COMMENTARY
Arakaki lawsuit threatens all of our diverse society
By Adrian Kamalaniikekai Kamali'i
At long last, the Arakaki plaintiffs have voiced their views and reasons for their litigation to dismantle the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. Much of what has been said in their reasons seems to be contradictory.
The plaintiffs ask, "Are we trying to harm Native Hawaiians?"
Their answer is "certainly not."
Do these plaintiffs not look at the residual effects of this case? Perhaps all 15 plaintiffs need to spend a night at the Institute for Human Services and see the number of Native Hawaiians who fill its confines and, even more devastating, the children who live under these conditions.
Perhaps all 15 plaintiffs need to spend some time at a maternity ward and get a close look at the mortality rates of Native Hawaiian infants. Perhaps all 15 plaintiffs need to spend a week at a correctional facility — not for their criminal action of filing such a lawsuit, but to see the number of Native Hawaiians who have succumbed to various crimes.
When these 15 individuals say "certainly not," they increase the notion that Hawaiians are owed nothing and they decrease the number of programs, of Hawaiian service organizations, and the hope that is used to heal and allay these and other social ills.
Their statement is plagued with the word "fair." What does fair mean nowadays? Fair simply means the following: To remove, by a perceived manifest right, the hereditary ruler of a kingdom and to place within it a corrupt system that strips its native people to a bare minimum.
Of course Arakaki et al. believe that "nothing about Hawai'i's past or present justifies denying government aid to one modern-day applicant and giving it to another solely because of somebody's ancestry."
Where, then, do they stand on issues of reparations to Japanese who were locked in internment camps? Where do they stand on the issue of Native American reservations? Or what are their views of possible reparations for African American slaves and their kin? Case in point: For every injustice that America has perpetrated, there has to be a form of justice.
No one can thoroughly conclude that "nothing about Hawai'i's past or present justifies" the need to help Native Hawaiians. Everything about Hawai'i's past and present has everything to do with current programs and the establishment of Hawaiian service organizations.
In the past 10 years, the number of Hawaiian service organizations — those that focus primarily on the betterment of Native Hawaiians and allaying their social ills — has increased 35 to 40 percent. This case seeks more than doing away with the quasi-governmental agencies; it seeks to continue an onslaught of future cases that will do away with aid to Native Hawaiians.
The plaintiffs stated that "Hawai'i is the only state in the nation that gives homesteads from its public lands and distributes public revenues exclusively to individuals of one race."
In 1897 Queen Lili'uokalani submitted her opposition to a treaty to then-President William McKinley, wherein she stated, "(I) do hereby protest against the ratification of a certain treaty ... purporting to cede those Islands to the territory and dominion of the United States." The queen continued her remarks by saying, "I declare such a treaty to be an act of wrong toward the native and part-native people of Hawai'i."
Lili'uokalani in this case clearly defines her role as an ali'i, to provide and protect what rightfully belonged to her "native and part-native people of Hawai'i" — that which she calls "the hereditary property of their chiefs."
Let's look at the residual effects of such a case.
Perchance the federal courts affirm the Arakaki case. What does this mean for Hawaiians? It would be another realistic stake of greed joining the many others in the hearts of many Hawaiians, both in Hawai'i and elsewhere. It would also add fuel to the color-blind fire that has become larger in recent years.
Such a case, if successful, would not only begin to rid the state of Hawai'i of its fiduciary responsibility to Native Hawaiians, but also begin to paint Hawai'i in an eggshell color and begin the process of a color-blind society in a place where we are proud of our diversity.
So, are these plaintiffs "trying to harm Native Hawaiians"? I agree with their reply, "certainly not." These 15 individuals are harming more than just Native Hawaiians; they are beginning to tear the very seams of our colorful fabric.
Adrian Kamalaniikekai Kamali'i is a 2000 graduate of the Kamehameha Schools and the president and CEO of Hui Ho'oulu Inc., a Hawaiian service organization geared toward advancing Hawaiian youths through education, culture, politics and the environment. Reach him at info@huihooulu.org.
