Discussion of Thurston Twigg-Smith's Book about the Overthrow
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1998-04-12
Guests: Samuel P. King (Senior U.S. District Court Judge); Mahealani Kamauʻu (Executive Director, Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation); Jon Van Dyke (Professor, UH Law School)
Duration: 1:09:22

[00:00:02] Randall Roth: Aloha. This is Randy Roth, host of the Price of Paradise show. We're broadcast live Sunday mornings on KHPR and KKUA and then rebroadcast Sunday evenings beginning at 8:00 on KIFO. All of us who worked to bring this program to you are volunteers who believe in the importance of lively and informed public dialogue. We believe the brightness of any community's future is directly related to the level of activity in its marketplace of ideas. Along these lines, we think topics that are sensitive and controversial need to be discussed publicly.
[00:00:37] Randall Roth: And we believe that people in this community with the best interests of the community at heart can engage in these conversations, focusing on each other's issues, and, and not avoiding or not attacking each other's motives or, or personal backgrounds. Our sponsor is the Hawaii Community Foundation, an organization that encourages grassroot efforts to improve the quality of life in Hawaii, and that administers charitable funds with efficiency and compassion. Today, we're going to be talking about a controversial new book. The book is about a topic that is of great importance to this community. The book is called 'Hawaiian Sovereignty: Do the Facts Matter?'
[00:01:18] Randall Roth: Its author, Thurston Twigg-Smith, is with us this morning, as are three critics of the book, Mahealani Kamauu, John Van Dyke, and Walter Heen. If you've seen this morning's Honolulu Advertiser, you know that there is a book review by Sam King, and then articles about the book by Mahealani and John. According to Sam, the readers may not like the author's viewpoint, but the book itself is a must read. I'll be telling you a little bit more about the author, Thurston Twigg-Smith, in just a moment, but I'm going to begin by summarizing what to me the book is all about.
[00:02:01] Randall Roth: After reading it, I come away with this. And Twigg, I'm going to ask you about, uh, whether this is a a decent summary of, of the book and then I'll tell our listeners a bit more about you. As I read the book, number one, you're saying the sovereignty movement is mostly based on revisionism. Number two, you're saying that that land was never stolen. Neither land nor a kingdom was stolen. Number three, you're saying the Queen was an inadequate leader who brought on the overthrow by her own actions. Number four, that the sovereignty movement is building up unrealistic expectations. And number five, that that movement is planting the seeds of disappointment and violence.
[00:02:44] Randall Roth: What do you think? Is that a decent summary?
[00:02:47] Thurston Twigg-Smith: A very decent summary, right, Randy.
[00:02:51] Randall Roth: Twigg Smith is a fifth generation Hawaii native whose great-great grandparents were pioneer missionaries to Hawaii. He attended Lincoln and Kapalama elementary schools, Roosevelt for junior high, and then Punahou for high school. He won a scholarship to Yale and graduated 1942 as a mechanical engineer, served in five campaigns in Europe during World War II, eventually attaining the rank of captain in the field artillery and was awarded the Bronze Star. After the war, he went to work at the Honolulu Advertiser, where he did a little bit of everything but mostly was in the editorial department. He served as its publisher from 1961 until 1993, when the paper was sold to Gannett.
[00:03:38] Randall Roth: Twigg, the you've done a lot of things in this community, but, uh, as we've indicated, the reason you're here today is that you've written this book. I've briefly outlined what I think the main points are, and, and you've indicated that that's a decent outline at least as a as a starting point. Tell us real quickly, why did you write this?
[00:04:00] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Well, I, I felt that there was an effort being made to make the Hawaiians look like they were victimized, and therefore they were in need of some help beyond what they could earn for themselves through political action and one thing or another. And I felt that a lot of the comments by the activists were trying to make the rest of us feel guilty and therefore pony up with money or whatever to ease their problems. And I just didn't think that was right based on what I'd known the primary thing being that uh right after annexation, the Hawaiians became American citizens and got the vote, and for the next four decades dominated the political scene here.
[00:04:39] Thurston Twigg-Smith: So it wasn't annexation that victimized them if anything has, and therefore tracing that back, it can't be the revolution either. I said earlier and I I would say anytime that the revolution was really the best thing that ever happened to Hawaii because it brought it into an age of democracy away from a monarchy.
[00:05:00] Randall Roth: Now, I mentioned that your great great grandparents were missionaries, uh, your grandfather, LA Thurston was I guess what many people would call the ringleader, the, the primary mover so far as the overthrow was concerned. There are some people who feel that your interest in the subject and your writing of this book was directly related to the fact that he was your grandfather.
[00:05:26] Thurston Twigg-Smith: I had grown up with that knowledge of course, and I was about 10 when he died, so we didn't get many chances to discuss sovereignty. But he, I I I knew that I would be accused of writing this thing to defend him and he really doesn't need any defending. He loved Hawaii, he spoke Hawaiian fluently, he served in the legislature, was elected from Hawaiian communities. He was very much a part of the islands and he just felt that it was better for the islands to go in the direction of a permanent tie with America than to be left floating out there as a potential colonial target for some other country.
[00:06:03] Thurston Twigg-Smith: So he felt he was doing what was best for Hawaii, particularly when the Queen took her move backwards.
[00:06:11] Randall Roth: I I get the impression that that you don't consider yourself anti-Hawaiian, that that one of the reasons, or one of the, the non-reasons if you will, for writing this book was to somehow put down Hawaiians, is is that what you're suggesting?
[00:06:26] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Absolutely, I'm not even trying to put down sovereignty. I comment several times in the book on the various aspects of sovereignty, many of which I support. The aspects that relate to culture, to, uh, esteem and pride, self-esteem and pride, those are good attributes of sovereignty and they ought to be pursued. I'm, I'm just against the elements of sovereignty that would try to lead us toward independence or moving lands back where they never were. Those kinds of things that are based on false premises.
[00:06:59] Randall Roth: Okay, well, as I indicated, we've got three critics of the book on the phone, and we're going to go to them one at a time and, and hear just a a real brief summary of their thoughts, uh, respective thoughts about the book, and then, uh, give an opportunity to each of them to engage in a uh a mini conversation with Twigg here, and once we've gone through all three of them, we'll open this up for callers. First on the line is Mahealani Kamauu. Mahealani is the executive director of the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and is actively involved in the sovereignty movement.
[00:07:36] Randall Roth: Those of you who've read the Price of Paradise books know that Mahealani was a co-author of a chapter on sovereignty in Volume 2. Mahealani, good morning.
[00:07:47] Mahealani Kamauʻu: Good morning. How are you?
[00:07:48] Randall Roth: I'm just fine. Mahealani, I know from your article in this morning's newspaper that you're, you're quite critical of the book. Can you in, in summary fashion, tell us why it is that that you don't think that this book is um, um, well, let me, let me just stop there. Tell us about the book. What do you think?
[00:08:11] Mahealani Kamauʻu: Well, um, I went through it once, it was very difficult. It was uh for me a a very wrenching experience. I felt it was um very hostile and insulting and um and racist. And I know that you um cautioned me about, you know, keeping my comments to the issue, and believe me, I'm trying. So, um, I for me, um, I had to focus on you know what I I think to be very clear, um, the morality of another um, of outsiders coming in and interfering with the internal affairs of an independent nation. And that for me is the is the kernel and the heart of this controversy.
[00:09:11] Mahealani Kamauʻu: I just heard Twigg Smith say that his grandfather, um, you know, felt this way and that way. Well, that was very inappropriate, if not immoral. I don't I didn't read anything in the book to suggest that our our leaders were committing human rights violations. There was nothing in the book to suggest that it that it was proper for outsiders to take over the government. He makes a very um, you know, reasoned, I guess argument that these folks were in fact subjects of the kingdom.
[00:09:50] Mahealani Kamauʻu: But if you look at the 50 or 60 years preceding the overthrow, it's clear that um they were most of the ones, most of the foreigners who were, who became subjects, um, you know, became subjects as a result of a long pattern of gunboat diplomacy and intimidation of our native government. And over time, forced concessions which eventually gave our foreigners and um non-residents increasing power in a government. That to me just builds up builds upon a whole pattern of um threat, intimidation, and um, you know, to a point where he can claim that um they used legal means to take over.
[00:10:46] Mahealani Kamauʻu: But for me and I think for a lot of Hawaiians, a lot of Hawaiian uh people, never mind whether we're sovereignty advocates or not, um, there's you know, it was fundamentally immoral and racist and I hear him repeating that. I just feel that he just doesn't get it. This is not a contrived um, program of, you know, revisionist history we're looking at. It is a fundamental, basic um, groundswell, a popular movement that that has the force and momentum of to me, moral persuasion, and it's not going to stop. And we're not going to be relegated to, you know, our cultural um, you know, non-threatening kinds of activities.
[00:11:41] Mahealani Kamauʻu: I mean, there's a political question and issue here that needs to be addressed and resolved.
[00:11:46] Randall Roth: Mhm. Mahealani and and I I should let listeners know on each of these many conversations I'm going to give the the critic the last word and and Twigg will have opportunity to to speak more in the context of responding to um to callers later in the show. Uh, but Mahealani, I want to give Twigg an opportunity to comment on on what you've said thus far, but I will come back to you.
[00:12:09] Thurston Twigg-Smith: I think one of the problems is looking is that some people like you, Mahealani, to as a representative of it, tend to think of Hawaii as existing in a vacuum at that time. So you refer to outsiders coming in. LA Thurston was a third generation resident here and most of the people that were involved with him in the revolution felt that they were part, they were as much Hawaiian as others who might be able to trace their ancestry back many more generations. I feel the same way. I think chapter two of the book sort of helps to put the whole situation in perspective.
[00:12:49] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Hawaii was out there as a wonderful piece of land and a strategic location that was going to be grabbed by someone. And these people were realistic enough to see it, as were the Kings that, beginning with Kamehameha III, they they recognized that some kind of an alliance was necessary to help preserve Hawaii. They didn't want it to fall into becoming a colonial prize, uh, from some nation. United States did not have colonial uh act uh aspirations in that period of time. It was the one country that offered a way out that was not colonialism.
[00:13:31] Mahealani Kamauʻu: It's uh, you know, for me it's wholly offensive to think of these guys sporting over some spoils. If we were to be aligned with any foreign country, then let it be a native initiative and not something that's forced it upon our people by foreigners.
[00:13:52] Randall Roth: I think that you find that one of the things I found, somewhat to my surprise, well documented evidence that many Hawaiians felt the same way. Obviously, in those days with a monarch around, they weren't making a lot of noise about it, but right after the revolution, and at the period of annexation, you found many Hawaiian leaders who saw benefits in the alliance with America. They were, uh, I think it was you. Somebody referred to the fact that the House had voted, House did not vote for annexation, the House was dominated by Hawaiians, and the speaker was a native Hawaiian, and the Senate had a number of Hawaiians in it. It voted unanimously for, uh, annexation.
[00:14:38] Randall Roth: So there was Hawaiian input into our moving in that direction.
[00:14:42] Mahealani Kamauʻu: Well, the Senate having a number of Hawaiians in it doesn't suggest to me that they were in control of the Senate, which is the problem here. I just, um, you know, I, I get really, really upset, uh, you know, for me, and I think it's pretty transparent, what happened is you had, um, you know, non-Hawaiians make a decision for the native people and that is wholly immoral and inappropriate and a violation of international law.
[00:15:13] Randall Roth: I think that if you look back at who was making the decisions for Hawaiian people in those days, it was the Queen. When you had a monarch around, the monarch was in pretty much control of the scene. So, I don't I don't think that the native Hawaiians as a group were making any decisions. They didn't, in other words, have sovereignty before the revolution. Mahealani, this is Randy and and I'm wondering, um, if we focus on on today, if we focus on the sovereignty movement in particular.
[00:15:45] Randall Roth: As I was looking at your article this morning and and based on having read Twig's book in the last week, it it seems to me that that there's a lot of overlap. For example, you indicate that that you feel that one of the hallmarks of the sovereignty movement is is personal responsibility and that that it that it isn't a goal of sovereignty to, um, to promote victimhood. Uh, certainly the native Hawaiians you say don't want to be thinking of themselves or treated as as victims.
[00:16:16] Randall Roth: And you indicate that there is um, uh, a strong goal on the part of the sovereignty movement to have have realistic goals and and you want it to bring the entire community together. You don't want it to be divisive. And to me these are are common themes from the book. Do you feel as though there is some commonality here?
[00:16:41] Mahealani Kamauʻu: Well, it's um on on on that basis, I think so. And um I I guess I feel often times you know our movement is misunderstood. You know in our newspaper this morning is uh you know a long article about the um you know restoration of Kahoolawe. I mean what more eloquent testimony to self-determination and and you know our people's um taking on responsibility than Kahoolawe. Now I suppose some would feel that um that the claims of you know spirituality as I've heard for that island are bogus, um which of course we disagree with.
[00:17:31] Mahealani Kamauʻu: But I bottom line is this, when you look through the newspapers, who are the people who are most forceful and at the forefront of bringing some sanity to the, um, you know, really predatory and rapacious inclinations of developers and and people who look at who still view our islands as, you know, a jewel and a prize to be seized and exploited. The native people are speaking for the environment. The native people are speaking for um, to me the highest and noblest, you know, um humanistic values. And I don't see that coming from any other quarter.
[00:18:14] Mahealani Kamauʻu: We have made, you know, I have been in it at least a couple of decades and so I've watched um progress and for me progress has been um growing sensitivity in our community about, you know, these values, growing sensitivity in response to, um, you know, Malama stewardship of the land. And I think for me that is that is very real and um eloquent testimony to our desire to take responsibility and move forward.
[00:19:00] Thurston Twigg-Smith: can't divide themselves from their neighbors in community. And I think Kahaluu is a perfect example of the problem there. This is something that nobody disagrees with, whether they're Hawaiians or not Hawaiians, they feel Kahaluu should be cleaned up and restored and become a place where people can visit or whatever.
[00:19:20] Thurston Twigg-Smith: I mean the emotionalism of the spiritual part of it, we don't need to get into that because that's strongly felt and I respect it. But the idea of Kahaluu being something only for Hawaiians is what I think is divisive. It should be something that all of us participate, you ought to in, you ought to invite other people to join in that. You certainly need the money of the rest of the community to do that, and I think that one is a good example of how we can get together instead of being divided.
[00:19:52] Mahealani Kamauʻu: Well, there are a couple of, actually, more than a couple of instances where you were just all playing wrong about um on the facts. I mean, actually, throughout, but on the issue of Kahaluu, it's always been there are monthly accesses to the island. They last for about a about one week and anybody is welcome to come and participate with that. It isn't something just for Hawaiians. And in fact, um especially non-Hawaiians are welcome and encouraged to come simply so that they can experience what we experience and what we know at, you know, the very deepest spiritual levels. And so, perhaps on this one thing, we should invite you over.
[00:20:39] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Good idea. That that sounds like a a wonderful invitation. And and we do need to move on so that we can hear from others. Mahealani, if if you do have time to to stay with us, we'd love to come back to you later in the show.
[00:20:52] Mahealani Kamauʻu: Thank you.
[00:20:53] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Thank you very much. Uh next on the line is John Van Dyke. John is a colleague of mine at the William S Richardson School of Law. He teaches uh a number of courses including constitutional law there. He also serves as a consultant for the office of Hawaiian affairs and other native Hawaiian organization uh in legal actions against uh the state and possibly federal government. Whoop, we just lost John. Uh we're going to we're going to get him back in just a moment. I'll tell you what, rather than wait, let's move on to Walter Heen.
[00:21:28] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Walter is a retired state appellate court judge who during his long and distinguished career has been a U.S attorney, city councilman, state legislator, acting federal court judge. Uh he's been in the news recently as a member of the Governor's economic revitalization task force, uh also a member of the PASH study group as well as uh one of two people on a short list to be appointed an OHA trustee. Walter, can you hear me?
[00:21:54] Walter Heen: I can hear you.
[00:21:56] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Uh we were going to save you for last, but uh we lost John Van Dyke. We're going to get him up on another line in a few minutes. But um you uh didn't write something for the newspaper this morning, so I'm not sure what your thinking is on um on this particular book.
[00:22:14] Walter Heen: Oh, well, first of all, um Mr. Twig Smith's book, reminds me of a a takeoff on an old expression that that is that history like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and it all depends on where you're coming from. And it also seems to me that he his book points out that you're a revisionist, a historical revisionist or not, depending upon whether or not you were the first one to write about that particular event. Uh, in Sam's in Sam King's review, he says that, uh this is a long awaited brief. And while I was reading Mr. Twig Smith's book, it occurred to me that it reads an awful lot like a lot of legal briefs that I've read. And when I was a trial judge, I used to tell the jury after the evidence was all in and it was time for uh final arguments, that now the attorneys are going to take that evidence, and they're going to emphasize certain facts, and they're going to they're going to persuade you to interpret facts in the way that they think is best for their client. I think that's what uh Mr. Twig Smith has done in this particular book. And of course, I think as pointed out by Sam also, uh it suffers of course from the fact that uh his, Mr. Twig Smith's viewpoint is not exactly without bias. However, to get beyond that, I was more interested frankly in his uh final chapter.
[00:23:58] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Hey, I'll tell you what. Walter, hold off just for a moment. I want to give Twig an opportunity to comment on what you've said thus far and then we'll come back to you and hear what you have to say about the last chapter because I too thought that that that was the key chapter. Twig?
[00:24:12] Thurston Twigg-Smith: I certainly have no problem with what Walter has said. I think that I would consider that I'd been very successful if I could get people to recognize that there is another side to history. I think that too many of the cases presented by the activist side of of emphasized that there is only one side to history. They, for example, in the Apology Resolution, they quite specifically say that that is the version, there's no other version, the Congress has approved it. So I think we're making progress if we can accept that there are two sides to history, that people do come at things from different directions, but both sides need to be considered. Walter, back to you.
[00:24:22] Walter Heen: Okay. Uh, actually, Randy, as you know, I'm not a sovereignty activist. I am very much keenly interested in the issue and how it can be resolved. Um and therefore, I also think like Sam, that Mr. Twig Smith's book is going to add to the dialogue. Nevertheless, uh I'm not sure it's a must read.
[00:25:15] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Oh please. Give give us your thoughts about the last chapter, Walter.
[00:25:21] Walter Heen: The final chapter, in essence, echoes what I think needs to be done. I think that the the Hawaiians, we Hawaiians have to recognize that we are either going to talk to the rest of the community at the end of our attempt to determine how we want to establish our sovereignty or we can do it, we can talk to them now. And I think it's very important to begin the dialogue now and that has been my approach in the sovereignty effort. Um, the expectations that Mr. Twig Smith points out as being um without without foundation, if you will, or beyond uh accomplishment, I think in in some respects he's he's correct. Certainly, and I think most um sovereignty people will recognize that um complete independence is practically out of the question. There are too many other people as pointed out by him and Mahealani, who inhabit our islands, and there's no way we're going to ask them to leave. Um certainly, I'm not going to ask my wife to go back to Seattle where she was born. You want to talk about a revolution. And uh they these divisions I think have to be have to be healed. Um the the the point made by Mahealani I think is very important, and I think that is probably the driving force in the sovereignty movement and that is not so much and I think it has to be viewed in this way, it's not so much a case of Hawaiians demanding that they shall be the sole caretaker if you will of these the islands on which we live and on which which we love. But like the Ohana system, the Hawaiians will take in anyone who is willing to accord the environment, the Aina, as much um as much love and affection and care as Hawaiians are. And the exploitation of our resources by people interested if you will, only in the bottom dollar, and I realize that's an exaggeration in some cases, is what really disturbs so many Hawaiians. Uh I think a good example of what really that is disturbing was recently uh published in in an article on Nihau, where the Hawaiians there were feeling threatened by outsiders landing on their shores and walking all over the seashells and fishing in the waters. Now, if if you look at it strictly from the standpoint of ours and theirs, it would appear as if the Hawaiians are saying this is ours, and don't come. But what they're actually saying is if you're going to come, be careful and take care of the Aina, have the same kind of love and affection for it as we do. And I think these are very important points. Um and my efforts have always been to try to establish a dialogue and the dialogue can only come when reasonable rational people sit down and discuss the problems.
[00:29:03] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Walter, um appreciate your your thoughts this morning. Uh time is running quickly and so I'm going to move on, um if All was true anyway. Thank you Walter, appreciate it. In case anyone tuned in late, you're listening to the Price of Paradise radio show. My name is Randy Roth and our topic today is a brand new book called Hawaiian Sovereignty, Do the Facts Matter? Uh its author, Thurston Twig Smith, is with me in the studio. Um most people call him Twig. He's a fifth generation Hawaii native. Um he attended public elementary and junior high schools in Hawaii, graduated from Punahou and then from Yale. Uh he spent many years working at the Honolulu Advertiser, most of those years as its publisher. Uh he's been retired from that for about five years or so. Uh he's won a number of awards, including last year a philanthropist of the year. Uh he's here today though talking about his new book, Hawaiian Sovereignty, Do the Facts Matter? We've got uh one other planned conversation coming up, but if you'd like to get in line to ask a question or make a comment, our phone number is 955-8821. If you're on a neighbor island, the number is 1-800-955-8821. Again, Thurston Twig Smith is with us in the studio and we're talking about his new book, Hawaiian Sovereignty, Do the Facts Matter? Well John Van Dyke uh was introduced a little bit ago but we had a technical problem and lost him. He's back on the line, I hope. John as I mentioned earlier is my colleague at the law school. He also serves as a consultant for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and other native Hawaiian organizations and in that capacity is involved in some pending or potential legal actions against the state uh or federal government. John can you hear me okay? Yes, good morning good morning Randy.
[00:31:03] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Um people who've had a chance to see the advertiser know that that you were particularly concerned about uh what you say is a an inaccuracy in Twig's book. Would you briefly describe what that is and then tell us why you feel that that particular inaccuracy is so important?
[00:31:24] Jon Van Dyke: Yes, so the book uh spends a lot of time talking about the 1993 Apology Resolution and um Mr. Twig Smith says at several points that it does not have the force of law because it was only a joint resolution.
[00:34:50] Thurston Twigg-Smith: it's clear that joint resolutions which are passed by both the House and Senate and then signed by the President as this one was have the same force and effect as any other statute passed by Congress. And there are numerous examples of joint resolutions being treated in that fashion. I suppose the annexation resolution itself, the Newlands resolution in 1898 would be the most appropriate example to cite in this context. And Mr. Twig Smith certainly recognizes recognizes that as a valid uh statute. And so it's impossible to to treat the 1890 1898 resolution as valid and the 1993 resolution as invalid. They're they're both the same. They both have the same status um under U.S law and are the supreme law of the land under Article 6 of the U.S Constitution. It's also important to to note that the 1993 resolution didn't come out of nowhere and wasn't an isolated uh situation. Uh Congress in 1992, when they passed uh amendments to the Native Hawaiian Health Care Act had a long list of findings that is um uh very close to the findings in the 1993 Apology Resolution. And then in 1994, Congress passed the Native Hawaiian Education Act which again has a long list of findings, refers to the apology resolution, acknowledges that Congress did apologize, acknowledges once again that the overthrow was illegal uh and repeats more or less the same findings. So for three years in a row, 1992, 93, and 94, Congress has gone on record as uh saying that the the Native Hawaiians uh have been mistreated uh by the United States and that the overthrow was illegal and in violation of international law, that 1.8 million acres of lands were taken without the consent of or compensation to the Native Hawaiian people. Uh so this is well-established now and courts of law must uh accept that as the position of the United States uh under concepts of judicial notice that are binding in U.S courts and courts are now doing so. So uh this uh can't be simply wished away, as Mr. Twig Smith would would want to. This is now uh binding law of the land.
[00:37:21] Thurston Twigg-Smith: John, let me get a reaction uh to that from Twig and then I'll return to you. I think there was a big difference between the operative clauses of a resolution and the whereas clauses and my argument is with the whereas clauses John. That those findings that you let uh refer to as being true simply aren't true and there were no hearings held to determine whether there was any input on the other side or not. For example, to say that the 1.8 million acres of land was taken without consent or compensation, you know that that's a specious argument because that those lands were not taken from the people.
[00:38:00] Thurston Twigg-Smith: they were put into trust for them. That's one thing the revolutionists did that everyone must recognize as a marvelous achievement. They got the United States to accept Hawaii on an annexation basis but put all of our land, all of our government lands into a trust for the people and ultimately those lands were returned to us as statehood. That didn't happen with any other annexation or the other seven other annexations of the previous 100 years. So that was an achievement and it's just it's just plain wrong to say that those things were taken without consent or compensation. They just weren't taken.
[00:38:37] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Same thing is true of the intervention of US military troops. And to to try to point paint this thing as the whereas clauses do, as a US inspired movement with a conspiracy going on between US agents and the revolutionists, is also not true. There certainly is a very clear other side to that in the Morgan Report where 13 senators, I mean, nine senators voted unanimously to exonerate the US troops of of any blame in the overthrow. The US troops were there as a force, but they were there as a benign force to preserve law and order and protect American property.
[00:39:16] Thurston Twigg-Smith: They didn't point their guns at anybody. They stacked them when they came ashore. They dipped their colors to the queen as they went by. So to try to to prove to pretend that this was a invasion without referring to the Morgan report which says otherwise, it's I think a distortion. That's the so I think that those whereas clauses are very troublesome, and for people to try to cite those now as the law of the land or the clear picture of history, is what leads to the problem in this area.
[00:39:46] Randall Roth: John, um, we're we're running um a little behind schedule, but I want to give you um uh an opportunity to respond to that. Why don't you go ahead.
[00:39:55] Jon Van Dyke: Yes. Um, Mr. Twick Smith has has made his points in his his book. Uh and of course, um under the First Amendment, he's he's free to give us his his personal version of of Hawaiian history, uh as he has. But in a book with the presumptuous title uh as that this one has, about whether the facts matter, he should get his facts straight about what uh is binding law and what is not. And his statements that the 1993 apology resolution is not binding uh are simply incorrect, even though he disagrees with that statute.
[00:40:32] Jon Van Dyke: It is the law of the land until uh Congress sees fit to change it. And it's also important, in his own book, he goes into some detail about Senator Slade Gorton's um arguments against the resolution. So the arguments against the resolution were made, were made vigorously by one of the leading Republican senators and uh Congress simply decided to uh enact the resolution even in spite of the arguments that were put forward.
[00:41:01] Randall Roth: John, uh Twig is is pleading for one more opportunity and I'm going to give it to him, but I'll come back and give you the last word, Twig Smith.
[00:41:09] Thurston Twigg-Smith: I just wanted to, I forgot to emphasize one thing, that what the resolution did in its operative language was to suggest the United States and the and the president pursue reconciliation. It didn't say anything about the other the whereas clauses and I don't have an argument with the operative language, but that part of the thing is law and all it says is we should pursue reconciliation. I agree with that.
[00:41:36] Randall Roth: John, you have the last word. Um, if you could keep it brief, I'd appreciate it.
[00:42:06] Jon Van Dyke: get land back in the hands of the Native Hawaiian people and assist uh and facilitate their efforts to uh restore the autonomous Native Hawaiian nation.
[00:42:20] Randall Roth: Okay. John, I appreciate uh you sharing your thoughts with us this morning. That was John Van Dyke, a professor at the law school. Well, our lines uh are full and in fact, they were full about 30 seconds after I invited calls a bit ago. Number two, that land was never stolen. Number three, the queen was an inadequate leader who brought on the overthrow by her own actions. Number four, the sovereignty movement is building up unrealistic expectations and number five, that those unrealistic expectations are planting the seeds of disappointment and violence. Good morning, Sean.
[00:43:32] Caller: Uh, good morning. This is a great panel, a very, very interesting discussion. Um, I just want to say that, you know, um, Mr. Smith, like I said, has his First Amendment right to publish what he will. But every time he comes out, he keeps rationalizing, you know, the overthrow. I think what had happened in 1893 was atrocious. I'm sorry, Mr. Smith. I have to disagree.
[00:44:21] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, Sean, I'm going to take that as a comment, and so we can hear from others. I'm going to I'm going to keep moving. Thank you, Sean. And and Twig, I know you'd like to respond to all of these, but I'm going to have a few more people uh express their thoughts and then we'll come to you.
[00:44:48] Caller: Aloha, good morning. with less than 2,600 votes, Hawaii was annexed. Number two, is this is for all the panelists, the Hawaiian Kingdom was the executive branch of the Hawaiian government. Since 1840, the monarchy did not have absolute power. Much like any civilized nation, the Hawaiian government was split into three branches. Aloha.
[00:46:11] Randall Roth: Aloha. What do you have for us this morning?
[00:46:14] Caller: Well, I haven't had the opportunity to to get Twig's book and I want him to autograph it when I do. Sure. Uh but I I I have heard from other people who have read it and so this is hearsay, but I understand there's a slight disagreement with respect to a statement statement attributed to me uh expressed back in September at a panel at the Pacific Club. And I thought the important to clarify that.
[00:46:46] Caller: Um and it has to do with the apology resolution. I indicated that I felt that the apology resolution because it doesn't go forward to accomplish any of the return of the lands or any of the those important aspects. Even though it does mention a process of reconciliation between the United States and the Hawaiian people, did not have the kind of force and effect of law than an act that would return the lands to Hawaii would.
[00:48:19] Randall Roth: Okay. Uh Bruce, can can I ask a question? Um, in Sam King's review of the book this morning, uh and and I'm writing I'm I'm reading now from it. He he suggested that the Twig's chapter on the apology resolution was in Sam Word's quote right on. And he said that the resolution in his opinion was a a quote cynical action by an uninterested Congress equivalent to apologizing to George III for the American Revolution, uh close quotes.
[00:48:51] Caller: This apology resolution is um right in the center, I think of of the controversy. And it seems to me that the the sovereignty proponents feel that it's um you know, accurate and very important. Um share a little bit more about your thoughts on this apology resolution, then we'll hear from Twig and and move on.
[00:52:59] Randall Roth: Okay, let me get a quick reaction from Twig to that.
[00:53:02] Thurston Twigg-Smith: I think you would do well to consider what the Hawaiians at the time were saying. They and I quote a bunch of them in the I think at the beginning of the forward. A reexamination of that would indicate that they they were very happy about the fact that the United States was going to be their boss in a sense, their their central government. So I don't think that it was a case of seating sovereignty. Sovereignty was taken away from them by the revolution, but it was taken put into the hands of the people. It wasn't put into the hands of any new monarch or any single dictator. It became a democracy.
[00:54:23] Randall Roth: Lono, I'm by that logic than the Baltic States were rightfully annexed.
[00:54:27] Caller: Lono, I think it's fair to say you and Twig simply disagree on on this particular issue, but you've you've expressed your point of view quite well and I appreciate your calling this morning.
[00:55:20] Randall Roth: Mahaelani, you've had an opportunity to listen to uh other critics of the book, uh including um I guess all of our our callers this morning. Any additional thoughts to share with us just in a minute or so?
[00:55:34] Mahealani Kamauʻu: Um Well, I I'd like to address one point that um that you used in your summation of uh Twig uh Twig Smith's book and that is this um possibility uh or potential for violence. I think that's very important. Um and in my um in the in my um comments in the paper I, you know, I I uh point out that there is really no basis for this. I mean, in his view, um the sovereignty proponents are building up um you know, uh expectations beyond what can be realized um you know, practically realized and um there is really no evidence that um our people are inclined towards violence. Neither are young people, you know, our people who are currently active in the movement. And in fact, um you know, from your large sovereignty groups, I uh um you you have this um premise of of nonviolence and you know, a commitment to to moving forward in this endeavor in a peaceful manner. So, um I can't um emphasize enough um how important it is to us. I think that that everyone
[01:03:46] Randall Roth: the author of a new book, Hawaiian sovereignty, do the facts matter? And Twig, again, I appreciate your willingness to walk into this lion's den and defend your position and and work along with everyone else that we've heard from, uh, towards some sort of constructive resolution of this issue that's so important to this community.
[01:04:05] Thurston Twigg-Smith: Thank you very much, Randy.
[01:04:06] Randall Roth: Uh, the Price of Paradise producer is Susie Roth and the production chief is Jeff Alardi. I want to tell you just real briefly about our sponsor. The Hawaii Community Foundation has been sponsoring this show from the very, very beginning, and that's about four years now. It's an organization that supports grassroot efforts to improve the quality of life in Hawaii and that for more than 80 years has been administrating charitable funds with efficiency and compassion.
[01:04:32] Randall Roth: I want to tell you something specific about the foundation. It believes in the power of neighborhoods. Uh, that's why it provides grants to help neighborhoods work together on projects such as community policing, graffiti paint outs, clearing away debris and trash, or holding community festivals that bring people together. Since this program was established in 1991, the foundation has given more than $1 million in grants to hundreds of neighborhoods around the state. This is just one of the many reasons why the people who bring this radio show to you are proud to be sponsored by the Hawaii Community Foundation. You've been listening to the Price of Paradise radio show. I'm Randy Roth. Aloha.