|
by Dr. Herb Barringer,
PHD,
University of
Hawai`i at Manoa
Last Christmas, I was invited to the home of a Korean friend in Waipahu
to spend the day and stuff myself, local style. My friend’s family, his
wife’s family, friends and neighbors, some forty strong (plus children),
packed the house, yard and carport. In one location, one could hear
pidgin, standard English, Korean, Japanese, Tagalog and something else I
couldn’t identify (it turned out later to be Thai). The food had begun
as Korean, but with the contributions of guests, it was transposed to
local potluck. This scene is not at all unusual in Hawai`i; in fact it
is typical of local style, and is repeated over and over in home after
home on any holiday or any other excuse for a gathering.
The characteristic of Hawai`i that makes this possible is the diversity
of our population. We are varied ethnically, as everyone knows, but in
addition, around 45 percent of our marriages are inter-ethnic, making
for mixed ethnicity in children and in families. Added to that is the
ethnic and class heterogeneity of many neighborhoods and friendship
networks, which makes it very difficult for people to isolate or
"ghettoize" themselves. It is possible to retreat to ethnic enclaves in
Hawai`i, but most people must work very hard at it to succeed.
Caucasians (please don’t be offended by the use of haole-I’m not)
and Japanese comprise the two largest ethnic groups in Hawai`i, followed
by Native Hawaiians, Filipinos, Chinese, Koreans, Southeast Asians,
African Americans, Samoans, Tongans, and on and on. Haoles, at 27
percent of the total, represent some important ethnic groups too,
although Haole ethnic minorities may have some difficulty establishing
their identities in Hawaii. Jews, Australians, New Yorkers, San
Franciscans, Scotch and Italians all get lumped together in Hawaii, much
the same as Asian Americans on the mainland. The only Caucasians to be
singled out are Portuguese, and they aren’t Haoles. Still with me? We
don't really know how many Native Hawaiians live here. Depending upon
definition they could comprise as much as 18% or as little as 12% of the
total population. It is significant that one third of all Native
Hawaiians reside on the Mainland. We have no idea how many others have
left Hawai`i.
The diversity of our people can be seen in the workplace, classroom,
shopping malls, public parks, football games, and on the internet. The
result of all this is a well-known tolerance, even Aloha, for other
peoples. This should not be confused with the pseudo-aloha of the
tourist industry, but rather genuine warmth, helpfulness and kindness in
everyday relations. This attitude stems from the tolerance of strangers
in the old Native Hawaiian culture, and from the camaraderie of fellow
workers in the now-moribund plantation economy.
It
makes ethnic harmony possible, and is altogether remarkable, given that
so many of our people come from East Asian societies noted for their
traditional chauvinism. Chinese, Japanese and Koreans get along quite
well in Hawai`i, despite historical antagonisms. People from the
Mainland may come to the Islands with racist predispositions, but most
learn soon enough that to exist comfortably in Hawai`i, they must
practice local tolerance. During the early years of this century,
Filipino laborers from Ilocos Norte were targets of prejudice and
discrimination, but now, second and third generation Filipinos are
moving into the mainstream of Hawaiian life-we all know Benjamin
Cayetano’s ethnicity well enough.
Historically, at least after the missionaries were converted to
entrepreneurship, Hawai`i became extremely tolerant of religion. Even
before that, the tolerance of Native Hawaiians permitted the rapid
expansion of Christianity. It goes without saying that Buddhists,
Mormons, Catholics, Protestants, Jews Muslims and Baha’i rub elbows in
all walks of life every day. It is significant that survey researchers
seldom bother to ask about religion in Hawai`i; almost no one cares. If
I may make an irreverent observation: it is fascinating that the local
foes of same-sex marriage felt it necessary to recruit national pressure
groups to lobby for a constitutional convention. Could it be that they
distrusted local tolerance?
One reason Hawai`i works is that no one ethnic group on the Islands is
large enough to have absolute power, either culturally, politically or
economically. It is true enough that traditionally, haoles dominated the
economy and polity of Hawaii, but today we can make a good case that the
political arena is truly multi-ethnic.
Because of selectivity in recruiting people from the mainland, Hawaiian
haoles have somewhat higher educations and incomes than others, but the
differences from people of East-Asian backgrounds are not very great,
and may very well decrease with time. Filipinos are thought by some
observers to be underprivileged, but this is largely because of the
large numbers of current immigrants from Ilocos Norte, mostly relatives
of those already here.
So, is this an ethnic paradise? The answer is "no," of course-we do have
problems, some of them serious. First, although most of the many
immigrants to Hawai`i have "made it" to some degree, Native Hawaiians
have been brushed aside-they have the lowest incomes and educations of
any of our major ethnic groups. Furthermore, they have the worst health
of any ethnic group in the United States. This is particularly shameful
in Hawai`i, which is, after all, their native aina. The Native
Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement appears to be gaining momentum, and may be
able to rectify at least part of the problem. It is not clear now how
much support Native Hawaiians will receive from other residents of
Hawai`i, but their movement has been very non-threatening and peaceful.
The success or failure of this movement, however, may be decided outside
of Hawai`i.
Second, there are still varying degrees of resentment about haole
dominance. Much of this stems from the past, but many haoles are not
sensitive to the problem, and sometimes act in ways that reinforce local
stereotypes. It is widely believed that businesses give preference to
haoles in higher managerial positions. There may be some foundation to
this belief because many businesses are controlled from Mainland America
or from international conglomerates who care little for local
conditions. Since 1960, haoles have migrated to Hawai`i in large
numbers, exacerbating ethnic tensions. This is paralled by a noticeable
out-migration of local people seeking employment on the Mainland. There
is no doubt that the "local-haole" ethnic dimension sometimes leads to
unpleasant social relations. But the results can’t be too serious:
Haoles keep coming to Hawai`i in large numbers, and many find a
comfortable niche in local society, though there is always the question
of whether or not haoles can also be "local". We should always remember
that Hawai`i is one of the few places in the United States where
Caucasians are not absolutely dominant.
Other ethnic antagonisms exist in Hawai`i, of course. New Filipino
immigrants, Samoans, "Portagees," Koreans and Southeast Asians all come
in for stereotyping and sometimes, outright discrimination. Second and
third generations of Chinese, Koreans and Filipinos avoid FOBs (I
understand this perfectly-I won’t carry a camera in the open for fear of
being mistaken for a tourist). African Americans generally do not feel
welcome, but that may be, in part due to large numbers of Black
servicemen on the Islands. Still, until recently, the overriding
tolerance and good nature of Hawaii’s people has led to a kind of gentle
ethnic humor, which struck most of us as harmless fun. There is,
however, a growing "mainlandization" concerning this and other
manifestations of racism, which may very well signal a coming change. I,
for one, am sorry to see the silencing of local comedian, Frank Delima,
but perhaps the cause is not only political correctness, but also a
signal of dangers ahead.
There is a real and present threat to local style, one that has been
around awhile, but is accelerating rapidly; the growing influence of
globalization, manifested in both the economy and in culture. Hawai`i
has been dependent upon the United States for some time, but now
American influence is being supplanted by the international system,
which is even less sensitive to Hawaii’s uniqueness than American
interests have been in the past. Nieman-Marcus, Computer City, Daiei,
you-name--it, are all crowding local businesses. The faceless McDonald’s
is not new on the Islands, and has so far been counterbalanced by
Zippy’s. But how long can local style hold out against the onslaught of
the new international order? Liberty House is on a slippery slope to
extinction, like Arakawa’s before it. When Japanese and American or
international firms hire employees in their home countries, or train
them in the new international style, what is to become of "local?" I
have no clear answers, but it is something we had all better think about
very seriously. Want kimch’i with your burger deluxe? Forget Burger
King!
Many of us wonder what the new millennium will bring to Hawai`i. I, for
one, am not optimistic about the future for several reasons: First,
globalization will almost certainly continue to accelerate, making
Hawai`i even more dependent upon the international economic system. This
means even less local control over our future. Hawaii is a convenient
economic commodity in the world marketplace, often exploited without
regard to consquences for us. Waikiki has been a disgraceful eyesore
since I first moved here in 1967, and there seems to be nothing standing
in the way of even more concrete and tacky tourist litter.
Second, we have been unable to find a local substitute for tourism as an
economic base. The tourist industry is unhealthy for a number of
reasons, but very low service wages and zero local investment returns
from profits are enough to give pause. Despite political rhetoric, very
little has been done to establish an electronics, software, or
network-based technological industry. Ocean mining or aquaculture are
also opportunities here, but I see no major effort to establish an
infrastructure for any of these alternatives. The conditions of Hawaii's
highways are ridiculous. Electricity fails with kona winds, with trade
winds, from no winds, even perhaps from angry menehunes. The islands are
festooned with ugly power lines, like toilet paper after a fraternity
party, and HECO whines that neighborhoods refuse to accept more.
Pollution looms as a real threat now, and may become critical if present
trends continue. Yet unplanned economic growth is encouraged as if there
were no twenty-first Century reckoning.
Third, and related to the economy, our population is growing at an
alarming rate. There is very little we can do about population
politically, but some trends are unhealthy. Local youth continue to move
to the mainland, and are more than replaced by haoles from the mainland.
The replacements are often either well-to-do retirees or
upper-middle-class workers. The local folks left behind are likely
dependent upon low-wage service jobs, or as in the case of Waianae, no
jobs at all. The potential here for greater inequality and conflict is
frightening. It is possible that local values could ameliorate the
conflict, but local values themselves are under attack by both the size
and suburbanization of our communities. ("Aloha" is not very evident on
the freeways of Oahu at 5:00 on a hot September afternoon). New cultural
input from such megacities as New York, Los Angeles, Tokyo and Bangkok
clash with local values. Large portions of Maui, for example are
indistinguishable from California, replete with yuppies.
ll this suggests that we have much work to do if we are to save the
charm of Hawai`i as we now know it. We must, of course, "live Aloha,"
but good intentions will not do the job. We must establish a firm
economic base for all our people, with decent jobs and a secure future.
That can only come by diminishing our dependence upon tourism, and
creating new, environmentally friendly industries; high tech,
aquaculture, sea mining, diversified agriculture and whatever else the
new millennium may suggest. To whatever extent possible, capital for
these enterprises should be Hawai`i-based. The change need not be
abrupt, but it must come, better sooner than later. Aloha!
Herb Barringer is
Professor of Sociology at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He is a
native of Montana, went to college in San Diego, and has lived
permanently in Hawaii since 1967. He received his Ph.D. at Northwestern
University, and has spent much of the past forty years in Korea, doing
migration research. Recently he has been studying Asian Americans and
Native Hawaiians. He teaches courses in research methods, race relations
and social deviance. He still can't speak pidgin properly. |
|