1X
Three guests who described themselves as the Kanalua Gang — a term from the Hawaii legislature for those who had not yet made up their minds — examined concerns about Hawaiian sovereignty with host Randall Roth. Clinton R. Ashford, an attorney, challenged the historical narrative underlying the sovereignty movement, arguing that private land titles were not disturbed by the 1893 overthrow and that crown lands had never belonged to the general Hawaiian population but to the monarchy. He also said that serious legal, economic, and political questions remained unaddressed by sovereignty proponents. Jim Mee, also an attorney, warned of racial divisiveness, questioning whether rights grounded in ethnic identity were sustainable as Hawaiian blood quantum diminished through intermarriage over generations. Walter Judd, a historian, noted that sixty percent of the population at the time of the overthrow was non-Hawaiian, and pressed for an account of what the sovereignty movement offered that majority. All three said they remained open to persuasion but had not heard satisfying answers. The concrete question at issue is whether the historical and legal case for Hawaiian sovereignty is sound and whether a sovereign entity could be structured to serve the interests of all residents.
Transcript
Read or download the full transcript (.txt). Speaker labels were assigned automatically and may contain errors.
Companion newspaper commentaries
Commentaries by the guests, published in The Honolulu Advertiser around the broadcast.
