Haoles in Hawaii

Notes

105 Notes Introduction 1. Local people also refer to the U.S. continent as the “mainland,” but there is a political move against that label as it assumes a marginal position for the islands. Hawaiian nationals also refer to the U.S. continent as “America ” in order to underscore their claims that Hawai‘i is not legally part of the United States. Of course, those from Central and South America, as well as Canada, resist the conflation of “America” with the United States. 2. I put “states” in quotes to highlight the contested nature of Hawai‘i’s statehood. 3. State and federal bureaucracies make distinctions based on blood quantum between “native Hawaiian” (50 percent native Hawaiian blood or more) and “Hawaiian” (less than 50 percent), but I do not. Some in the Hawaiian community also use the term Kanaka ‘Ōiwi, which literally means “bone people,” or Hawaiian by ancestry. 4. These numbers are derived from the 2000 census and available from the Hawai‘i State Data Book: http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/economic/ databook/. 5. For more on how the tourist industry represents Hawai‘i as an exotic paradise, see Trask 1999. 6. Some good places to start investigating postcolonial theory include Mohanty 2003; McClintock, Mufti, and Shohat 1997; Lewis and Mills 2003. 7. Some places to start exploring critical whiteness studies include Fine 1997, Delgado and Stefancic 1999, Hill 1997, Frankenberg 1997, HaneyL ópez 1996. 8. Some would argue that these powerful locals have become so haolified that they no longer represent Hawaiian/local culture or values. Further, there is a strong critique suggesting that locals need to take responsibility for their complicity with, and sometimes active participation in, the colonization of Hawai‘i and the oppression of native Hawaiians (Fujikane 2000, 2004; Trask 2000; Rosa 2000). Chapter 1 “Haole Go Home”: Isn’t Hawai‘i Part of the U.S.? 1. This new scholarship includes Silva 2004, Kame‘eleihiwa 1992, Osorio 2002, McGregor 2007, Meyer 2008, Kauanui 2008. 2. Jonathan K. Osorio writes eloquently about this idea of the “dismemberment ” of the Hawaiian people and nation (2002). 3. For more on the transformation from traditional to Western law, see Merry 2000. 4. For more on the Māhele, see Kame‘eleihiwa 1992; Osorio 2002, 44; Kent 1989, 32. 5. The first sugar plantation was opened in Kōloa and was still in operation in the 1970s when I attended Kōloa Elementary School. The school bus drove out on a cane road to pick up and drop off many of my local classmates whose families worked at the plantation. 6. For a detailed discussion of these debates, see Bell 1984. 7. In the first decades after Cook’s arrival Hawai‘i was a stopping place for fur traders from the United States and England on their way to China (Kent 1983, 14). 8. Importantly, Noenoe Silva points out significant problems with the published versions of Kamakau’s writings in which passages were deleted and reordered in order to make the text fit Western standards of “history” (Silva 2004, 16–23). 9. Much excellent scholarship has focused on the immigration of laborers and the plantation system, and I will return to some of it in my discussion of local identity in chapter 2. See, for example, Takaki 1983, Okihiro 1991, Tamura 1993. 10. See chapter 2 of Aloha Betrayed (Silva 2004, 45–86). 11. See chapter 5 of Aloha Betrayed (Silva 2004, 164–203). 12. For more on militarism in Hawai‘i, see Kajihiro 2002, Ferguson and Turnbull 1999, Trask 2002b, Churchill and Venne 2004. For more on tourism in Hawai‘i, see Halualani 2002, Bacchilega 2007, Trask 1999, Desmond 2001. Chapter 2 “No Ack!”: What Is Haole, Anyway? 1. Aloha Betrayed is the title of Noenoe K. Silva’s book about Hawaiian resistance to the overthrow (2004). 2. This can be contrasted with postcolonial theory’s intense attention to all forms of resistance by the colonized including evasion, mimicy, and subversion. 106 notes to pages 12–38 notes to pages 39–68 107 3. For more on representations of the queen, see the final chapter in Silva’s book and Lydia Kualapai’s article (Silva 2004, Kualapai 2005). 4. The military question was not so much about the military use of territories or harbors, which U.S. foreign policy makes clear does not require U.S. soil/water. In fact, the United States had already...