Total Length: 1243 words ( 4 double-spaced pages)
Total Sources: 6
Page 1 of 4
al.; Sai).
One of the reasons for the lack of political success for any of the groups that support Hawaiian sovereignty is that there is no cohesive, united, group. Much as Russia in 1916 had over 100 parties, until Lenin and the Bolshevik/Menshevik groups coalesced, there was not enough entropy to bring about change. In the 21st century, and with the history of Hawaii, this is even more difficult. A broad overview of these groups would include:
Basic View
Platform
Misc.
Kingdom of Hawaii Exile
Royalist
1893-85, now defunct
Used as historical tradition for restoring the monarchy
Home Rule Party of Hawaii
Royalist
Extreme nationalism, popular early 1900s
Largely used as an historical basis for rule
Democratic Party of Hawaii
Royalist
Moderate version of Home Rule Party
Using land to secure benefit for natives
Aboriginal Lands of Hawaiian Ancestry (ALOHA)
Nationalist
Reparations for native peoples
Unclear if still in existence
Office of Hawaiian Affairs
Democratic/Nationalist
Legally represent interests of native Hawaiians; most well-funded organization
Respected group trying to redress past issues
Ka Lahui
Grassroots Nationalist
Lobbying United Nations to force decolonization
Trying to work through the system using the contemporary Native American model
Nation of Hawaii
Republicanism
Est. 1993, activism for native peoples.
Some of its leaders have been jailed.
Ka Pakaukau
Non-Violence
Wants U.S. To pay reparations and clean up polluted areas
Return Hawaii to more natural preserve
Poka Laenui
Nationalism
Complete decolonization
Use native democratization
Hawaiian Kingdom
Nationalism
Legally trained, leader Sai believes treaties were broken
Seeks legal means to redress.
Kingdom of Hawaii
Nationalism
Reinstatement of Kingdom of Hawaii
Public attention to the issue.
(Sources: Coffman; Dougherty; Budnick)
At least in the foreseeable future, it is unlikely that any of these movements will gain enough momentum to actually elicit change. Due to some of the efforts of the movment, the United States has apologized for the overthrow of the monarchy and some of the promises it made in An Apology Resolution, November 1993, under President Bill Clinton (LIberty). Despit this public pronouncement, however, in Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs (2009), the Supreme Court ruled that the apology had no binding effect to modify or change the lands of the State of Hawaii (Hawaii, et.al. v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, et.al.). And, although the debate continues, the economic impact of soverignty without severe reparations paid would likely result in a disaster for all sides, certainly not something the U.S. Congress is willing to address anytime soon.
REFERENCES
Budnick, R. Stolen Kingdom: An American Conspiracy. Honolulu: Aloha Press, 1992.
Coffman, T. The Island Edge of America: A Political History of Hawaii. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2003.
Dougherty, M. To Steal a Kingdom. Oahu: Island Style Press, 2000.
Fein, B. "Hawaii Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand." 15-16 June 2005. Hawaiian Congressional Record.