Hoe, a lanky Honolulu native, had taken command of the 41-man 2nd Platoon in April -- two months before he was married and five months before his battalion, which is based at Fort Lewis, Wash., deployed to Iraq. The command was the fulfillment of a dream for Hoe, who after several years as an enlisted soldier enrolled at the University of Hawaii so he could return as a commissioned infantry officer.Lt. Hoe was loyal to his country to the point of dying for it, and at the same time had strong feelings about Hawai‘i:
Hoe was proud of his family's military history but joked that Hawaii had been better off without the Mainland. "He would say, 'We don't have to be a state; we were fine without you, just fine,'" [Staff Sgt. Steve] Siglock recalled.Perhaps Lt. Hoe wasn’t exactly joking…
Nainoa Hoe’s father, Allen, himself a Vietnam vet, is a Justice in the acting “Government of the Hawiian Kingdom”. Risible? Laugh too hard and you risk ignoring what are, at best, some damned inconvenient facts. That Hawai‘i was stolen by the U.S. is not Leftist cant, but much closer to conventional wisdom on the Islands, though opinions on what (if anything) to do about this vary greatly.
Year before last, my wife and I were in Honolulu. I recall a Hawaiian man standing on a corner in Waikīkī on a Saturday night, staring out over the rivers of tourists from East and West crowding the sidewalks. The man was aged and hard, stone still, and he stared over us all as if staring over the destruction of war, a thousand yard stare, and while he was only one person among thousands, he was singular, alone, and utterly out of place… or was he?
Such was the power of his presence that at once all was inverted, and it was not he that was out of place but me, and my wife with me, and all of us, who were there with him in O‘ahu, but not of it. He was there, the only one truly there, and he had always been there.
There was a chasm between us – one that someone such as Lt. Hoe might have bridged.
What is the nature of the responsibility we owe to those who we as a nation have wronged? Perhaps “responsibility” is the wrong word. Culpability transmitted by blood, the sins of the father revisited on the sons – this concept has no resonance with me. But a sense of obligation, transmitted by culture and society, rings truer. The language of “acknowledging ramifications” and “supporting reconciliation” adopted by the 1993 “Apology Resolution” is a step in this direction.
Then there are the maximalist “roosting chickens” whichChurchill recently commented publicly on Hawaii in the Rocky Mountain News. Feb. 2, 2005, Churchill said to potential visitors to Hawaii: "You want to do something constructive for indigenous Hawaiians? Stay home. And if you have to break their kneecaps in order to get them to, do it." [Hat tip: LGF]Endorsing violence is a habit for Churchill, who spoke last Tuesday at the University of Hawai‘i, Lt. Hoe’s alma mater, to a crowd of 800 “mostly sympathetic” listeners:
UH student Kirsten Chong said her professors assigned her to listen to the speech. "He was humorous and he certainly didn't pull any punches," she said, adding that because she is native Hawaiian, she agrees with much of what he said. [emphasis mine]I suspect Lt. Hoe might have had words for Ms. Chong. I suspect Lt. Hoe would have had words for Ward Churchill. Perhaps Lt. Hoe had words for us all, words we will never know. Mourn him, for we are truly diminished by the loss of this man.
Her name is Kirsten Chong, and she claims to agree with Ward Churchill because... she's a native Hawaiian?
"Idiotarian." The term just speaks for itself some times....
Joe, couldn't Ms. Chong be a native through her mother? Or an adopted child? Churchill is scum and it's rather sad that anyone, even radical students, would give him an appreciative hearing, but your comment is off the mark.
Two levels of idiocy going on here: Churchill's hate-filled rage against the "crimes" of the past; and the author's soppy "maybe we should sort of feel guilty" bit.
Expansion is the nature of human societies. You either expand or you contract and die. Healthy societies get annexed and become vibrant parts of the "imperial" society, as has generally happened in places like Hawaii. Unhealthy societies are annihilated.
Would you try to shame humanity for displacing evolutionary predecessors? Was there a "neanderthal genocide" we should be flailing our backs in collective self-loathing over?
Hawaii was an island kingdom. It was ruled by an absolute monarch, who, whoever nice she may have been at the end, was still a tyrant. Anyone who seriously thinks that the life of everday residents of Hawaii, or Puerto Rico, or Guam, or any of our other conquests, is worse today than it was 200 years ago, is a flaming idiot.
Surely not all, but when many Hawaiian nationalist speak of an independant Hawaii, they only mean for indigenous Hawaiians; all the late-coming euro, asian, pacific islanders, and africans be damned. Although, I can sympathize somewhat with their grevances, I find their form of nationalism very chauvanistic and verging on racist, and complete disdainful for the present situation in Hawaii: a multiculteral place, NOT just one native Hawaiians held down by some white minority.
This is interesting. The Hawaiian "Shadow Government" only wants to roll back history to 1898. Why not roll it back to somewhere before 1758, just before Kamehameha was born? You know, before the main island was even united, let alone the other islands. Does the "Shadow Government" know that the Islands were united by force of arms? What about all those other Hawaiians that were denied self government. A single Hawaiian government wouldn’t go far enough to redress these injustices. There should be at least five, no make that 10 just to be safe. We don’t want any oppression do we? Okay 15, tops.
It's interesting how various groups select the precise times of their preferred golden age that must be restored in order to correct the injustices of history. Should we be prepared to hand the entire United States back over to some nativist shadow government? Canada too? I know, I know. There are some that wish to do exactly that. How many nativist governments would it take? Would the Sioux bury the hatchet (STS) with the Cheyenne to form one? Who's gonna decide these things? Ward Churchill?
Let's be consistent. The borders of Europe have sure gotten jumbled up over the centuries. Maybe we should rewind everything to before 1066. Wouldn't it increase our karma points if Britain were turned back over to the Anglo-Saxons? Oops, maybe that's not far enough back? Should we go even further and restore Celtic rule? Maybe that’s not even far enough. Are there any neanderthals around to turn things over to?
Somehow, it’s doubtful that would work either. We've tried to roll back the clock some 3000 years in Israel. But for some unfathomable reason, many who you'd normally think would support restoring native governance are against this bit of historical injustice correction. Is 3000 years to far? It’s so confusing.
Is there some statute of limitations on Golden Age Restoration™? If so what is it? 100 years? 1000 years? 4000 years? Or does it depend on who's doing the whining now?
If Hawaii were an independent state now, I can guarantee it would be playing off China against the U.S. to extract maximum "buddy money."
My people's culture has been destroyed. You see, my people’s culture was a horse culture. They did not use machines that spewed pollution and noise.
They had a religion that has been expelled from courthouses. Evolution, a mere theory, has been forced on my children in government schools, weakening their understanding of my people’s religion. My people’s religion is laughed at publicly by representatives of the government and the media.
My people’s culture, like those of my red, black, and yellow brethren has been destroyed by “progress”.
But there are no Reservations for my people, like there are for my red brethren; government financed, special-interest-controlled areas, with special privileges for some citizens because of blood content. There are no ethnic or cultural studies at colleges and universities like there are for my black brethren. No one apologized for taking my grandfathers and putting them in boot camps and sending them across the ocean to fight the yellow man or the Nazis. Instead, University teachers say descendents of my people deserve to be killed. Other’s think descendents of my grandfathers should apologize for things they did not do. They take the battle flags of my grandfathers and turn them into symbols of hate. Nothing is done when they burn symbols of my grandfather’s blood and sacrifice while protesting against the nation my people loved.
Why can’t my culture survive like those of Africa and India and Islam? Perhaps we could follow the path of Ward Churchill and Islamic Jihad to revive my people’s culture: Put it back the way it was. We could break their kneecaps or stand around looking, like we are the only ones without guilt, over the water breaking against the shores of the land that once belonged to my grandfather’s people; The Non-Native AMERICANS.
I almost make myself cry. C’mon, give me a break!
G.M.
Joe,
"Kirsten Chong" - yes, a scandinavian chinese hawaiian. Actually, this is pretty much par for the course in Hawaii. The Islands are very multiethnic, which is not a bad thing at all, in and of itself. There are very few "pure" Hawaiian people left - doubtless Ms. Chong has some substantial native genes. (My own surname, for what it's worth, is Anglo, but I'm half German). The "idiotarian" aspect of her comments, for me, has more to do with the content of her comment, not her ethnicity.
Jon,
As to the idiocy of the author, let me gently suggest that you read rather too much into what I wrote. "..flailing our backs in collective self-loathing" is not the prescription I would endorse; a sense of obligation is. What might that obligation entail? I'm not sure exactly, but an acknowledgment of the truth about the past, and an examination of the ramifications for the present - surely these are not bad things. I don't pretend to hold the franchise on the truth; forgive me if I fail to concede that you do.
Of course, part of acknowledging the truth about the past is to examine the nature of the Hawaiian kingdom itself, which was, as you point out, not unalloyed paradise.
As lurker pointed out, Kamehameha united Hawai'i through force of arms. Further, these were western arms. I've argued with a Hawaiian correspondent that Kamehameha, were he alive, would very much support the fact that Hawai'i is an American state, having sought in his lifetime membership in the British empire (then the predominant naval power).
And so I'm not arguing in any sense for a return to the status quo ante - as several point out, quite rightly, "ante when exactly?" The Hawaiian sovereignty movement is peaceful (which is why I find Churchill's participation so fetid), and I can listen to their story with neither guilt nor defensiveness.
I'm a little confused. Didn't Hawaii's citizens at some point vote on whether they wanted to become a state? At which point, if there was a vote then I have precious little sympathy. That's nice that some elderly gentleman likes to stare down at people visiting Hawaii and keeping his economy afloat. I can't help but think, however, that if he was a white man staring down at non-white people in Europe he wouldn't gain much if any sympathy.
If this type of argumentation is taken to its logical endpoint, then the United States would be dismembered and no longer exist.
Jon: """Two levels of idiocy going on here: Churchill's hate-filled rage against the "crimes" of the past; and the author's soppy "maybe we should sort of feel guilty" bit. Expansion is the nature of human societies. You either expand or you contract and die. Healthy societies get annexed and become vibrant parts of the "imperial" society, as has generally happened in places like Hawaii. Unhealthy societies are annihilated."""
I wholeheartedly agree, Jon. For example, Nazi Germany was quite right to carry out its programme of expansion to gain Lebensraum. After all, its victims were only Untermensch, who deserved to die.
lewy14: """As lurker pointed out, Kamehameha united Hawai'i through force of arms. Further, these were western arms. I've argued with a Hawaiian correspondent that Kamehameha, were he alive, would very much support the fact that Hawai'i is an American state, having sought in his lifetime membership in the British empire"""
So, by this logic, Canada, having been part of the british Empire, wants to be part of the USA now, right?
Hawai‘i statehood in 1959 was supported by everyone. The annexation of the independent Kingdom of Hawai‘i in 1898 was a colonial usurpation masterminded by US business interests, no doubt about it. It came from the Marines, not a vote.
Heh. There's a great deal of overextrapolation going on here. I'm disinclined to refute it all in detail.
But props to AJL for the correct encoding of the ‘okina.
Wow. We trained LT Hoe's unit at FT Hood. A very professional, impressive group.
I wonder what an independent Hawaii would have done in 1939-42 wrt Imperial Japan?
While US annexation of Hawaii and seizure of the Phillipines was cut from the same cloth, so were their results: US intervention into the Pacific balance of power. Without US interjection in Pacific affairs in the early 20th century, Hawaii would be no more independent than it is today, though it would be more ethnically homogeneous due to heavy Japanese immigration after annexation by Japan.
Thanks lewy, but can I pronounce it correctly…?
AJL, I have for you right here, as I add some words gratuitously so as to not mess up the formating of the front page, a pronunciation guide. Is there a practical use for his knowledge? Actually, yes. The Hawaiian dialect of English makes use of many native words, and knowing how to pronounce the place names is always a good thing.
Well, I have mediocre control of the Hebrew glottal stop (‘ayin=ע); that should do it.