Hawaii State curriculum textbook, <em>A History of Hawaii <\/em>(Menton and Tamura, 128-9) for the eighteen-member government that was installed by the Committee of Safety and sugar-planters who monopolized the power and economy during the Republic of Hawaii, preventing K\u0101naka Maoli from voting, controlling education, and maintained martial law.<\/p><p>[10] The section \u201cFrom Kingdom to Statehood\u201d explains more fully what was the Territory and the evolution that occurred that made Hawai\u02bbi a territory. However, a brief timeline might benefit any confusion here, the governmental terms refer to these time periods of governance: Pre-Contact (prior to 1778), Kingdom (islands unified into absolute Monarchy [1795-1840], Constitutional Monarchy [1840-1893]), Provisional Government (1893-1894), Republic of Hawaii (1894-1898), Territory of Hawaii (1898-1959), Statehood (1959-present).<\/p><p>[11] The Doctrine of Discovery was a Papal decree that stated \u201cany land not inhabited by Christians was available to be \u02bbdiscovered,\u2019claimed, and exploited by Christian rulers.\u201d <a href=\"https:\/\/www.gilderlehrman.org\/history-resources\/spotlight-primary-source\/doctrine-discovery-1493\">Spotlight on a Primary Source by Pope Alexander VI<\/a>\u00a0 Mark Charles (Dine), \u201cWe the People \u2013 The Three Most Misunderstood Words in US History,\u201d 17:44 (Jan. 4, 2019) YouTube: TEDxTysons. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=HOktqY5wY4A\">\u00a0<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=HOktqY5wY4A\">https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=HOktqY5wY4A<\/a><\/p><p>[12] Ronald J. Horvath, \u201cA Definition of Colonialism,\u201d <em>Current Anthropology, <\/em>13, no.1 (Feb. 1972), 47.<\/p><p>[13] George Steinmetz, \u201cThe Sociology of Empires, Colonies and Post-colonialism,\u201d <em>Annual Review of Sociology, <\/em>40 (2014), 79.<\/p><p>[14] Mitra Sharafi, <em>Law and Identity in Colonial South Asia: Parsi Legal Culture, 1772-1947<\/em> (US: Cambridge University Press, 2014). 44-54.<\/p><p>[15] Lord Lugard, \u201cIndirect Rule in Tropical Africa,\u201d 1900, 291-2.<\/p><p>[16] Patrick Wolfe, \u201cSettler Colonialism and the Elimination of the Native,\u201d <em>Journal of Genocide Research <\/em>8, no. 4 (December 2006): 387\u2013409; Jeffrey Ostler and Nancy Shoemaker, \u201cSettler Colonialism in Early American History: Introduction\u201d <em>The William and Mary Quarterly<\/em>, 76, no 3 (July 2019), 362.<\/p><p>[17] Jeffrey Ostler and Nancy Shoemaker, \u201cSettler Colonialism in Early American History, 362.<\/p><p>[18] Alyosha Goldstein, \u201cEntangled Dispossessions: Race and Colonialism in the Historical Present\u201d <em>Relational Formations of Race, <\/em>Natalia Molina, et.al. (US: University of Calif, 2019). 61.<\/p><p>[19] Nancy Shoemaker, \u201cTypology of Colonialism,\u201d<em>Perspectives on History, <\/em>\u00a0(Oct. 2015)<\/p><p>[20] Shoemaker, \u201cTypology of Colonialism.\u201d<\/p><p>[21] Kamehameha I did battle to become <em>mo\u02bbi<\/em> (supreme ruler) which was traditionally done when an <em>ali\u02bbi nui<\/em> (high chief) died. Traditionally, upon the deathbed of an <em>ali\u02bbi nui<\/em>, one <em>ali\u02bbi<\/em> might be given K\u016bk\u0101\u02bbilimoku (a symbol of the god of war and the <em>ali\u02bbi <\/em>of power) while another might be given the <em>H\u0101<\/em> (the breath or mana [power] of the <em>ali\u02bbi<\/em>). This is what happened with Kamehameha I, he received the symbol of K\u016b from the high chief Kalani\u02bb\u014dpu\u02bbu; while he gave the<em> H\u0101<\/em> to K\u012bwala\u02bb\u014d, his son, this set up a challenge to both potential leaders as to who would get both, Kamehameha did in the end. This link explains it in more depth <a href=\"https:\/\/hawaiialive.org\/kukailimoku\/\">https:\/\/hawaiialive.org\/kukailimoku\/<\/a> . Kamehameha did utilize western guns, but not until 1790, first by capturing the ship that Isaac Davis was on and taking all the weaponry and ship, Davis was the only survivor. Later, he detained another<em> Haole<\/em>, John Young. Essentially, Kamehameha I kidnapped both of them, while at the same time honoring them by marrying them to <em>\u02bbali\u02bbi nui w\u0101hine<\/em> (high ranking women) and giving them land for being his trusted advisors. He used the two men to train his warriors on the use of foreign weaponry and was able to put down the other chiefs, thereby unifying all the islands. The actual unification did not finalize until 1798. He probably traded with other foreigners after to resupply himself.\u00a0\u00a0 Upon his death in 1819, he gave K\u016bk\u0101\u02bbilimoku to another chief and the H\u0101 to his son, thereby setting up a situation where Kamehameha II would have had to battle for his position as well, however, Ka\u02bbahumanu, the <em>kuhina nui<\/em> (main advisor) to the King talked Kamehameha II in breaking the <em>kapu<\/em> system which effectively took the power away from K\u016b without actually having to go to war, thereby keeping the kingdom intact as his father had created it. Therefore, <em>K\u0101naka Maoli<\/em> were not subjugated or labeled subjects of a foreign power; they had <em>ali\u02bbi<\/em> that may have traded with foreigners, may have eventually had <em>Haole<\/em> Hawaiian citizens become advisors or members within their government, but they were not subjects of a Euro-American power. Instead they were recognized as an independent nation under a treaty of Friendship with the United States by 1824, and again reconfirmed in 1849 with even stronger more specific language. Yet, it was not just the United States by the reign of Queen Lili\u02bb\u016bokalani, Hawai\u02bbi had treaties and embassies throughout the world prior to the overthrow.<\/p><p>[22] Jon M.Van Dyke, <em>Who Owns the Crown Lands of Hawaii?<\/em> (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2008): 19-22.<\/p><p>[23] The ranking of <em>ali\u02bbi<\/em> was determined by their genealogical connection to the gods, and the hereditary <em>mana<\/em> (spiritual power) within their being.\u00a0 The <em>kuhuna<\/em> (priest\/skilled class) also came from the <em>ali\u02bbi<\/em> class. There were many rankings of <em>ali\u02bbi<\/em>, which are detailed in <em>Ka Po\u02bbe Kahiko: The People of Old<\/em> (1869-1870, <em>Ka N\u016bpepa<\/em><\/p><p><em>Kuokoa<\/em>) by Samuel Kamakau.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/p><p>[24] Shirafi, <em>Law and Identity. <\/em>10.<\/p><p>[25] The Parsi, who trace their ancestry to the early Persians of India, eagerly embraced British legal training to generate laws, create lawyers, and Parsi-judged courts that would protect their religion and cultural traditions under the increasing British Imperial control. Shirafi, <em>Law and Identity,<\/em> 9.<\/p><p>[26] Van Dyke, <em>Who Owns the Crown Lands<\/em>, 26-7.<\/p><p>[27] P. Christiaan Klieger, <em>Kamehameha III <\/em>(California: Green Arrow Press, 2015): 1-270.<\/p><p>[28] Hawai\u02bbi Kingdom Constitutions of 1840 and 1864.<\/p><p>[29] The \u2018<em>Haole<\/em> elite,\u2019 \u2018sugar planters,\u2019 \u2018the Big Five,\u2019 \u2018<em>Haole<\/em> businessmen,\u2019 the \u2018annexations,\u2019 are all terms I have used within my research to describe the group of business interests that conspired to \u201coverthrow\u201d the Hawaiian Kingdom. The common storyline in the current Hawaiian History books is that the missionaries were the cause of the overthrow, even Haunani Kay Trask argues this. However, that is a case of historical misinformation, one designed to minimize America\u2019s involvement in the crime. Research on the actual culprits is easily found and can disprove the fallacy of the guilt of the missionaries.<\/p><p>When the American Board of Missionaries left Hawaii in 1863, a majority of their missionaries left Hawaii as well, so the mission did not fund the overthrow or employ any of them at the time. The majority of the thirteen who were involved in the conspiracy (the committee of Safety, the ones who were actually responsible for the overthrow) were overwhelmingly American businessmen. This can also be said of those involved in the Bayonet Constitution and the creation of the new Provisional government\/Republic of Hawaii.\u00a0 There were only four who were Hawaii-born of missionaries, therefore they were the children of missionaries. Not missionaries.<\/p><p>Evidence can be found in <em>Stolen Kingdom<\/em>, where Budnick lists the participants of the overthrow and the early government, clearly stating their origin and economic interests. Evidence can also be found in LaRue Piercy, <em>Hawaii\u02bbs Missionary Saga<\/em> (1992), in this book the author lists all the missionaries, the date they came, the date they left Hawaii or their service to the mission.\u00a0 There were four missionaries (mostly teachers) that left the mission early to become advisors to the <em>ali\u02bbi, <\/em>so they did have a hand in the development of the government.\u00a0 William Richards was the minister of public instruction in 1846 which gave him a cabinet seat on the privy council, he died in 1847. Gerrit P. Judd was a medical missionary, (almost as soon as he arrived) he became translator and recorder of the Government which meant he was on the treasury board and he helped Kamehameha III balance the budget he inherited; he also became secretary of state of foreign affairs in 1843 and helped the King reclaim his thrown during the Paulet Affair; in 1852 he became a judge for the kingdom and was an advisor on drafting the 1852 Constitution; he died in 1873.\u00a0 Lorrin Andrews, was a teacher and instrumental in forming the written Hawaiian language and the development of the printing press in Hawaii, he became a judge of foreign cases (in other words a diplomat where crimes done by foreigners were concerned, keeping Hawaii from having to deal with foreign outrage; he died in 1868.\u00a0 Finally, Richard Armstrong became the minister of public instruction in 1848 and helped Kamehameha III establish public education in Hawaii, because of this he became a member of the privy council and the house of nobles. Any other Haole that became a part of the government were not missionaries.<\/p><p>[30] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom, <\/em>40-1.<\/p><p>[31] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom, <\/em>61-2.<\/p><p>[32] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom, <\/em>68.<\/p><p>[33] Jon M Van Dyke, <em>Who Owns the Crown Lands of Hawaii?<\/em> (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2008): 156-163.<\/p><p>[34] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom<\/em>, 101-124.<\/p><p>[35] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom<\/em>, 83-132, 166; Menton and Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii, <\/em>129.<\/p><p>[36] <em>Organic Act of the Territory of Hawaii<\/em>, Sec., 83.<\/p><p>[37] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom,<\/em> 133-158.<\/p><p>[38] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom, <\/em>133-159.<\/p><p>[39] The Republic of Hawaii and the white Oligarchy remained in control from 1994-1998, when the US Congress authorized an illegal treaty of annexation.<\/p><p>[40]Ku\u02bbumealoha Gomes, <em>Autobiography of Protest in Hawai\u02bbi <\/em>edited by Robert Mast and Anne Mast. (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1996): 421.\u00a0 <em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p><p>[41]Ku\u02bbualoha Meyer Ho\u02bbomanawanui, \u201cN\u0101 Luna,\u201d in <em>\u02bb\u014ciwi: a Native Hawaiian Journal,<\/em> editor Mahealani D. Dudoit, (Honolulu: Kuleana \u02bb\u014ciwi Press, 1998): 2; Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom, <\/em>164.<\/p><p>[42]Patrick Wolfe, \u201cOn Settler Colonialism,\u201d <em>Speaking of Indigenous Politics: Conversations with Activists, Scholars, and Tribal Leaders,<\/em> edited by J. Kehaulani Kauanui and Robert Warrior (US: University of Minnesota Press, 2018): 369; Budnick, 166; Menton and Tamura, 129; Mackenzie, 13.<\/p><p>[43] Keanu Sai. <em>Hawaii Kingdom Weblog <\/em>Hawaiian Kingdom Government, Acting Minister of the Interior. Contains photocopies of the Anti-Annexation Petitions, Letters of Protest of the Queen, and various Hawaiian Kingdom Officials to the United States government, as well as the Blount Report and the official letter of President Cleveland recognizing the illegal occupation. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.hawaiiankingdom.org\/us-occupation.shtml\">https:\/\/www.hawaiiankingdom.org\/us-occupation.shtml<\/a>; \u201cThe Joint Resolution was incapable of acquiring Hawai\u02bfi legally.\u00a0 Only a Treaty could annex Hawai\u02bfi. The Treaty of 1897 was never ratified by the United States. Annexation by resolution was unconstitutional. It would destroy the integrity of the Constitution and undermine the basis of the American Republic.\u201d Williamson Chang, \u201cDarkness over Hawaii: The Annexation Myth is the Greatest Obstacle Progress,\u201d <em>Asian-Pacific Law &amp; Policy Journal, <\/em>16, no.2, (2015).<\/p><p>[44] Organic Act of the Territory of Hawaii, 1898.<\/p><p>[45] The Big Five included: Campbell Estates, Castle &amp; Cooke, Dillingham, American Factors, and Alexander &amp; Baldwin. Large corporations who controled the majority of private lands in Hawaii and all aspects of the government, and economy. Trask, <em>From a Native Daughter, <\/em>91.<\/p><p>[46] Organic Act of the Territory of Hawaii, Sec. 4. 1898.<\/p><p>[47] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom. <\/em>168-188.<\/p><p>[48] The Hawaii State Constitutional Convention of 1978. <a href=\"https:\/\/hawaii.concon.info\/?page_id=214\">https:\/\/hawaii.concon.info\/?page_id=214<\/a><\/p><p>[49] Haunani Kay Trask, <em>From a Native Daughter: Colonialism &amp; Sovereignty in Hawaii <\/em>\u00a0(Maine: Common Courage Press, 1993), 21.<\/p><p>[50]Avis Kuuipoleialoha Poai, \u201cTales from the Dark Side of the Archives: Making History in Hawai\u2019i without Hawaiians,\u201d <em>University of Hawaii Law Review, <\/em>39 (2017): 575.<\/p><p>[51] Poai, \u201cTales from the Dark Side\u201d 584.<\/p><p>[52] Attorney Paul Sullivan: \u201cthe single most valuable resource\u2026in examining the history of Hawaii\u2019s government\u201d; Judge Burns: \u201cexclusively relied on vol. 3 of Kuykendall\u2019s work\u201d; Avis Kuuipoleialoha Poai, \u201cTales from the Dark Side,\u201d 603-612.<\/p><p>[53] R.S Kuykendall, and Charles H. Hunter, \u201cThe Publications of Ralph S. Kuykendall,\u201d <em>Hawaiian Journal of History, <\/em>2 (1968): 136-141.<\/p><p>[54] Kamakau, Samuel. <em>Ka Po\u02bbe Kahiko: The People of Old<\/em> (1869-1870, Ka N\u016bpepa Kuokoa). Trans. Mary Kawena Pukui. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1976,<\/p><p>[55] Kuykendall, <em>1819-1854<\/em> (269). As defined in the Oxford dictionary serfs were bound to the land and their lord.\u00a0 Maka\u2019\u0101inana were not.<\/p><p>[56] Samuel Kamakau, <em>The Works of the People of Old <\/em>(1869-1870), translated by Mary Kawena Pukui. (Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1976): 6-8; Betty Dunford, <em>The Hawaiians of Old <\/em>(Honolulu: Bess Press, 1980): 40-42.<\/p><p>[57] Explanation of the traditional land system will be explained in more detail in \u201cHawaii\u02bbs land History\u201d of this project, 41-45.\u00a0\u00a0 The layering that I refer, explains how Royal Patents included multiple Kuleana Awards within the confines of the RP, demonstrating the numerous people responsible for the care of the land. No one owned the land exclusively.<\/p><p>[58] In reviewing the literature, I noticed that of the modern text that discussed the Great Mahele (the land laws of Hawaii), they all referred as one of their main sources to Levy &amp; Kuykendahl, however when looking at those sources they refer to the Revised Statutes of 1925. These are records that had been rewritten to benefit the ruling Oligarchy and then added into the Territorial Laws.<\/p><p>[59] Neil M Levy, &#8220;Native Hawaiian Land Rights,&#8221; <em>California Law Review<\/em> 63, no. 4 (1975): 848-85.<\/p><p>[60] Pala Pala Sila Nui (Royal Patents) &amp; Kuleana Awards (Land Grants): \u02bbAhupua\u02bba of Koali, Mu\u02bbolea, Ula\u02bbino, Hamoa, Lahaina, Waikapu<\/p><p>[61] Levy, \u201cNative Hawaiian Land Rights,\u201d 848-85.<\/p><p>[62] Lili\u02bbuokalani believed that America had as much integrity as Britain had as evidenced by their actions during what was called the \u201cPaulet Affair.\u201d Kamehameha III almost lost the thrown to Lord Paulet, but Britain stepped in and forced him to return the thrown to the King and people of Hawaii, this is probably why she believed in America\u02bbs honor. R.S. Kuykendahl, <em>The Hawaiian Kingdom 1819-1854. <\/em>Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1953, 201-214.<\/p><p>[63] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom, <\/em>123.<\/p><p>[64] Levy, \u201cNative Hawaiian Land Rights,\u201d 848.<\/p><p>[65] Van Dyke, <em>Who Owns the Crown Lands of Hawai\u2019i<\/em>, 11-18.<\/p><p>[66] Gavan Daws, <em>Shoal of Times, <\/em>(Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, 1974).<\/p><p>[67] Poai, \u201cTales from the Darkside,\u201d 573.<\/p><p>[68] Poai, \u201cTales from the Darkside,\u201d 574.<\/p><p>[69] Jonathan Osorio, \u201cLiving in Archives and Dreams,\u201d 191,196; Avis Poai, \u201cTales from the Dark Side of the Archives,\u201d 572-5.<\/p><p>[70] Helen Bauer, <em>Hawaii: The Aloha State<\/em> (Hawaii: The Bess Press, 1960): 92-96. This was my textbook in 1967, then republished and repackaged word for word several times from 1960-1980s, my eldest son was bringing home the same textbook when he was in the seventh grade.<\/p><p>[71] Linda Menton &amp; Eileen Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii <\/em>(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1989).<\/p><p>[72] Bauer, <em>Hawaii the Aloha State,<\/em> 94. My personal copy of the Hawaii Department of Education textbook from 1960-1989.<\/p><p>[73] Menton &amp; Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii. <\/em>21-27.<\/p><p>[74] Kuykendall, <em>The Hawaiian Kingdom,1819-1854, <\/em>269-302; Levy, \u201cNative Hawaiian Land Rights,\u201d 848-85.<\/p><p>[75] Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom.<\/em><\/p><p>[76] Trask. <em>From a Native Daughter,<\/em>18.<\/p><p>[77] The \u201cBig Five\u201d were the five major sugar planters that came to control the government, the largest tracks of land, a monopoly on the economy, control over the news media, economic corporations, the banks, the utilities, and the majority of business interests in Hawaii between 1893-1980s. They consisted of C. Brewer &amp; Company, Theo Davis &amp; Company, American Factors, Castle &amp; Cooke, and Alexander &amp; Baldwin.\u00a0 Linda Menton &amp; Eileen Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii<\/em>, 161.<\/p><p>[78] Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie (editor) <em>Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook.<\/em> (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1991).<\/p><p>[79] The Office of Hawaiian Affairs was established by the State in 1979. The state claims it is funded through the Hawaiian Trust funds. Up until 2000, only Native Hawaiians (no blood quantum was designated) could vote or run for the OHA office; however, due to the loss of the court case <em>Rice v. Cayetano, <\/em>since that time, non-Hawaiians can both vote and run for a position on the board of trustees.\u00a0 Therefore, like the Office of Indian Affairs which has federal oversight; the Office of Hawaiian Affairs has state oversight. They are neither autonomous, nor sovereign.<\/p><p>[80] I use \u201cNative Hawaiian\u201d here since this is how K\u0101naka Maoli are identified by both the State of Hawaii and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.<\/p><p>[81] MacKenzie, <em>Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook,<\/em> 21-25.<\/p><p>[82] David Malo. \u201cA Hawaiian Life\u201d in <em>The Mo\u02bbolelo Hawai\u02bbi of Davida Malo, vol. 2: Hawaiian Text and Translation. <\/em>Translated by Noelani Arista<em>. <\/em>Edited by Charles Langlas and Jeffrey Lyon. (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2020)<em>.<\/em><\/p><p>[83]Samuel Kamakau, <em>Ka Po\u02bbe Kahiko: The People of Old<\/em> (1869-1870), Translated by Mary<\/p><p>Kawena Pukui (Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1976)<em>.<\/em><\/p><p>[84] Mary Kawena Pukui, <em>N\u0101n\u0101 i ke Kumu, <\/em>vol. 1. (Honolulu: Hui Hanai, 1983).<\/p><p>[85] Trask, <em>From a Native Daughter<\/em>.<\/p><p>[86] The \u201cGreat M\u0101hele,\u201d refers to Kamehameha III\u02bbs actions of addressing the Hawaii land tenure system.\u00a0 The debates surrounding this concept will be a major focus of my master\u02bbs project.<\/p><p>[87] Trask, <em>From a Native Daughter, <\/em>15.<\/p><p>[88] Trask, <em>From a Native Daughter, <\/em>51-69, 87-110, 131-143.<\/p><p>[89] Aron Alton Ardaiz, <em>Hawaii the Fake State: A Nation in Capitivity, <\/em>(Hawaii: Truth of God Ministry Hawaiian Islands, 2008): 199-371.<\/p><p>[90] These are standard legal terms meaning: <em>de jure <\/em>(rightful entitlement or claim), <em>de facto <\/em>(by fact, but not necessarily by right), <em>ex post facto <\/em>(having retroactive effect or force)<\/p><p>[91] J. K\u0113haulani Kauanui, <em>Hawaiian Blood: Colonialism and the Politics of Sovereignty and Indigeneity <\/em>(Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2008).<\/p><p>[92] A \u201cconceptual\u201d methodological approach is one where the historian uses linguistic analysis to the cultural understanding of key concepts of an Indigenous group.\u00a0 For example: In Kauanui\u02bbs analysis of the word <em>mo\u02bbok\u016bauhau<\/em> (genealogy), she breaks down the individual segments of meaning in the word: <em>mo\u02bbo<\/em> (series\/succession), <em>k\u016b\u02bbauhau<\/em> (lineage\/pedigree\/traditions); then finally, <em>\u02bbauhau<\/em> (assessment\/tribute\/tax), thereby linking the understanding of the word to the \u201creciprocal relationship between the common people, the chiefs, and the land.\u201d Kauanui, 37.<\/p><p>[93] Shirafi, 6.<\/p><p>[94]Candace Fujikane and Jonathan Y. Okamura, editors. <em>Asian Settler Colonialism: From Local Governance to the Habits of Everyday Life in Hawai\u02bbi.<\/em> (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2008).<\/p><p>[95]Jon M.Van Dyke,<em> Who Owns the Crown Lands of Hawaii?<\/em><\/p><p>\u00a0<\/p><p>[96] Van Dyke, <em>Who Owns the Crown Lands?<\/em> 30-53.<\/p><p>[97] Kamanamaikalani Beamer, <em>No M\u0101kou Ka Mana: Liberating the Nation, <\/em>(Honolulu:Kamehameha Publishing, 2014).<\/p><p>[98] Beamer, <em>No M\u0101kou Ka Mana, <\/em>8.<\/p><p>[99] Beamer, <em>No M\u0101kou Ka Mana, <\/em>105.<\/p><p>[100] Na Lama Kukui, <em>A Native Hawaiian Focus on the Hawai\u02bbi Public School System, SY2015, <\/em>Honolulu: Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) Research Division, 2017, 1.<\/p><p>[101] Joe Feagin and Sean Elias, \u201cRethinking Racial Formation Theory: A Systemic Racism Critique,\u201d <em>Ethnic and Racial Studies<\/em> 36:6. (2013): 936\u2013939.<\/p><p>[102] Feagin and Elias,<em> \u201cRethinking Racial Formation,\u201d939-41.<\/em><\/p><p>[103] Feagin and Elias,<em> \u201cRethinking Racial Formation,\u201d<\/em> 931-7.<\/p><p>[104] Evelyn Nakano Glenn, \u201cSettler Colonialism as Structure: A Framework for Comparative Studies of US Race and Gender Formation.\u201d <em>Sociology of Race and Ethnicity<\/em> 12:1. (2015): 53-55; Andrea Smith, \u201cIndigeneity, Settler Colonialism, White Supremacy,\u201d <em>Racial Formation in the Twenty-First Century<\/em>, (US: University of California Press, 2012): 35.<\/p><p>[105] Andrea Smith, \u201cIndigeneity, Settler Colonialism, White Supremacy,\u201d <em>Racial Formation in the Twenty-First Century<\/em>, ed. Daniel Martinez HoSang, Oneka LaBennett, and Laura Pulido, (University of California Press, 2012): 40.<\/p><p>[106] Robert Mast &amp; Anne Mast, <em>Autobiography of Protest in Hawaii<\/em> (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1996):407; Trask, 5-6.<\/p><p>[107] Ho\u02bbokua\u02bb\u0101ina, He Ali\u02bbi Ka \u02bbA\u0304ina, He Kauwa\u0304 Ke Kanaka 3:37 YouTube.<\/p><p>[108] Unlike Asians on the Mainland United States, the Asians in Hawaii were not forced to return to Asia as a result of the Chinese Exclusion Act. Anyone could become either a naturalized Hawaiian citizen of the Hawaiian Kingdom or their children born in Hawai\u02bbi were automatically considered citizens. Many Asians also intermarried with Hawaiians. If they were a citizen they could vote, however many too were not citizens.\u00a0 It was not until after the overthrow that the Republic tried to make some leave, mostly agitators for the unions. Overall, they were needed to work the fields and it was less expensive to keep them in Hawaii than shipping in a new immigrants all the time. This is why Hawaii has a very large Asian population. Candace Fujikane and Jonathan Y. Okamura, editors, <em>Asian Settler Colonialism: From Local Governance to the Habits of Everyday Life in Hawai\u02bbi, <\/em>(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2008): 21-42.<\/p><p>[109] Picture Brides was a system created by their employers, by which contract laborers could find wives from their home country, women they had never met and only had seen in photos. Candice Fujikane and Johnathan Y. Okamura, <em>Asian Settler Colonialism, <\/em>54.<\/p><p>[110] In Hawaii, the laborers that were brought in by sugar planters were not indentured or slaves; they were referred to as contract laborers, men whose government had brokered the agreements with the planters in order to ensure fair treatment of their citizenry. While they were paid poorly and often went into debt to the company store, they were free to leave the plantation upon the completion of their contract. Theon Wright, <em>The Disenchanted Isles: The Story of the Second Revolution in Hawaii <\/em>(NY: The Dial Press, 1972): 47; Eleanor Nordyke. <em>The Peopling of Hawaii<\/em>, (Honolulu: East-West Center, University Press of Hawaii, 1977): 30-35.<\/p><p>[111] Wolfe, \u201cOn Settler Colonialism,\u201d 348.<\/p><p>[112] Jennifer LaFleur, \u201cThe Race That Space Makes: The Power of Place in the Colonial Formation of Social Categorizations.\u201d <em>Sociology of Race &amp; Ethnicity,<\/em> 7, no. 4. (2021): 516.\u00a0<\/p><p>[113] Roger Bell, \u201cIncorporated but Not Equal, 1898-1941\u201d <em>Last Among Equals:Hawaiian Statehood and American Politics <\/em>(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,1984): 53.<\/p><p>[114] Wright, <em>The Disenchanted Isles, <\/em>48; Nordyke, <em>The Peopling of Hawaii, <\/em>24.<\/p><p>[115]LaFleur, \u201cThe Race That Space Makes,\u201d 514; Menton and Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii, <\/em>211-217; Interviews: Ho\u02bbopai, Motooka, Villiarimo.<\/p><p>[116]Robert N Anderson, Richard Coller, and Rebecca F. Pestano, \u201c Social Relations\u201d <em>Filipinos in Rural Hawaii <\/em>(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1984): 83-4.<\/p><p>[117]Morris Young, \u201cStandard English and Student Bodies: Institutionalizing Race and Literacy in Hawaii,\u201d <em>College English, <\/em>64, no.4. (National Council of Teachers of English, 2002): 409.<\/p><p>[118] Menton and Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii, <\/em>211-217; Interview: Chris Villiarimo (2015).<\/p><p>[119] Anderson, et.al, \u201cSocial Relations,\u201d 95-6; Wright, <em>Disenchanted Isles,<\/em> 47; Interview, <em>Autobiography of Protest<\/em>: Gomes<em>, <\/em>423 and Petranek<em>, <\/em>329.\u00a0<\/p><p>[120]Daniel B. Eisen, Kara Takasaki and Arlie Tagayuna, \u201cAm I really Filipino?\u201d <em>Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity,<\/em>\u201d 1, no. 2. (OK: Southwest Center for Human Relations Studies at the University of Oklahoma, 2015): 25-6.<\/p><p>[121] Na Lama Kukui, 2.<\/p><p>[122] Na Lama Kukui, 2; Trask, <em>From a Native Daughter, <\/em>21.<\/p><p>[123]\u00a0 Maunakea, Katherine. 1993. Interview in <em>He Alo \u0101 He Alo: Hawaiian Voices of Sovereignty, Face to Face. <\/em>(Honolulu: American Friends Service Committee,1993): 27; Interview: Ho\u02bbopai.<\/p><p>[124] Interview: Noenoe K. Silva, in <em>\u02bb\u014ciwi: a Native Hawaiian Journal,<\/em> editor Mahealani D. Dudoit. (Honolulu: Kuleana \u02bb\u014ciwi Press, 1998): 41.<\/p><p>[125]\u00a0 Noe K. Silva, <em>\u02bb\u014ciwi: a Native Hawaiian Journal,<\/em> editor Mahealani D. Dudoit. (Honolulu: Kuleana \u02bb\u014ciwi Press, 1998); 53; Budnick, <em>Stolen Kingdom, <\/em>172.<\/p><p>[126] Menton and Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii, <\/em>129.<\/p><p>[127] Roger Bell, \u201cIncorporated but Not Equal, 1898-1941\u201d in <em>Last Among Equals: Hawaiian Statehood and American Politics. <\/em>(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,1984): 53.<\/p><p>[128] Bell, <em>\u201c<\/em>Incorporated but Not Equal,\u201d 53; Menton and Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii, <\/em>218.<\/p><p>[129] Tamura and Menton, <em>A History of Hawaii, <\/em>218; Young, \u201cStandard English,\u201d 406-7.<\/p><p>[130] Young, \u201cStandard English,\u201d 409.<\/p><p>[131] Interview: C. Villiarimo.<\/p><p>[132] <em>Programme for the Patriotic Exercises in the Public Schools<\/em>, Territory of Hawaii, 1906.<\/p><p>adopted by the Department of Public Instruction, 1.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p><p>[133] Programme, 3.<\/p><p>[134] Programme, 3-14.<\/p><p>[135] Programme, 7.<\/p><p>[136] Bell, <em>Incorporated but Not Equal, <\/em>45.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p><p>[137] Bell, <em>Incorporated but Not Equal, <\/em>45<em>. <\/em>\u00a0<\/p><p>[138]Schuman, Frederick L.. \u201cRacial Relations in the 50th State\u201d in <em>The North American Review,<\/em> vol.249:2. University of Iowa,1964. 44-45.<\/p><p>[139] Schuman, \u201cRacial Relations,\u201d 45.<\/p><p>[140] Young, \u201cStandard English,\u201d 406.<\/p><p>[141] Young, \u201cStandard English,\u201d 406.<\/p><p>[142] Young, \u201cStandard English,\u201d 406.<\/p><p>[143] Menton and Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii, <\/em>218; Young, \u201cStandard English,\u201d 406-7.<\/p><p>[144] Young, \u201cStandard English,\u201d 410.<\/p><p>[145] Interview: Gomes, <em>Autobiography, <\/em>424; P. Villiarimo.<\/p><p>[146] Michelle Morgan, \u201cAmericanizing the Teachers: Identity, Citizenship, and the Teaching Corps. In Hawaii, 1900-1941,\u201d <em>Western Historical Quarterly, <\/em>45, no. 2. (Oxford University Press, 2014): 149.\u00a0<\/p><p>[147] Morgan, \u201cAmericanizing the Teachers,\u201d 147-8, 160.<\/p><p>[148] Morgan, \u201cAmericanizing the Teachers,\u201d 150.\u00a0<\/p><p>[149] Morgan, \u201cAmericanizing the Teachers,\u201d 154.<\/p><p>[150] Wright, <em>Disenchanted Isles, <\/em>48; Interview: Gomes, <em>Autobiography, <\/em>48.<\/p><p>[151] Jean Beaman and Amy Petts, \u201cTowards a Global Theory of Colorblindness: Comparing Colorblind Racial Ideology in France and the United States,\u201d <em>Sociology Compass, <\/em>14, no. 4<em>, <\/em>(Calif: Dept. of Sociology, University of California, Santa Barbara, 2019): 5-6.<\/p><p>[152] Interviews: Gomes, <em>Disenchanted Isles, <\/em>424; Okubo, <em>Disenchanted Isles, <\/em>39; P. Villiarimo.<\/p><p>[153] Krysia N. Mossakowski, \u201cCoping with Perceived Discrimination: Does Ethnic Identity Protect Mental Health?\u201d <em>Journal of Health and Social Behavior, <\/em>44, no. 3, American Sociological Association, 2003. 318-331; Eisen, et.al, \u201cAm I Filipino?\u201d 26.<\/p><p>[154] Eisen, et.al, \u201cAm I Filipino?\u201d 26-7.<\/p><p>[155] Interviews, <em>Autobiography: <\/em>Burgess, 412; Okubo, 143.<\/p><p>[156] John R. Chavez, \u201cAliens in their Native Lands: the Persistance of Internal Colonial Theory,\u201d <em>Journal of World History, <\/em>22, no. 4. (HI: University of Hawaii Press, 2011): 787-90.\u00a0<\/p><p>[157] John Dominis Holt, \u201cOn Being Hawaiian\u201d (1964)<\/p><p>[158] <em>Pierre Bowman, \u201cKalama Case Preceded Waiahole-Waikane,\u201d Honolulu Star Bulletin<\/em> (Jan. 7,1977). A-15<\/p><p>\u00a0<\/p><p>[159] Martha Warren Beckwith, <em>The Kumulipo: A Hawaiian Creation Chant, <\/em>(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1951). 232, stanzas: 1792-1812; Beckwith, <em>Hawaiian Mythology <\/em>(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1970): 297.<\/p><p>[160] Samuel Kamakau, <em>Na Mo\u02bbolelo a ka Po\u02bbe Kahiko<\/em> (1865, Ka N\u016bpepa Kuokoa) Trans. Mary Kawena Pukui (Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1991): 13, 133;<\/p><p>[161] Mary Kawena Pukui (trans), <em>\u02bb\u014clelo No\u02bbeau: Hawaiian Proverbs and Poetical Sayings,<\/em> (Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1983):1149.<\/p><p>[162] While these cultural traditions date back to when<em> H\u0101loa<\/em> (the first kanaka) was born, today they are still practiced by <em>mahi\u02bbai<\/em> (farmers) and <em>lawai\u02bba<\/em> (fishermen) throughout the islands.<\/p><p>[163] Interview: Kawaikap\u016b\u02bbokalani Hewitt, 2020.<\/p><p>[164] Keeaumoku Kapu, Interview by Patricia Villiarimo, Lahaina, Hawaii November 20, 2007,\u00a0 practitioner of Hawaiian culture.<\/p><p>[165] The \u201cWestern vision of land and a capitalistic conception to land tenure,\u201d is the concept that land could be bought and sold, fee simple, and for profit.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p><p>[166] The <em>\u02bbahupua\u02bba<\/em> is a land division that represents the area of land from the peak of the mountain, along the ridges and down to the ocean, usually in the shape of a pie. The <em>konohiki<\/em> were the ones who managed the lands and watched over it.<\/p><p>[167] W.D. Alexander, \u201cA Brief History of Land Titles in the Hawaiian Kingdom\u201d (1891).<\/p><p>[168] Constitution of 1887, Constitution of 1892.<\/p><p>[169] Principles of the Land Commission, written in English and Hawaiian (1846): 13.<\/p><p>[170] Royal Patent 382, Court Document Wittlesley to Bishop Power of Attorney, Deed: Wittlesley to Kamakahiki and others.<\/p><p>[171] Royal Patents (1875, 466, 416,415); Kuleana Awards (LCA:75b, 75)<\/p><p>[172] Alexander, \u201cBrief History of Land Titles\u201d (1891) para. 6; Principles of Land Commission (1846); Hawaiian Kingdom Constitutions of: 1852, 1887, &amp; 1892.<\/p><p>[173] Alexander, \u201cBrief History of Land Titles,\u201d Sec. Homestead Lots.<\/p><p>[174] Constitution 1992; Chap.LXIII, Sec.1<\/p><p>[175] Principles of the Land Commission, 5<\/p><p>[176] Menton &amp; Tamura, <em>A History of Hawaii, <\/em>113; Also in (Levy, Kuykendall, &amp; Trask)<\/p><p>[177] Organic Act of the Territory of Hawaii, Sec. 73.<\/p><p>[178] Further discussion of the Great Mahele, <em>Palapala Sila Nui<\/em> (Royal Patents) or Kuleana Awards and Hawaii\u02bbs land history is discussed on pp. 41-45.<\/p><p>[179] Aron Alton Ardaiz, <em>Hawaii the Fake State: A Nation in Captivity <\/em>(Hawaii: Truth of God Ministry Hawaiian Islands, 2008): 66.<\/p><p>[180] Organic Act of the Territory of Hawaii, Sec. 73, p.43.<\/p><p>[181] quit-claim, is a land tenure term used in Hawaii, that describes the process of paying government land taxes, in order to gain title to the land.\u00a0 The title the land owner receives is a TMK (Tax Map Key).\u00a0 This is also called Quiet Title, because it is done in secret, without the true owner, the owner of the Kuleana Award, or Royal Patent, not being aware. Ardaiz, <em>The Fake State, <\/em>66.<\/p><p>[182] A few examples of questionable transfers of interest: Regarding Royal Patent 382- Deed: Kanahele to Gracias, Punihele to Makaenui Sugar Company, Puu &amp; Luahine to Hana Plantation, filed with Title Guaranty of Hawaii between 1906-1930. Widow of Chun Kee to R.A. Drumond.<\/p><p>[183] <u>State v. Lorenzo<\/u>, Haw. 219, 883P.2d 641 (Ha. App.1994).<\/p><p>[184] Valerie Kamaka Pu. Interviewed by Patricia Villiarimo, May 2006. Shared court case filed on January 11, 1978 by Hana Huli Association, Limited (a Hawaii corporation), six volumes filed with Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii against the family owners of Royal Patent 382, Koali, Hana, Hawaii.<\/p><p>[185] Mackensie, <em>Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook, <\/em>43-65.<\/p><p>[186] Interview: Mackey Cockett III, Nov. 2022.<\/p><p>[187] Ardaiz, <em>The Fake State,<\/em>123-4.<\/p><p>[188] Samuel King,<em>\u201c<\/em>Broken Trust,\u201d <em>Honolulu Star Bulletin <\/em>Special Ed. (Aug. 9, 1997)<\/p><p>[189] These are just two examples of questionable spending by the Bishop Estate trustees. <a href=\"https:\/\/archives.starbulletin.com\/specials\/bishop\/story2\">https:\/\/archives.starbulletin.com\/specials\/bishop\/story2<\/a><\/p><p>[190] Kyle Kajihiro, \u201cNation Under the Gun: Militarism and Resistance in Hawaii,\u201d <em>Cultural Survival Quarterly Magazine<\/em> (Mar.2000).<\/p><p>[191] The Native Hawaiian Task Force Report (HI: Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 2012): 8; Goldstein, \u201cEntangled Dispossessions,\u201d 62.<\/p><p>[192] John Dominis Holt \u201cOn Being Hawaiian\u201d (1964)<\/p><p>[193] These examples are just a few that I myself have witnessed growing up both on Maui and Oahu.<\/p><p>[194] Haunani Kay Trask, <em>From a Native Daughter<\/em>, 181.<\/p><p>[195] Walter Ritte, interviewed by Patricia Villiarimo, May 6, 2020. Walter is an important cultural activist in the state of Hawaii, active in many of the movements since his first fight.<\/p><p>[196] Walter Ritte.<\/p><p>[197] Hawaii Constitutional Convention of 1978, Sec. 7.<\/p><p>[198] Haunani Kay Trask, \u201cThe Birth of the Modern Hawaiian Movement,\u201d <em>The Hawaiian Journal of History,<\/em> 21 (1987): 129.<\/p><p>[199] Trask, \u201cThe Birth of the Modern Hawaiian Movement,\u201d 128.<\/p><p>[200] Trask, \u201cThe Birth of the Modern Hawaiian Movement<em>,<\/em>\u201d 131.<\/p><p>[201] Trask, \u201cThe Birth of the Modern Hawaiian Movement,\u201d 132.<\/p><p>[202] Trask, \u201cThe Birth of the Modern Hawaiian Movement,\u201d 134.<\/p><p>[203] Trask, \u201cThe Birth of the Modern Hawaiian Movement,\u201d 144.<\/p><p>[204] Rev. Larry Jones (Special Columnist), \u201cKalama not a Racial Issue,\u201d <em>The Sunday Star-<\/em><\/p><p><em>Bulletin &amp; Advertiser<\/em> (April.18, 1971): A23.<\/p><p>[205] Trask, \u201cThe Birth of the Modern Hawaiian Movement,\u201d 142.<\/p><p>[206] <em>Pierre Bowman, \u201cKalama Case Preceded Waiahole-Waikane,\u201d Honolulu Star Bulletin<\/em> Jan. 7,1977. A-15<\/p><p>[207] <em>Bowman, \u201cKalama Case,\u201d<\/em>A-15.<\/p><p>[208] Kaho\u02bbolawe Island Reserve Commission (KIRC). \u201cKa Huaka\u02bbi i Kaho\u02bbolawe,\u201d 6.<\/p><p>[209] KIRC, 6.<\/p><p>[210] PKO. \u201cKaho\u02bbolawe Aloha \u02bb\u0100ina &#8211; George Helm\u201d leader of Aloha \u02bbAina movement.\u201d Hi: Na Maka o Ka \u0100ina.<\/p><p>[211] PKO. \u201cStory of Kahoolawe by Those Who Were There<strong>\u201d <\/strong>Hi: Na Maka o Ka \u0100ina.<\/p><p>[212] \u201cStory of Kahoolawe by Those Who Were There.\u201d<\/p><p>[213] \u201cStory of Kahoolawe by Those Who Were There.\u201d<\/p><p>[214]\u00a0 George Helm, \u201cKaho\u02bbolawe Aloha \u02bb\u0100ina.\u201d<\/p><p>[215] Loretta Ritte, \u201cKaho\u02bbolawe Aloha \u02bb\u0100ina.\u201d<\/p><p>[216] Vice Admiral Coogan, \u201cKaho\u02bbolawe Aloha \u02bb\u0100ina.\u201d<\/p><p>[217] Walter Ritte. Interview by Patricia Villiarimo, May 6, 2020.<\/p><p>[218] David Tong, \u201cKahoolawe Searcher is Lost,\u201d <em>The Honolulu Advertiser <\/em>(Mar.10,1977): A.1.<\/p><p>[219] Uechi, Colleen. \u201c40 years after men\u02bbs disappearance at sea, their vision for Kaho\u02bbolawe has become a reality.\u201d <em>Maui News. <\/em>(Mar. 5, 2017).<\/p><p>[220] \u201cHunt for Helm, Mitchell Resumes\u201d <em>Honolulu Advertiser <\/em>\u00a0(Mar. 26, 1977): A-3<\/p><p>[221] \u201cHunt for Helm, Mitchell Resumes,\u201d <em>Honolulu Advertiser <\/em>(Mar. 26, 1977): A-3<\/p><p>[222] Walter Ritte. Interview with Patricia Villiarimo. May 6, 2020.<\/p><p>[223] Francis Anthony Boyle. \u201cRestoration of the Independent Nation State of Hawaii Under International Law\u201d <em>St. Thomas Law Review,<\/em> 7. (Summer 1995).\u00a0 Shared at the symposium for: Tribal Sovereignty- Back to the Future?<\/p><p>[224] Walter Ritte. Interview by Patricia Villiarimo. May 6, 2002.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Motivation [1] Pro Se&#8211; is Latin for \u201cself,\u201d it is used as a legal term for defending oneself on their own behalf. No lawyers are involved. [2] It has been questioned as to whether or not \u2018Hawaiian\u2019 is the correct spelling, or whether or not it should be \u2018Hawai\u02bbian,\u2019 therefore it is necessary to provide [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/684"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=684"}],"version-history":[{"count":20,"href":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/684\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":822,"href":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/684\/revisions\/822"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ehoalakaea.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=684"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}