Hawaii Five-No

N AT I O N A L R E V I E W/S E P T E M B E R 26, 2005 tually secede, taking some of Hawaii’s land with it.

The Akaka bill is just the latest battle in a long Hawaiian war over multicultural- ism, race entitlements, and the American way. When Hawaii joined the Union in 1959, statehood was very popular: An astounding 94 percent voted in favor. “We were so proud to be Americans,” says Slom. “We had worked so hard for statehood because we had to prove to Congress that we weren’t a bunch of sav- ages out here.” But in the years since, multiculturalism arrived, and with it, the Hawaiian-rights movement: “This is an incredible culture, but it’s been taken over and radicalized.” These days, the government won’t even acknowledge Statehood Day, which used to be a rau- cous celebration, because it might prove too divisive. Slom was the sole member of the legislature to vote against a resolu- tion supporting the Akaka bill. “People think they’re entitled to some- thing taken from their ancestors ages ago,” says Malia Zimmerman, Hawaii’s most prominent conservative journalist. In real- ity, it’s not even clear that anything was taken from ordinary native Hawaiians, since the monarchy owned and controlled most of the land. But this hasn’t stopped the Akaka bill’s proponents from casting the debate in stark reparation terms: Native-exclusive programs are a debt the U.S. owes to Hawaiians—though details of the alleged past transgressions are scant, or exaggerated—and without the bill, all native-only programs will be in danger. There is some validity to this last asser- tion. In 2000, the Supreme Court ruled that native-only voting restrictions for the board of a quasi-independent state agency, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA), were illegal. (OHA was conceived to ben- efit natives.) Just a few weeks ago, the Ninth Circuit Court, not exactly a bulwark of conservative thought, struck down a native-only admission policy at Ka- mehameha Schools. In response, over 20,000 Hawaiians took to the streets to protest, armed with hula skirts, pictures of deposed queen Liliuokalani, and the bright red T-shirts of the independence move- ment. They weren’t the only ones who were upset. Gov. Linda Lingle said that “regardless of the legal basis of [the Kamehameha] decision, this is not a just decision.” I

AB

About the Author

Alston B. Ramsay

Featured Tags

N AT I O N A L R E V I E W/S E P T E M B E R 26, 2005 tually secede, taking some of Hawaii’s land with it.

The Akaka bill is just the latest battle in a long Hawaiian war over multicultural- ism, race entitlements, and the American way. When Hawaii joined the Union in 1959, statehood was very popular: An astounding 94 percent voted in favor. “We were so proud to be Americans,” says Slom. “We had worked so hard for statehood because we had to prove to Congress that we weren’t a bunch of sav- ages out here.” But in the years since, multiculturalism arrived, and with it, the Hawaiian-rights movement: “This is an incredible culture, but it’s been taken over and radicalized.” These days, the government won’t even acknowledge Statehood Day, which used to be a rau- cous celebration, because it might prove too divisive. Slom was the sole member of the legislature to vote against a resolu- tion supporting the Akaka bill. “People think they’re entitled to some- thing taken from their ancestors ages ago,” says Malia Zimmerman, Hawaii’s most prominent conservative journalist. In real- ity, it’s not even clear that anything was taken from ordinary native Hawaiians, since the monarchy owned and controlled most of the land. But this hasn’t stopped the Akaka bill’s proponents from casting the debate in stark reparation terms: Native-exclusive programs are a debt the U.S. owes to Hawaiians—though details of the alleged past transgressions are scant, or exaggerated—and without the bill, all native-only programs will be in danger. There is some validity to this last asser- tion. In 2000, the Supreme Court ruled that native-only voting restrictions for the board of a quasi-independent state agency, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA), were illegal. (OHA was conceived to ben- efit natives.) Just a few weeks ago, the Ninth Circuit Court, not exactly a bulwark of conservative thought, struck down a native-only admission policy at Ka- mehameha Schools. In response, over 20,000 Hawaiians took to the streets to protest, armed with hula skirts, pictures of deposed queen Liliuokalani, and the bright red T-shirts of the independence move- ment. They weren’t the only ones who were upset. Gov. Linda Lingle said that “regardless of the legal basis of [the Kamehameha] decision, this is not a just decision.” I