COMMENTARY
We can shape Hawai'i's future, or react to outsiders' visions

By John Griffin

Those who overthrew the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893, the folks who guided these Islands to statehood in 1959 and the neo-conservatives now so influential in the Bush administration may have one thing in common: You might call them the futurists of their times.

At their best, futurists don't predict the future. They study history and current trends and then suggest what could lie ahead as possible futures, most often if people work to make one happen.

I don't agree with the overthrow or the neocons. But in all three cases cited above (plus many others, good and bad) people had visions of what was possible and worked to make one come true.

Now, with our Legislature coming into session, national and local elections this year, and general world turmoil, it seems time for us in Hawai'i to do a little futuristic thinking about our possibilities.

True, Hawai'i most often has been shaped by outside influences — explorers (starting with Polynesians) finding the Islands, Westernization, missionary zeal, colonialism, national politics, world conflicts and imposed commerce, among other things.

But that doesn't mean we can't ponder trends in the world, nation and here in Hawai'i and adapt to them as best we can. Indeed, it seems necessary to do so on some long-term basis.

So I was especially interested in a talk to the Hawai'i-Community Media Council recently by professor Jim Dator, the longtime head of futures (note the plural) studies at the University of Hawai'i and a world figure in that discipline.

Before turning to the future, Dator explained that American history has been influenced strongly by "three competing public philosophies."

Of these, most often dominant has been individualistic "liberalism," now called "neoliberalism" and linked with big-business globalism and, confusingly and often mistakenly, termed "conservatism" by many people.

The other two are "populism," which is linked to the ideas of local community and cultural and environmental values, and "progressivism," which more favors big government as a counter to big business.

Dator took this view of President Bush and Co.:

" 'Dubya' has been populist in rhetoric, protectionist in economic policy, imperialist in foreign and military affairs, and authoritarian in civil rights. None of that is in accordance with neoliberal philosophies. ...

"The neocons within the Republican Party who currently rule the U.S. are certainly not in favor of neoliberal globalization. Instead, they have taken us well down the road to creating the New American Global Empire that they envisioned and had been working on for many years. ... "

You can argue that Bush is now busy moderating that harsh image for the election year and in the face of dissent, just as he deceptively billed himself a "compassionate conservative" for the presidential campaign four years ago.

But, such argument aside and more to my point, these are five possible futures that Dator saw for the United States and Hawai'i:

• Triumph of the New American Empire

The United States is the undisputed global hegemon, focusing on internal security and external military might. Global neoliberalism has been replaced by American (domestic and foreign) corporatism. The New American Empire also is characterized by restricted individual rights, emphasis on common American values and the Bible. Property and corporate ownership is restricted to a few loyal citizens only.

Hawai'i, in this scenario, is a tightly controlled military center "for projection of American imperial rule in Asia."

• Global Economic and Environmental Collapse

"Derivatives-led global-debt crisis (at all levels — national, corporate, personal) brings down the overextended house of cards. Predatory capitalism destroys its resource base. The result is overpopulation/depopulation, water wars, global warming/cooling, climate change, and sea-level rise. The focus of human activity is now on coping with these environmental issues.

"Hawai'i is almost entirely on its own — no sun-based tourism ... can waste resources coming and going so far. We are just one more overpopulated, isolated and humid Pacific island coping with sea-level rise, climate change and environmental refugees from other Pacific islands."

• North America in a Globalized World

Global neoliberalism returns with North America as an important participant. Economic concentration is in the hands of a few global corporations. Dator described these as "European Union, Confucian Asia, Hindic Asia and Islamic Ummah (featuring Islamic capitalism) with South America as part of North American sphere, major South Africa subregion, Central Asia slowly rising, on the way to full globalization by end of 21st century.

In this scenario, Hawai'i globalized, but more as a part of Asia than the United States, although it still was an American state.

• Nine Nations of North America in a Localized World

This might follow some collapse or as a reaction to the excesses of our empire and/or the World Trade Organization and International Monetary Fund neoliberal globalization. Dator suggests this might result in "preservation and improvement of local culture and lifestyles, not economic growth, the focus of life." Other effects might be bioregional diversity, rugged individualism along with communal property ownership, and the rise of indigenous people everywhere.

In this scenario, Hawaiian sovereignty would be "achieved and maintained."

• High-tech Globalization and Beyond

"Beyond the nation-state to global political economy. Beyond planet Earth (Moon, Mars, Europa, Venus)? Beyond mere humanity (AI, genetic engineering, nanotechnology, Martians and ET)? Beyond capitalism to a post-money, post scarcity society.

Dator here envisions a branch of the University of Hawai'i on Mars and has even composed words for its alma mater.

Don't like those choices? Well, the idea is for all of us to envision our own possible future, or to at least benefit from trying.

Back in 1970, Hawai'i had a successful, stimulating Governor's Conference on the Year 2000, an effort not to predict 30 years ahead but to get out of some development ruts and brainstorm exciting possibilities. A state commission was enacted to follow up.

For several reasons, the momentum dwindled and died, although many of us benefited from the experience.

I'm not advocating some new conference on the year 2050. But as we are wrapped up in important matters such as education reform and sustainability, I do see a need to think further out at what these islands might become in reacting to a changing world around us.

We've got to plan beyond the next election.

John Griffin is former editor of The Advertiser's editorial pages and a frequent contributor.