August 21 marks the sixtieth anniversary of Hawaiian
statehood. Many Americans know little more than package tours and “Pearl
Harbor” about the fiftieth state, and few realize that when the U.S. naval base
was attacked by the Japanese, it was not at the time U.S. territory. Even fewer
have any idea how Hawaii came to have an important American naval base capable
of triggering a world war. James Baldwin called our perpetual ignorance of
vital historical matters American “innocence,” the inability to face or even
recognize ugly facts about ourselves. In relation to Hawaii such innocence
continues to render us oblivious of the imperial power grab that robbed the
islands of their national independence 126 years ago.
As long as Great Britain deterred rival powers from
colonizing the islands, U.S. leaders championed Hawaiian independence. In 1842,
President James Tyler declared that Washington coveted “no peculiar advantages,
no exclusive control over the Hawaiian Government, but is content with its
independent existence and anxiously wishes for its security and prosperity.”
Essentially extending the Monroe Doctrine to Polynesia, the U.S. would oppose
any nation’s attempt “to take possession of the islands, colonize them, and
subvert the native government.” Hawaiian independence was also recognized by
the major European powers, among others, and affirmed by many treaties and
proclamations.
As the nineteenth century proceeded, however, the balance of
power shifted towards the United States, offering new imperial opportunities
unlikely to be ignored. Rear
Admiral Samuel Francis DuPont declared that it was “almost impossible to
estimate too highly the value and importance of the Hawaiian Islands, whether in
a commercial or a military sense.” Militarily, the islands were an important
link in the chain of U.S. naval bases that would eventually encircle the world.
Economically, they offered important raw materials and primary agricultural
products, as well as a market for industrial and processed goods, a familiar
imperial pattern. In fact, by the end of the nineteenth century Hawaii was an
economic satellite of the mainland:
90% of its foreign trade was with the U.S., the booming sugar industry
far and away the most important.
As a result, the U.S. “self-defense” perimeter expanded to
include Hawaii, then menaced by what the white planter class called a ninety
percent “ignorant majority.” The dilemma for the oligarchs was that their
plantations required abundant cheap labor, performed by Asian immigrants and
Hawaiians, but the political system had to be in the hands of the white planter
minority in order to avoid wealth redistribution via the ballot box. So
Washington took up the white man’s burden of guiding and assisting the
Hawaiians – so “low in mental culture” – on their journey from grass-hut
backwardness to civilized existence.
Native Hawaiians, who shrank from about 350,000 when Captain
Cook arrived to about 35,000 by 1893, were conspicuously ungrateful for the
unsolicited favors. In 1886, Planters Monthly editorialized that the naïve
Hawaiian “does not yet realize” the “bounds and limits fixed” and the “moral
and personal obligations attending” the gift their imperial benefactors were
bestowing on them: “The white man has organized for the native a Government,
placed the ballot in his hands, and set him up as a lawmaker and a ruler; but
the placing of these powers in his hands before he knows how to use them, is
like placing sharp knives, pointed instruments and dangerous tools in the hands
of infants.” Naturally, the children had to be put to bed if the “men of best
quality” were to get their imperial work done.
In 1873, just thirty years after President Tyler had loudly
endorsed Hawaiian independence, the Marines landed to support the colonists.
When the plantation oligarchs failed to take power in the elections of 1886,
they launched a coup d’état the following year, assisted by their military arm
the Hawaiian Rifles. The “Bayonet Constitution” imposed on the king awarded
U.S. citizens the vote while banning Asians as aliens and excluding a large
part of the native population with property qualifications. The Pearl River
estuary became a site for a U.S. naval base.
The increasing numbers of Asians populating the islands
inflamed “yellow peril” paranoia. (In 1890, Asians represented 32% of the
population; three decades later they were 62%). The Hawaiian Gazette
editorialized that “the asiaticizing of the Hawaiian Islands is proceeding at
such a rapid rate that those citizens who know what such a course must lead to,
may well stand appalled before such a prospect.” The Honolulu Advertiser was
more succinct: “It is the white race against the yellow. Nothing but annexation
can save these islands.” Maui lawyer Lorrin Thurston outlined the so-called
demographic threat to the plantation oligarchs: “Four-fifths of the property of
the country is owned by foreigners, while out of an electorate of 15,000 but
4,000 are foreigners – thus placing the natives in overwhelming majority.” So
increasing numbers of white plantation owners favored annexation as a way of
eliminating the dominant Hawaiian-Asian majority as a political force, while
keeping cheap immigrant labor flowing.
In 1891, the U.S.S. Pensacola arrived in Hawaii “to guard
American interests,” which included over two-thirds of the investment capital in the dominant sugar industry. The
following year an Annexationist League was formed and laid plans for a coup
d’etat, quickly supported by Washington. In January 1893, Queen Liliuokalani
made a final effort to preserve Hawaiian independence, eliminating wealth
qualifications and granting the right to vote exclusively to Hawaiians. On
order of U.S. Minister John Stevens, a staunch annexationist known for his
“partiality for white folks,” U.S.
troops landed and imposed martial law, in support of “the best citizens
and nine-tenths of the property owners of the country,” in the words of the
expedition’s commanding officer. Minister Stevens informed the U.S. Secretary of State that “the Hawaiian
pear is now fully ripe and this is the golden hour to pluck it.”
Speaking for the “overwhelming majority of conservative and
responsible members of the community” – at most, a few hundred wealthy men -
U.S. planters and their Hawaiian collaborators declared “that independent,
constitutional, representative and responsible government, able to protect
itself from revolutionary uprisings and royal aggression, is no longer possible
in Hawaii under the existing system of government.” Queen Liliuokalani surrendered under protest to the “superior
force of the United States of America” and its troops, abdicating in hopes of
sparing her followers the death penalty. She herself was fined $5000 and
sentenced to five years at hard labor, though the sentence was commuted in
1896.
An annexation treaty presented by President Harrison to the U.S. Congress expired under President Cleveland after an investigation of the coup revealed popular backing for Queen Liliuokalani rather than the provisional government of the planter class. With the continuing rapid influx of Asians to the islands portending a loss of white political control Teddy Roosevelt warned of a "crime against white civilization." Only one remedy stood out: diluting the local Hawaiian-Asian majority by annexing the islands to the white-dominated mainland.
An annexation treaty presented by President Harrison to the U.S. Congress expired under President Cleveland after an investigation of the coup revealed popular backing for Queen Liliuokalani rather than the provisional government of the planter class. With the continuing rapid influx of Asians to the islands portending a loss of white political control Teddy Roosevelt warned of a "crime against white civilization." Only one remedy stood out: diluting the local Hawaiian-Asian majority by annexing the islands to the white-dominated mainland.
In 1898, President William McKinley confided to his
secretary that “We need Hawaii, just as much and a good deal more than we did
California. It is Manifest Destiny.” The Missionary Record agreed, explaining
that annexation was what Jesus would have wanted. “Has it ever occurred to you
that Jesus was the most imperial of the imperialists?” The Reverend Wallace
Radcliffe gushed that the ends justified the means, that U.S. imperialism was
“enthusiastic, optimistic and beneficial republicanism,” and “not for domination
but for civilization, not for absolutism but for self-government.”
McKinley’s anti-imperialist opponents sounded little better,
recoiling in horror from the prospect of annexing “a country an overwhelming
majority of whose population consists of kanakas, Chinese, Japanese, and
Portuguese." Nebraska Senator William Allen warned that so-called
steak-and-potato Americans had been thrust into “deadly competition with those
who live on a bowl of rice and a rat a day.” A California representative fanned the flames of racist hysteria speaking of “the immoralities unmentionable” and the “nameless contagions”
created by “Asiatics." He read an article entitled “Shall We Annex Leprosy?”
into the Congressional Record.
In the more sedate senior chamber, Massachusetts Senator
George Frisbie Hoar dismissed the wishes of Hawaiian natives on grounds of
absurdity: “It would be as reasonable to take the vote of children in an orphan
asylum or an idiot school.” The sovereign Hawaiian government and its “dusky
Queen” he declared, were “things of the past.”
In the grip of white plantation owners and swarming with
Christian missionaries, Hawaii was annexed by joint resolution of Congress.
Islanders wept and investors cheered.
1898:
Honolulu
Queen Liliuokalani’s Lament
“It had
not entered into our hearts that these friends and allies from the United
States, even with all their foreign affinities, would ever go so far as to
absolutely overthrow our form of government, seize our nation by the throat,
and pass it over to an alien power...”
“Perhaps
there is a kind of right, depending upon the precedents of all ages, and known
as the ‘Right of Conquest,’ under which robbers and marauders may establish
themselves in possession of whatsoever they are strong enough to ravish from
their fellows.... we have known for many years that our Island monarchy has
relied upon the protection always extended to us by the policy and the assured
friendship of the great American republic. “
“If we
have nourished in our bosom those who have sought our ruin, it has been because
they were of the people whom we believed to be our dearest friends and
allies...”
“The
conspirators, having actually gained possession of the machinery of government,
and the recognition of foreign ministers, refused to surrender their conquest.
So it happens that, overawed by the power of the United States to the extent
that they can neither themselves throw off the usurpers, nor obtain assistance
from other friendly states, the people of the Islands have no voice in
determining their future, but are virtually relegated to the condition of the
aborigines of the American continent.”
Sources:
Kent, Noel J., Hawaii: Islands Under The Influence, (Monthly Review, 1983)
Millis, Walter, The Martial Spirit, (Literary Guild of America, 1931)
Zinn, Howard, A People's History of the United States, (Harper, 1995)
Schirmer, Daniel B., Republic or Empire: American Resistance to the Philippine War, (Schenken Publishing, 1972)
Chomsky, Noam, Year 501 - The Conquest Continues, (South End, 1993)
Gatewood, Willard B., "Smoked Yankees" and the Struggle For Empire, (University of Illinois, 1971)
Miller, Stuart Creighton, Benevolent Assimilation - The American Conquest of the Philippines, 1899-1903, (Yale, 1982)
Landau Saul (with Paul Jacobs and Eve Pell), To Serve The Devil: Colonials and Sojourners, (Vintage, 1971)
Williams, William Appleman, The Roots of the Modern American Empire - A Study of the Growth and Shaping of Social Consciousness in a Marketplace Society, (Random House, 1969)
Takaki, Ronald, Strangers From a Different Shore - A History of Asian Americans, (Penguin 1989)
Loewen, James, Lies Across America - What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong, (New Press, 1999)
1 comment:
Thank you for posting a much needed article on this subject. Now more than ever, the mainstream needs to be made aware that claims of this country's imperialistic tendencies are more than just random conspiracy theories from those with the perversion of hating freedom (or whatever a nationalistic individuals "other" group is).
It bothers me that people are, from my experience at least, so content to justify what we did to Japan on the basis of an "attack on American soil" when Hawaii was taken by force - further discussion of possible Japanese reasoning for this action and any discussions of doing similar in other countries at the time would help the readers at least begin to face the imperialistic nature of the country we live in, if for no other reason than to accept reality over a feel-good "here to save the world" narrative that will only drag us all further down into fundamental misunderstandings of what we are and how this is echoed elsewhere in society.
Post a Comment