Stumbled across a website, basically where anyone can contribue stories. Someone decided to write a story about Slavery in Hawaii, posing the question of Hawaii ever had African Slaves.
The article doesn't really focus on that, but the writer decided to outline a timeline regarding Hawaii's kauwa
or "servant" class which is always interpreted by westerners as a slave
I replied pointing out a few things, but one in particular which bothers me whenever people try to cite sources, sometimes they don't get it right. I've seen it before and it happened in this article. The person wrote:
1870 it was published locally, "Today, with the breaking down of class barriers, members of the slave class are indistinguishable from the ruling classes." (Kepelino, 142-147; Kamakau, Ke Au Okoa, November 3, 1870.)
I corrected that person saying that passage actually comes from a book called "Hawaiian Mythology" by Martha Beckwith & even cited the page number. That they quoted only a part of the very first sentence, and in that long paragraph, Beckwith quoted a few words from Kepelino's "Traditions of Hawaii" but that she also cited Samuel M. Kamakau's article which was printed in the newspaper - Ke Au Okoa
dated November 3, 1870.
I'm sick & tired of people trying to paint a particular image of Hawaiians. It's really bad when they try to look authentic and credible by citing sources but it's done incorrectly and in most cases, it comes from non-Hawaiians. Apparently a Hawaiian perspective (or any indigenous person for that matter) aren't credible enough, in which sometimes they like to cite academics, but the problem is not all academics may have done their research thoroughly as it was done in this article.