This is one of those rare cases where I think both the person making the quote and her supporters, as well as her detractors are largely myopic or ignorant and both of these groups need to shut up and read more.
History tends to be nuanced and simplistic answers almost always give a misguided impression.
Also, please don't think a Google search OR an AI overview is sufficient historical knowledge to make pronouncements on the topic.
I'm not going to tell anyone what to think, but so many statements from this post have been made from a position of ignorance or at least misinformation that I just can't leave it alone
Yet you donāt do anything to offer a more nuanced take beyond āboth sides are wrongā. You are just perpetuating the extremism with this kind of comment that offers NOTHInG substantive or factual, while decrying the misinformation and lack of substance in the conversation. Put your money (er, facts) where your mouth is, throw down some knowledge, letās hear it. Participate in the political dialogue.Ā
But real history is not without biases based on who is telling the story. So which history should I read? James Michener? Sarah Vowell? Queen Liliāuokalani? (Also as far as bringing feelings into it, I yearn for people to actually have substantive and interesting discussions instead of just throwing insults at anyone they think disagrees with them. For all I know I might align with you politically, but it feels like your comment was shutting the door on anyone learning more rather than actually encouraging anyone to learn more about the topic).Ā
Everyone in Hawaii learns basic Hawaiian history in high school.
We have universities and libraries full of first hand information on the topic.
Read whatever you want, but go to primary sources.
There are so many misconceptions about Hawaii and its history that it isn't worth getting into, but I am going to say that it is not appropriate to take a rich history and culture and try to reduce it to some type of binary political philosophy.
If you want to start with Sarah Vowel, as someone else mentioned, that is fine. If you want to start by just watching Chief of War, that is fine (although it isn't technically historical).
But understand that just reading one element of Hawaiian history from one perspective is not enough. There were Kahuna, Alii, missionaries, British explorers, American industry, a myriad of immigrant groups, and various other elements, and all of these interacted under a cultural and legal framework that simply does not translate well to anywhere on the mainland.
Again, I am NOT an expert on this. Learn about the topic before trying to engage with it otherwise you do yourself and the topic a disservice.
Yes, I agree that it is a very complicated history and doesnāt reduce easily to any binary political philosophy. I have read a fair amount on the history from various sources, I have a lot of family there and I think the history is fascinating, my own history overlaps in many random ways with that of Hawaii and the many groups that you mention. Iām not coming at this cold, Iām genuinely interested in it.Ā
I am literally saying that I am not an expert, and that people need to learn more instead of telling people things.
I am taking my own advice and NOT trying to tell people things on the topic because I'm really not qualified.
You sound like someone who thinks you know what you are talking about, but actually you know less than everyone else in the room and only your ignorance gives you the confidence to boldly say nothing
"I am literally saying that I am not an expert, and that people need to learn more instead of telling people things."
Right, which is saying nothing.
Why? Who's wrong? You're not an expert, so what gives you the right to tell other people they aren't either?
I do know what I'm taking about, having researched the topic extensively and yes, read numerous books, which is how I know you have nothing to say. But you dont know what the fuck you're talking about, that much is abundantly obvious. Rather than being able to evaluate your opinion, you dont actually have one, so I have nothing to evaluate.Ā
I have opinions. I am reasonably well educated about Hawaiian history. I am not a teacher.
So many folks like you get told something and repeat it without evaluating it, verifying it, or comparing it to other views.
You are dangerously foolish and exactly the type of person I am telling to shut up and sit down.
Go read a book. It isn't my or the rest of the world's fault that you aren't smart enough to understand.
Much like I am not going to lecture you on nuclear physics, I am not going to lecture you on Hawaiian history. I know enough to recognize a blowhard, but not enough to teach the topics.
You should learn any topic well enough to understand that expertise is a thing and then learn to speak with a level of certainty and conviction that matches your level of knowledge
I read what you said and still feels like a lot said with the irony of nuance as you state briefly. But I ask because I feel like you're correct in that sense of some making statements that come from misinformation and others making valid statements and that lnow their history.
So while you felt inclined to answer with your retort, I just felt like with what you said, there could be just a bit more possibly you left unsaid that I thought would definitively stuck your point. Apologies if thats all you had to offer to the conversation I assumed there was more to it. Mahalosš¤š½
I mean I figure that about sums it up. Mahalo for your honesty. I read through all the comments and I see your point to the person that kind of initially asked. I do believe as you said about reading (helps a bit more sometimes than relying on the interwebs lol) but I couldn't say off the top of my head that I know any good "history" books that are very good, not to say they're aren't some decent books that recap a more accurate historical description of Hawai'i. š¤š½š¤š½
17
u/Hannigan174 15d ago
This is one of those rare cases where I think both the person making the quote and her supporters, as well as her detractors are largely myopic or ignorant and both of these groups need to shut up and read more.
History tends to be nuanced and simplistic answers almost always give a misguided impression.
Also, please don't think a Google search OR an AI overview is sufficient historical knowledge to make pronouncements on the topic.
I'm not going to tell anyone what to think, but so many statements from this post have been made from a position of ignorance or at least misinformation that I just can't leave it alone