Coming up next on Insights on PBS Hawaii, what would it take to achieve Hawaiian sovereignty? Aloha and welcome to Insights on PBS Hawaii. I'm Daryl Huff from Hawaii News Now. It's been 22 years since President Bill Clinton signed a bill apologizing for the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy.
Many sovereignty proponents hoped the apology bill would lead to formal recognition of a Native Hawaiian governing entity, but there are still competing visions of what that government could look like and hurdles to clear even after Native Hawaiians reach consensus. Could a renewed push for Native Hawaiian Constitutional Convention, galvanize the community, and pave the way for self-determination. Tonight on Insights, what would it take to achieve Hawaiian sovereignty? We encourage viewers to join tonight's conversation by calling 973-1000 if you live on Oahu, or 800-238-4847 if you're calling from a neighbor island. You can also watch Insights streamed live at pbshawaii.org.
Just click on the Insights logo. Or you can find us on Twitter. at PBS Hawaii.
Now to our panel. Peter Apo is trustee with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. He previously served 12 years in the State House of Representatives and was also former Governor Ben Kaitano's special assistant on Hawaiian affairs.
Lily Kalaa Kamaelehewa is the director of the Kamakakua Kalani Center for Hawaiian Studies at the University of Hawaii, Manoa. Dr. Kamaelehewa is a trained historian with expertise in Hawaiian cultural traditions and the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement. Kalei Kaua Ka'eo is an associate professor of Hawaiian studies at the University of Hawaii Maui College.
A well-known sovereignty activist, Mr. Ka'eo was recently arrested for protesting construction of the 30-meter telescope on Mauna Kea. And Bumpe Kanahele is the head of state for the Nation of Hawaii, which is headquartered at Puʻuhonua o Waimanalo. In 1994, Mr. Kanahele was awarded the lease for the Waimanalo Village after a 15-month occupation. at Makapu'u Beach Park. Mr. Kanahele is also the CEO for Aloha First, a nonprofit organization working toward Native Hawaiian reconciliation and restitution.
And let me start with Lili Kalahukamaila Hiva. What is sovereignty? Let's kind of do a little bit of a sort of Sovereignty 101 here. People, you know, don't understand or they have preconceived notions about these words. When we talk about sovereignty, what are we talking about?
A lot of people have different ideas about what that means, but for me, it means political control over land. And that's the simplest way to put it. It's not a feeling in your heart.
It's political control over land. At the moment, we Hawaiians don't have political control over land, and that's what we're seeking. But Bukana Hele, you ended up with some control over some land. Is it as simple a definition as that, or is it more complicated to you? I think the word is national sovereignty.
And that is the identity... Of the people concerned and the control over the national lands. It's very clear in the United Nations documents and stuff that national sovereignty exists in the Hawaiian people. people today.
Always did. Is there any dispute anymore that the Hawaiian Kingdom was illegally annexed by the United States? Illegally, I think they were never annexed at all. I mean, if you actually look at the facts of our history, it's very clear the United States tried formally in two attempts to annex the Hawaiian Islands, both in 1893 and later in 1897. And because of the organizing of our people, with the Ku'e petitions and the Queen's letter of protest, the U.S.
Senate failed, again I repeat, failed to ratify that secondary treaty. So these are illegal, see, that makes the idea that it was an actual annexation. And my challenge would be to anyone out there, show me any evidence of fact of having any annexation.
So in your mind, what does sovereignty mean now? Sovereignty to me means, as in Hawaiian we say, which is having a full authority and control of your lives, your destiny, your land, your resources, your education, and really your future as a people. Sovereignty is something that, in fact, when you talk about sovereignty, I don't believe there's such a thing as a sovereignty movement.
I think we need to understand that sovereignty was achieved in 1843 in the Hawaiian kingdom when we became a recognized nation state. That's a historical fact. What has happened? since of course 1843, specifically 1893 and 1898, 1900 was the taking away of our right to control our resources and control our lives.
But that's really Talking in the language of re-recognition, or re-control of our sovereignty. That's not the same as saying we're trying to achieve something. Because the fact is, we already achieved it back in 1843. Let me ask Peter Apo with OHA.
Is there a difference between sovereignty and sovereignty? sovereignty and independence? Yes. How would you break that?
Well, sovereignty does not necessarily include independence in this case. So when you look at those who champion federal recognition, recognition, federal recognition is getting, basically leads to the Indian model of a nation within a nation. Independence in this case means that the, that as Kaleko pointed out, that the nation was never, the sovereignty of the nation was never extinguished. That we don't recognize the jurisdiction of the United States.
So the two different things. But I think essentially, you know, in terms of fast-forwarding from 1893, a hundred and seventeen years ago, something bad happened, and a whole population, you know, Hawaiians and others who were citizens were disenfranchised illegally from their sovereignty, and from their nationhood. And it's been a hundred and seventeen, it's been thirty-seven years since the OHA has been created, and that we've been trying to figure out a way to resolve this, to try to come up with a common vision of what we mean by sovereignty, as Likala pointed out earlier.
And it's a very difficult navigation, because as she mentioned, within the Hawaiians, they all have a little different version of what we mean by sovereignty. But I will say this. Until there is a resolution to this abiding tension that has existed for a hundred and seventeen years between Hawaiians and the rest of Hawaii, Hawaii will never be whole. whole. It's got to be resolved.
Lili Kala Kama'elehua, so I understand, there's a difference between independence and sovereignty in your mind, yes? So, where do you think is the model of federal recognition? How does that look?
You know, when I look at what our people need today, we need land, we need housing, we need to have a a place where we can find shelter. If you look at the 520,000 or 25,000 Native Hawaiians, where 50 percent of us are somewhere else outside of Hawaii because we can't afford housing. We've got quite a number of our people who are homeless as well, or houseless, as they say it.
We need land now, and we need to have houses now. We need to have a place where we can grow food and feed our people. We need to run our own school system, absolutely, because the DOE does not serve the Hawaiian nation or its Hawaiian children. our Hawaiian identity. So, when I look at all those things, I say, okay, how can we achieve that as quickly as possible, because I'm a grandmother now, and I don't want to wait longer.
And I think we have some really dire problems right now that we need to resolve. So, I look at federal recognition as a way to come to control some land, have a government that is not a state agency. I think OHA works very hard to find ways to support the Hawaiian people.
Sometimes we disagree politically. but I think their hearts are true. Their hearts are good. Our problem is it's a state agency and everybody gets to vote for OHA. We need to have a government where Hawaiians vote for those government officials and people are responsible to the communities that they come from, to the islands that they come from.
And if the community says, we don't like what you do, they vote you out. That's old story, democracy. So when I look at federal recognition, which is not perfect, not for Native Americans, not for Alaska Natives, which is not perfect. I still see opportunity there that we might not have any other way.
I don't think we're going to be independent tomorrow. And if we were, do we have young people who are going to run the nation, who are going to plant food, take care of water, take care of medicine, take care of education? Do we have young people who can do that? Can we run our own nation? So federal recognition actually gives us a chance to practice all those things, and then we can talk about independence.
But right now, we're outnumbered by non-natives. So if we were independent tomorrow, we would be independent. tomorrow, that doesn't mean Hawaiians will get anything. Right. Let me go to Kalei Koa.
Kaeo, is federal recognition enough for you in terms of— Definitely not. I mean, I'm one of those very, very clear out there that federal recognition to me, an assimilation, is death to our people. And all you got to do is look at history.
If you understand, if you put Hawaiians under federal Indian law—and there's some things about federal Indian law you got to understand, what we call the Marshall Trilogy. When you look at things with the doctrine of discovery, being a dependent domestic nation, to be a trustee, a ward. These are words and language in which In the U.S. federal law, how American Indians are treated, I should say treated, mistreated, dehumanized, living in situations that are appalling, and yet I find it very troubling that trustees and other leaders in my community somehow believe that's a step forward. For me, that's a step towards death as a people. Our kupuna left us with this message, E'o ka'aina, wama'u ke'e'o.
E'o ka'aina. is not federal Indian policy. Again, with the land, the control. If we cannot have a situation which we can decide for ourselves what happens at Mauna Kea, let me ask that question.
engaging in federal recognition, stop what's going on in Mauna Kea. And I would suggest it wouldn't stop Mauna Kea, it wouldn't stop Maui, it wouldn't stop in regards to returning the waters to our streams. These are situations which tell us directly, unless we bring life back to the land, we're really talking about the death of our people.
I would argue the exact opposite. I would say that if we had federal recognition, we could control Mauna Kea, we could control Haleakalā, we could control our lands. And that is really a difference. of opinion, of course, but I would argue that those kinds of things could be controlled by a nation that is recognized by the federal government. Let me give you an example.
How would it change education? Federal policies of no child left behind. That's a federal policy. Yes, it is. American Indians are forced to follow these policies.
When they look to education, who do American Indians look to education? They look to the Hawaiians. See, the point I want you to understand is that... No, absolutely, Clay.
I want us to run our own... Let me finish my point. No, all right. Let me ask both of you to... Yeah.
Okay, stop for a second. All I'm saying is that let's look at factual situations. Let's look at facts. No child left behind, race to the top. These are federal programs that are imposed upon our Hawaiian education right now that we're forced.
We're forced. That's a federal program. And it doesn't have to be in the federally recognized nation.
They don't have to follow that. Okay, which American Indians don't follow that law? You absolutely don't have to follow it. Which American Indians do not follow that law? We don't want the money for that.
I'm asking a very straight question. Which American Indian tribes are not forced to follow those laws? I don't think they're forced. This is one of the more complicated things to understand. Federal recognition in and of itself does not constitute sovereignty or nation.
Correct. Federal recognition simply qualifies Hawaiians, as it does Native American Indians and Native Alaskans, and by the way, we are not recognized as Native Americans, to draft a proposal for... sovereignty and for nationhood that then has to be ratified I assume by the state of Hawaii and by the federal government so what that proposal would be is what the upcoming convention we think is intended to raise.
OHA has a bifurcated mission and sometimes it doesn't quite match up the first responsibility we have is since over the 117 years beginning with the Hawaiian homestead Act, there's been a compilation of over 250 federal entitlements for Hawaiians that amount to millions and millions and millions of dollars. In the absence of federal recognition, all of that is at risk because we are not Native Americans. So that's why you get the Reis Cayetano, the lawsuits coming down. So we are, federal recognition helps. protect those entitlements until such time that we can have some sort of a national proposal.
I want to give Bobby one shot. I'm going to disagree with that because if it was, we wouldn't be getting lawsuits every year. TRUST GETTING LAWSUITS. FEDERAL RECOGNITION NOT GOING TO HELP THOSE LAWSUITS. THERE'S NO GUARANTEE.
THAT'S TRUE. I JUST WANT TO GET BACK TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THE NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY, THIS IS WHERE INDEPENDENCE TAKES ITS REIGN OVER FEDERAL RECOGNITION. I WANTED YOU TO GET INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT.
YOU AND I HAVE HAD THE CONVERSATION BEFORE ABOUT WHAT YOU PICTURE HOW THIS WORKS. NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY, PRIOR TO 1778, WE ALL HAD OUR NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY. EACH KANAKA HAD THEIR identity as a kanaka and they had their rights to the lands and natural resources. Now, Soon as, after the Kamehameha, when he united all Hawaiians, he was uniting the sovereignty, the national sovereignty of all of them. Now, after the second, the third comes in, the Ma'ele totally wipes out communal land tenure or national sovereignty, and then what ends up?
The native tenant rights. Subject to native tenant rights, it watered down. Once it watered down, it of course left avenues open for non-Hawaiians to come and businesses and all that to wipe that out. You know what, Bumpy, you're wrong about federal recognition.
Well, I... In the absence of federal recognition, the right... Cayetano decision comes down that says Hawaiians are racist, that you cannot separate out Hawaiians, we cannot organize ourselves in the absence of federal recognition because we do not enjoy the same congressional protection that is afforded every other indigenous people in the United States. So federal recognition, first of all, would allow us to have an election without being threatened by lawsuits that it's a racist.
No, I've constantly heard that. So while you may disagree with federal recognition as the pathway that you choose to exercise independence and quality of life for Hawaiians, it is very important in protection of the entitlements. We are living on a house of cards.
The only thing that says that protects us In terms of being able to act, it's the Hawaiian Homestead Act. It's a very, very thin thread because we're not Native American Indians and we're not Native Alaskans. Can I just wait for a second because I want to make sure that I want to be real loyal to our audience here. that you guys are kind of getting into the points that are, they're over my head, and I think they're going to be going over our audiences. So we'll get to these things step by step.
That's why I was trying to talk about the national sovereignty part, because I'm not an American. We're not Americans. If you are, then you're not independent. If you are national, then you're forced to live under the rule we are. You're forced to use their money.
You're forced to use their ID cards. You're forced to use their passports for travel. That's a given that.
That's where we're under extreme duress. But we're not Americans. If you are national, you're not American. Now, federal recognition is going to rob us. me of my national sovereignty in no way that's gonna happen.
Okay so let me know and get it just real quick okay now one of the staff members of OHA I asked them that question and he couldn't answer me that there would be no lawsuits you mean to say that this gonna stop the lawsuits and he couldn't ask he couldn't answer me. So the designer said. It's from you guys office. I didn't say it was gonna stop the lawsuits. No but that's what I'm saying so why we throwing the dice you know what I mean.
There is a shield that federal recognition provides us that would have prevented the Rice-Cayetano decision. The Rice-Cayetano decision that said we cannot have an election was based on the fact that we have no federal recognition. Period.
There is no discussion. But no more guarantee that we, the law. So what I'm hearing, so I, to reinterpret a little bit of this, is that while the federal, the federal recognition you folks feel would protect. many of these entitlements and give you the ability to stand up. Right.
Federal recognition allows indigenous peoples of the United States, if you're frank, to be exempted from the 14th Amendment, the Equal Protection Law. Okay, right. But on the other hand, what I hear you saying, Bumpy Kanaheli, is that if you do that, you're basically selling out the concept of nationhood. No, no.
I asked the attorneys from OHA in our meeting, and they couldn't answer the question. They couldn't give us the no. won't get sued. They couldn't give the answer.
So you say it doesn't offer the protection that they say it offers. Sure, there's gonna be lawsuits no matter what we do, because people are racist against Hawaiians, and they want our land, basically. But we have to figure out how we get people on the land, and how do we do that quickly, because we don't have time to waste. Federal recognition does not solve all problems. However, if we go independent tomorrow, without rights laid down and without land, we can't do anything.
laid down that are ours, we get nothing. Because there are lots of people out there who live in Hawaii who don't want Hawaiians to have any rights at all. Okay, Kaliko, okay, last little bit on this.
Yeah, I just want to be very clear. See, the conversations you can see, federal recognition is not sovereignty. Right.
We can understand that. Those are not, so when people try to mix those two, when you talk Kaulananapua and each other with federal recognition, they're confused. So everybody agrees about that. Yes, that's true.
When you talk about we were, there was an overthrow, but we want federal recognition, to me they're confused. Self-determination is a bit of a challenge. I just want to be clear about that. See, as I said, there is no treaty. So first of all, let's be clear.
Does everyone agree there's no treaty? There is no treaty. So there is a deep question in regards to a national identity, as Uncle Bampi has said. That's clear.
So this is not about Hawaiians trying to pretend to become something. This is about Hawaiians trying to say, we are something already. Now, if people want to choose to give that up, that's by choice. But I would suggest this. Other Hawaiians do not have that right.
Take that away from us who have not forgotten, who refuse to give up, who will continue to fight for the EO Ka'aina. You know, I myself, I understand if we keep under a system run by people like Ige, Governor Ige, or Abercrombie, wanting to give away Mauna Kea. And I would suggest to all you got to look at it's not just about the 14th Amendment It's about plenary power that Congress will have it's about making Hawaii into a domestic trade Dependent nation under the US Constitution.
It's about waving you right rights to the lands. That's clear. To me, it's about controlling land like the Navajo Nation does.
And at 6 o'clock in the afternoon, they can say to everybody who's not Navajo, off you go, this is our land and we control it. And people may say that that's not enough and people may say derogatory things about Native Americans. But the difference is the Navajo were never an independent nation.
They were independent before the foreigners invaded them. Independence is not set up by all the nations of the world. For us, Ea doesn't start in 1843. It starts when our ancestors first lived on this land. Ea is ancient.
It doesn't start in 1843. Correct. Ea. Yes. And that is our word for sovereignty.
But if we talk about self-determination, let's say, what part of sovereignty is self-determination? How do we decide how we're going to raise our children, how we educate them, what kind of lands we live on? Self-determination and sovereignty are not the same thing. And you're clear about it, correct? Yes, I am.
Correct. Let's be clear. Let's not trope. But I don't believe sovereignty is gonna help Hawaiians tomorrow, because...
we are outnumbered and you know as well as I do there are lots of people who live in this and American Indians are outnumbered being only one percent of the United States they have land that they can live upon and that's what I want land that we can live upon so that all of my cousins can move home from the continent and have a place to live in Havaian okay let's all take a moment to take a sip of water well that's what the the constitution convention is going to be about it's gonna this argument yes it's going to be carried over yes and hopefully what will happen instructive and but what I'd like to do is I'd like to you know our viewers have been writing and calling and I want to get to some of their questions if you guys don't mind you know I appreciate it but I you know let's all take a little moment let's try some of these questions which may make it worse okay so only a small minority signed up for the role the native Hawaiian role so why should they be allowed to speak for all native Hawaiians when most native Hawaiians have shown they don't want to create a race-based government Yeah. And why should they be allowed to break apart the state of Hawaii without permission from the rest of Hawaii's people? As a supporter of the Hawaiian roll, Peter Apo, how do you respond to that question? Well, I disagree.
There's about 120,000 names. Not all of it came from the actual roll commission. Some of it was transferred from two previous registrations.
But basically the same process took place. People registered with the intention of going to the polls to vote. for a delegate for constitutional intervention. So you get about 120,000 names and and it's still counting.
Let's tell the truth. Kanai Oluwole signed up with a little more than 30,000 over a hundred I think 150 hundred six dollars per a signature was paid out of OHAS money to get gathered the signatures you know creating a so-called t-shirt nation as I say. See nation building is going on in Mauna Kea.
Nation building isn't coming from signing and putting on a t-shirt and that's one of the things I'm really frustrated with with Office of Foreign Affairs. Look at the DUI here. hearings that came out last year. If you can look at our people and deny the fervor of our people wanting to speak out, wanting to gather, that's nation building.
Nation building comes from the people. And I'm very saddened when I hear that that voice is not listened to and not being addressed. And I think that UI hearings speak to that.
Okay, let me re-ask this question because I think that we may be missing the point a little bit. I think that with this question, wants to know is whether the state, are we looking at breaking the state apart, was the sort of centralist, because of the will of a small number of people. Lili Kalaa, I'll come and heave up.
Can you try? Sure. I think that we are afforded under American law as indigenous peoples a certain land base.
Now the United Nations says that we should have rights to all of the land base that our ancestors owned. control. So we'd certainly like to have that right. What we have under America is we have a certain law that allows under federal recognition certain lands set aside. I absolutely believe we have to do federal recognition before we go to an independent nation.
Because we are outnumbered. Now, when we have 80% of the population being Hawaiian, perhaps we won't have that problem. But right now, we have to have land. That's what we have.
We must have land. I really admire what Bumpy's done. The land that he has.
What happens if the leaders of the community don't have land? What happens if a government decides they're going to break that lease? I want to address that. I want to solve that problem.
I want to make sure we have lands on every island that Hawaiians can live on. Is that breaking the state apart? No. The person who feels like that has a homeland somewhere else and they can... go there thank you very much but where do we go this is our place for 100 generations we must have land here oh people gotta make one stand that's what it is you gotta make one stand with a small no kill our village you gotta take that's right you gotta you gotta let it all go and federal recognition is not good i don't care which way you look at it the the royal commission i supported the royal commission because get good people in there that was going in a direction i thought it was going in now i question in it again the royal commission is the third process that native hawaiians had to choose whether they wanted to or restore whether they wanted to be independent or be integrated with the system.
The first one was 1945. The first one shows the national sovereignty, how it resides in a culture of the people's concern. Now, that's a big problem for me, especially knowing that that was covered up. Our national sovereignty was covered up in 1945. The process never worked.
And what happened was statehood. came out of there. Everything after that is not good for us as Hawaiians. Yeah, we're forced to live on this.
Yeah, we got to do this, da da da, da da da, both sides. And we're gonna argue like this until everybody get it that it's the national sovereignty that we gotta restore. I don't really understand the thing to do about the Roe Commission.
It's a voter registration process. That's it. Voter registration.
Because in order to have an election, you have to, and in order to vote in this election, you have to prove somehow that you are a Hawaiian. Now, however you do that, whether it's through the Royal Commission or through the Kau'inoa, which is a previous registration process, that's all it is. It does not say we're going to have to...
It's to create an electorate. So for the first time in Hawaiian history, you will have a puvalu or an aha, where the Hawaiians can come out and speak through a democratic process. to choose what form of nationhood or if they want nationhood at all the democrat that's all kaneo just like finish what i was trying to say because now now that we're hitting this point where the role is coming up they they made their mind up to do it next year you know when i got involved i thought this thing was going to happen like right away and then the more it delayed it reminded me of 1945 1993 was the second one.
That got flopped too. 2011 and look, we're at 2015 now. I would urge all Hawaiian nationals, all those that believe in independence, let's start the government already.
We need a government to sit down and talk to the state government and the federal government at this point. I call upon the people on this table, what if, what if we just call for a restoration of our national sovereignty. Not a government, just the national sovereignty that belongs in each of us. The non-Hawaiians can vote to recognize the national sovereignty of the Kanaka Maoli. Now we decide, because our decision could be tomorrow, like Lily said, what if we do it tomorrow?
You know, our economy, we don't need to worry about that. Lands, we get plenty of lands. But we're not, we're still guiding ourselves or being. being led that, hey, this Roe Commission thing, this stuff that happening now is gonna be good.
But it's really putting us back into an old, old problem that we had from the beginning. May I just say that we have land that are our lands. Mauna Kea is one of them. And you know our young people are gonna be arrested up there.
And they have been arrested, they're gonna be arrested again and again. How do we get the American government to agree that that land should be controlled by us? us.
Federal recognition is one path. It may not be the best path, but I'm saying that is one path. That Native Americans have lands they control, Alaska Natives have lands that they control, and that's what I want, land that we can control. We control lands. We get private lands.
We get all kind of lands right now. Thousands, tens of thousands of acres, all our trust. One point three million in the DLNR. So why are we looking for lands? How come we're not, you know?
I'm sorry. No, no. Mr. Keogh, go ahead. Let me address the question with Kamele. ...Ovalu and his AHA convention.
The truth is, that is just a minority of Hawaiians who have signed up with Kana'i Ovalu. That's the truth. That's the fact. I asked straight to OHA and others, I said, why don't you have a process where all Hawaiians can participate? those Hawaiians who accept the language in Act 195. And I tell all Hawaiians, go and read Act 195. If you read Act 195, as nationals, for myself, there's no way I can sign my name to an act that was pushed by Abercrombie.
that was written by just several Hawaiians, that act never came from the Hawaiian community, let's be very clear. So there's no self-determination in Act 195. Now what is Act 195? Act 195 was signed by Governor Abercrombie, I don't know, four or five years ago perhaps, to push the...
The Royal Commission. The Royal Commission. All right.
I have asked that we need a process, see we need a process, independent process, led by Hawaiians, designed by Hawaiians, and for Hawaiians. We had that, it was called Kalahui Hawaii. Let me just, let me finish. Not a process, not a process that was signed by Abercrombie, appointed by Abercrombie, the same Abercrombie that was appointed by the Abercrombie you said, I give Mauna Kea to the world. Yeah, that's the same Abercrombie.
Let's remember that. This is a process. And I challenge OHA, again, if you move forward a process that does not include all Hawaiians in this process, you will see this argument here is nothing to what you see out in the community.
And if you don't believe me, take a look again at what you heard in the DUI hearings. Okay, I think what we're going to do is I really have to honor our callers and our viewers. So I'm going to just stop for a little bit. I think that there is a couple questions. questions about the division among not just this panel, but in the community.
We'll go talk about that some more. Right now, a couple of questions here about how sovereignty looks for people who are not Hawaiian. And, you know, do you believe, this is a question from a viewer, do you believe that all Hawaii citizens should be treated equally under law by the government?
It's a very broad question, but under a sovereign model. Is equality important? And under the Kalahui Constitution, non-Natives have the right to all basic rights. They have a right to live upon the land, they have a right for religion, for freedom of speech, all the basic principles that Kalahui has endorsed. The only thing that non-Natives would not have a right to do is vote.
Now, half the population of Hawaii doesn't vote anyway. That's in Kalahui you're talking about. This is Kalahui's constitution. We said we have honorary citizens, that non-Natives would be honorary citizens, have all rights that all Hawaiians have, but not have the right to vote. Because when non-Hawaiians had the right to vote in the kingdom of Hawaii, they voted against the Native people.
And we should not forget that. We talk about, oh, there were non-Natives that were disenfranchised when America's military took over. Yeah, well.
Well, the majority of us were Hawaiians. We were the most disenfranchised. We're the ones who lost our land.
We're the ones who got our language banned. We're the ones. Now, everybody else has a nation they could go home to. We didn't.
This is our nation. So when I look at the Kalahui Constitution, that's what I would follow. I also want to address what we're looking at for this kan-kan and back to Kana'i Oluwalu.
As you know, my son is one of the guys who helped make Kana'i Oluwalu. So I'm going to say that that's my point of view. And I'm always going to stick up for that and for him.
And there were things. things I think they could have done better. Could have talked about land more.
Okay, but they didn't. I want to look at the 500,000 Hawaiians that are out there from the last census, and about 250,000 of them live away. Of the 250,000 that live at home, about 125,000 are under the age of 18. So if you look at 100,000 Hawaiians who can vote, who live in Hawaii, that's about how much you've got on those rolls.
So I'm going to defend those rolls. I plan to run for the CONCON. I hope everybody who's at this table will vote.
will also come to that con-con and say, I disagree, and I want this instead of what you want, Lili Kalaa. Let's have a disagreement. But I think we have to have the con-con. Yeah, and this question, again, to go back to the viewer question, is a little bit about how it looks to non-Hawaiians.
But we're talking about two different models here. We're talking about the federal recognition model. We're also talking about a sovereign nation model. So Peter, about— Actually, what we're talking about, in answer to the question— What is that again?
—is that the Hawaiians deserve the same constitutional shield of protection. protection that every other indigenous people in the United States to be able to organize ourselves and to propose a model and that model could be it could be independence. I mean, I guess, yeah, so go ahead.
I mean, in terms of in a sovereign nation, are everyone else able to be citizens? That is for education. If you actually go and read international law and understand about citizenship and nationality, rights of citizenship are afforded to those who are citizens of a particular nation state.
Right. That's documented. Again, your parents were citizens.
You're born in the territory. I mean, there's a whole, so. That's a very complicated question.
That's not something you have an opinion at. These are things that are actually written in law. And I think that's part of the conversation we'd be very clear about. There's people that are praying things that are opinions, and there are things out there that are actually written and quoted in law. And I would suggest that everybody out there should go out and read and understand.
how a nationality, again, not ethnicity. That's not the same thing. Ethnicity and nationality are one and the same thing. Well, that's a very important point. That's what I wanted to explore a little bit.
Is that when we talk about who votes on a federal recognition model, you know, then you... You can exclude non-Hawaiians in those voting. That's an ethnic model. Yes.
It's a Lāhui model. That's not a national model. Right, but if you actually had a Hawaiian sovereign government that ran Hawaii, you couldn't exclude. Yes, an independent Hawaii. Then we can look at the Kalahui model where non-Hawaiians would be considered honorary citizens.
The independent model would include military, would include government, would include money. That's an independent model. country. If you cannot defend your country, we cannot defend our 200-mile exclusive economic zone.
If we cannot provide for these people that live in Hawaii, how much we get now? 1.3 million or something like that. What about our economy as an independent country? Trading commerce, making a lot of money doing trade and commerce.
Right now, the Jones Act preventing that. So there's a lot of ways to make money. There's a lot of, we have a lot of money ourselves, just in our beneficiary, you know. Do you guys, do people who are not not Hawaiian, should they be afraid of this process? No, they should not.
My mother is a non-Hawaiian. As I always tell people, I would never do unto my mother, anyone else that would not do to my mother first. So let's be clear about that. If you understand our people, you know, our people are the most diverse, whether it's religion, in color, hair type, lots of hair, no hair, whatever. And to somehow suggest, to suggest that we would be biased to people because ethnicity, I think is very, it's based upon.
a model of people who come from that kind of thinking he said so we don't i don't think there's any place in the world where you find that people as diverse as our people the hawaiian people there's no place in the world it's true to somehow believe that we would become like those people is really to not understand who we are as a people and i would say this in my family i have people who are of all ethnicities and and for people to not understand that we are you know if you haven't been in hawaii that this long and haven't experienced the people that's why you end up asking those kinds of questions and i think that you gotta blame organization for that. I think it's one of the most misunderstood, for some reason, thing about we are the people of Aloha. We have always been the people of Aloha.
It's in our DNA. So while people see us arguing like this, and while they may be offended by some of the media coverage and how mainstream media manages Hawaiian issues, basically, whatever the model ends up, I am confident it's going to be inclusive. You know, this is a great question. Philip from Hilo says, there are not enough Hawaiians to vote for sovereignty to pass it.
We need to educate non-Hawaiians better on the issue. It's not a non-Hawaiian thing right now. Nationality is all about Hawaiian.
At this point, the only way to make this, in other words, if say, Hawaiians wanted to be American, federal recognition, they wanted to be American, for whatever reason, you still cannot harm the independence movement and what we choose. If we choose to to form the government tomorrow, guess what? We might beat the rule in the amount of people we can pull together to make that happen.
Just make sure Hawaiians are gonna have man in schools. I want to run a non-school system. All I'm saying is what? That's what I want. I'm trying to answer the questions, too, at the same time.
You know, I think of all the non-Hawaiians who are afraid, what they really ought to do right now is petition the state of Hawaii to allow us to run our own school system, have our own board of education that's run by Hawaiians, our own school system system that's run by Hawaiians and that we can run and teach our children. Right now, we're homeschooling my granddaughter because we don't want her to go to an American school. We want a Hawaiian school. So how do the non-native support us now? Don't tell us about later on when we get some land.
Tell us now how you're supporting us. You should be supporting us to have land right now. You ought to be supporting calling up Governor Ige. Hey, let those Hawaiians be on the mountain.
Let the Hawaiians control the mountain and move the TMT to Mount Fuji. You know? That's what they should be doing.
What do you say to this point? I would suggest, see, Hawaiians at this point in history, let's be honest, we no longer ask them to tell us, let us be on the mountain. See, we are now telling them, we know, see the young people, we know. There's no treaty. We never gave consent.
Never. There's no title. The state of Hawaii does not have title to the mountain.
I can prove that without a doubt as an educated person. And in fact, I would challenge Governor Iggy to prove otherwise. And so to suggest that somehow that we all shouldn't be part of the same thing. See, nation building is going on.
And I look at Office of Wine Affairs and other state agencies who support, I mean don't forget, Canelo Paulo came from the governor's desk. The governor's office has never had the interest of our people in mind. The governor's office supports those who oppress our people.
and support those who benefit. There are many other people out there, industries that benefit of our oppression, that benefit our lands and resources to this day. And the reason we have to fight is because we can no longer look to the government and the state agencies to protect our interests. And at this time, time, our people have reason, and we'll rise stronger and do whatever it takes to take places back, like Mauna Kea. You know, on the question that we also have from a viewer is about, one person made reference to the Civil War, you know, in terms of a state trying to withdraw from the nation.
And it brings up the question, you know, many people would make the argument that, oh, there have been a lot of things that have happened since the overthrow that made this a legal country, a legal state. How do you answer, how do you, how much resistance do you expect? respect, though, from the United States for this kind of an issue of an independent Hawaiian nation, eventually do you get a snapback where it just... You know what it is. Respect and disrespect.
They don't respect us anymore. We're invisible. We're invisible, bro.
And so that's the disrespect. So from day one, when they took over, and our history gonna show all that. And disrespect, that's how we get away from racial discrimination and all the talk, when we talk about respect and disrespect.
This one kupuna went and shared this with me. He said, Bumpy, that's what no more in everything. And I was like looking at him and that's on everything. So for— Just what we, the whole subject of nation building, nationhood, we, each Kanaka, should have the protection of diplomatic immunity to me. So that, kind of like Mother Teresa's thing.
closed shelter, you know, so that our people don't worry about having to lose retirement, or if their military having to lose their kind of money, or having to lose their land, or even non-Hawaiians. and disrespect come back with a law on all people. You watch things change for the better. We all might be this way and arguing and all that right now, but I think when those things come out, it's got to be viewed that way.
Otherwise, you know, we're never going to have them. Right now, we're invisible. Peter, I'll put to the question from the viewer. Is one of the reasons that you support federal recognition is because you're a Republican. recognition is that you really don't think the United States would ever give up a legal, you know, could, the United States would win ultimately in a tribunal kind of situation?
I go back to what I think is the most important in terms of the relationship between the Hawaiians and the federal government. It's insulting to me that we are not Native Americans. I mean, to a rational people.
right? Navajo Indians, Native American Indians, they're Native Americans. Alaskans are Native Alaskans.
They have protections. Hawaiians do not. We are naked standing in the sun having these kind of dialogues because the federal government refuses. The Akaka bill was intended to bring, to put us even so we can begin to have a dialogue that at least carries some weight.
Now, people may disagree with, you know, if you want to be independent from Hawaii, and you want to say that the United States is being illegally occupied, then of course you're not going to support federal recognition. You want to walk off in the sun? I actually have another take on that.
Let me just say, I believe one day we will be independent. And I believe that because I have grandchildren. I believe that Hawaii will be independent. I just want to make sure that when we are independent from America, that we will have rights as Native Hawaiians in that independent nation. So I look...
look at federal recognition, and I'm calling it an opuni malama, as a pathway towards that independence, we think America is so strong. And it is. America also has a streak of justice. Sometimes you have to dig for it, but you can make the argument. You know, one time it was said that the sun never set on the British Empire, and now it does.
We never thought the Berlin Wall was going to fall, and one day it cracked and it was gone. We never thought the Soviet Union was going to break up into small countries, and then it did. What history teaches us is that it's not If the people have a will, then the people can make political changes.
We need to survive until the next generation so that we can make our political will. That's what we need as Hawaiians. And we're having a very difficult time surviving without land.
We must have land. Let me go again at the heart of the matter. See, there's a lot of opinions coming out here. Let's look at historical facts as historians. Let me ask you a question.
When did Hawaiians become Americans? Number one. What year and what instrument? Tell me when and what instrument did the title of our national lands be transferred to the United States? What year and what instrument?
and by what instrument? And when did the Hawaiians, the national Hawaiians, not the ethnic Hawaiians, give up our citizenship and our nationality to these lands? Can you tell me when it occurred and by what instruments? When the American military was landed and took over our country, we were occupied by that military military. You're not answering my question.
That is exactly what happened. What year and by what? There is no legal. OK, that's what I'm getting at.
OK, let me get to you. What year and by what legal instrument? There is none.
There is no legal instrument. I agree. Why is that so important?
Because that's the core issue. The core issue is that our nationality. has never been given up. We, as a people, have never gave consent to our nationality, never gave consent to our national lands, and this is by virtue of the fact the United States to this day cannot show evidence.
And they admitted it. They're apologizing. Well, no, not in apology law. They did.
They admitted it. They did the wrong. Again, that's what I'm saying. If there is no evidence, why are we talking about federal recognition if we're not Americans in the first place?
Because I think... It's not an opinion. I want the facts. Because I think there's been 170... years and Hawaiians like my parents decided that they were Americans.
And so I was raised as an American. And you have thousands of people like that. Who come from a generation who are proud to be American. Period.
So I think that what we're running into is 117 years of mind, mind altering whatever. And. And you know, what I wanted to say, actually, to what you was talking about, that you know, whoever thought Cuba was gonna have normal relations with America again, whoever thought Palestine would be recognized by the Pope, you know. Hawaii, you know why we stand alone, we stand naked, and we no more protection?
Because we have the choice to become a restored independent country. That's why we stand naked. You know.
And can I help? You're right, Peter, because my father-in-law told me the same thing. He said, boy, you know what? We never know none of this stuff.
I was giving him the U.N. stuff, and he was telling me, I never know this. He's a military man. My brother was a military man. So we're getting there.
I believe we're all getting there. But that's the way we stand on things. Let me ask, what is the process, though, on that specific issue? Let's set aside federal recognition for now.
So what's the process that gives you the opportunity to do that? gets the United States government to recognize what you folks are saying. We proclaim our restoration of our national sovereignty. It's not a government. It's what Coleco are talking about, that we have, we was born with them.
Once that recognized, that's a different bargain. Now, Federal recognition, all that kind of stuff, no make difference now if we talk about it. But at least we recognize that we are Kanaka Maoli and this is our national lands, and we want to control that again. We want to put our people back.
We want to build our health, housing, education, and all that. I agree. And then, after that all, then we gotta figure out how to help this economy. To me, the state government and the federal government's stock, their policies, their legislative work and all that, not gonna be able to make Hawaii a better economic state. It's not gonna.
With a new kid on the block, an independent country would blow holes to the economic. woes that we face right now. There would be no way that we're controlling an independent country as Hawaiians. We can control ourselves. We don't have to control the state little by little to transition.
That's exactly right. So why we not go for the whole thing instead of we go for little at a time. And there are plenty of Hawaiians who want to be a part of it. Yeah, because they don't know some of the stuff we're not telling them. Most of them are mis-educated with history.
That's why I go back to understanding truth and history is the key to everything. children are being diseducated? Not opinions, but truth and history. Okay, Peter.
I agree that education is important, but I'll tell you what I think is the most important thing. Nothing is going to happen with nationhood, south, whatever you want to call it, without the support of the people of Hawaii. Correct. It ain't going to happen. All the people of Hawaii.
So we got to, you know, whatever the model is, it has to be inclusive, it has to include them, and they There has to be a democratic process by which that model, whether it's independence or federal recognition, is put forward. I think it's been amazing that over all these years that the general public has generally been supported, especially coming out of the 70s, the activism of the 80s, the return of Kaho'olawe, the creation of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, all supported basically by the people of Hawaii through a constitutional amendment. I fear... that that support is diminishing because we're not being very articulate about exactly, you know, what we're talking about. And I think people are beginning to feel threatened.
Education is the key. I agree with you. And being truthful and honest is the key. And being truthful.
Absolutely. Not opinion. Yes, I agree.
Let's be honest. Let's be truthful and honest. And as historians and educators, that's our responsibility to educate the masses. I think that everyone agrees about that right now.
But here's an interesting question about this sense of threat. that you mentioned, and I think it comes from a misconception, particularly what Bobby Kanaheli just described, someone from Kailua. How are they proposing to run the islands if they took over? That's really not what we're talking about, is it?
I mean, that's a lack of education. That's what the question is. Well, they is talking about the Hawaiian spirit, now. Right, I know.
That's what I mean. This is a very common misconception, I think. We can eat from the land.
If we didn't have to pay rent, we wouldn't have to. worry about money so much. That's the main thing.
That is the thing that's oppressing not only Hawaiians, everybody here. We must have rent control, and we need to have more tax on speculation. What's great about an independent nation is you can say, no more foreigners buying our land.
You can say that. Tonga says that. Tonga won't even let pregnant women who are not Tongan give birth in their country. They still got communal, and they still got— In the end, I think we all—and Lee Kalah talks about it in the most, but even through the— the honesty and truth.
We want the same thing. We're not different than other people. We want education for our children.
We want home ownership. You know, we want to have quality of life. So, in answer to the question, that's what's going to happen. That's how we would rule.
Quality of life for everybody. I think through this call, you know, the guy that, you know, how they're going to run the government. Yeah. Brother, you're selling a shot on our knowledge and our experience over hundred seventeen years of education from America we came pretty brilliant and we started to eat ourselves apart and that's because of the the way the colonization came on us I can promise this we've been we've been subjected to the crime of genocide yep so take that to the bank and figure it figure it out because that is like totally would put any other generation or any other peoples on this earth would totally put them into a state of war, state of fighting, state of killing people and all that. We endured stuff that, you know...
And we have kapu aloha. I... And we have the kapu aloha. That's the thing. I want to say to that caller, let us take control of the ceded lands, the state lands, and we'll plant food and feed everybody.
Yeah, everybody. Hawaiians, non-Hawaiians, we feed everybody, because that's what we do. That is our culture.
We feed everybody. And I'm not clear about even usage of the words like ceded lands. You see, that's why for me as an educator, let's be clear, let's be honest. Those lands have never been seen by our people. That's part of the fake.
I'm going to bump you into it. No, let's be clear. That's part of the fake.
You're in the fraud. We've never seen these lands. Stolen lands.
Those lands. And again, I also stole them because the lands are still there, you see. They never disappear. It's just, why did Uncle Bumpy get his land back again? We're on the land.
What's going on in Mauna Kea? We're getting back. See, I think that we don't struggle in Mauna Kea with the hope that the state says, Oh, Hawaiians, we recognize your human rights and you're a bunch of humans, and yes, we're going to treat you. treat you fairly.
We're going to stand up. We're going to do whatever is necessary. We're going to do whatever it takes.
Because you understand, as human beings, nobody can make us human beings. Only us can stand up for ourselves as human beings. Quick question.
We've got about two minutes to go. We can continue this conversation online afterwards. But really quickly, the disputes over the telescopes, Mauna Kea and Haleakala, just very briefly, each of you, and I'll start with Haleakala.
What does this protest mean? What does it say about sovereignty and the growth of the Hawaiian movement? Our young people are standing up for our sacred lands and our sacred mountains. And I think it's so beautiful that they're doing so with a kapu aloha. This is what it means.
I agree with Kalei Kaua when he says you have to stand up, you know, for we're all organizing how to protect Mauna Kea. The TMT is a horrible, horrible thing to put on the mountain. And It will dig up nine acres off the top of the mountain. It's horrible.
So we have young people now saying, no, they do know their rights. In fact, a lot of them are our students up there on that mountain. So education right there.
And they know that this is wrong, so they're going to stand up for it. They're going to be arrested for it. They're going to be put in jail for it.
Their families are going to suffer for it. All those people who are non-Hawaiian ought to be calling up Ige right now and saying, Stop the TMT. Stop that contract. Put it anywhere else. Save that mountain.
I have to wrap the show up and we'll continue online right after this. Hawaii's public schools, talking about a completely different subject, Hawaii's public school reform efforts have earned praise from the U.S. Department of Education, but there's always room for improvement.
How can our public schools close achievement gaps, boost graduation rates, and address issues that interfere with learning? Next week, how can we improve our public schools? Hopefully it'll be as lively as it was today. That's next time on Insights on PBS Hawaii.
I'm Darrell Huff. A hui hou.