Kalani Mondoy sets the record straight with Jere Krischel
Just in case people don't know... I consider Kalani Mondoy an expert in genealogy and in being Hawaiian. He happens to be the similar mix as me (Filipino, Chinese, Hawaiian, and Portuguese) whereas I am Haole too while he is Filipino. Anyway below is Kalani Mondoy's response to Jere Krischel:
Jere: "Now kalani, will you join me? Or will you insist that 20mL of koko makes one person different from another?"
Kalani: "I know I haven't been straight up, but for the record I do not go by blood quantum, a Haole concept. Remember Jere, Caucasians are not imposed with Blood Quantum, nor the Chinese, or Japanese or Salvadorians, etc. in the U.S.
But because I have been the family genealogist for nearly 2 decades, have another relative that has been keeping up with the genealogy for more than 2 decades and most importantly come from Hawaiian lineage that preserved Hawaiian genealogies, you should know that "ancestry" is important to me. It is not the same as "blood quantum". BQ is used to exclude whereas ancestry is about origins."
Jere: "Even if raised in the same culture, with the same traditions, with the same family, those 20mL of blood seem to be what is used to separate a certain group out."
Kalani: "Yes, definitely true. Which is something I don't follow. This is evident with hanai."
Jere: "How many generations of bones of my ancestors need to be buried in the islands for me to become oiwi?"
Kalani: "Good question. 'Oiwi in the sense of ke kalu o ka 'aina, a person born in the islands and who has ties to the islands....not much. One, not even one if it implies to some people.
But if you are referring to someone who is descendant of Wakea and Papa whose ties have been in Polynesia for centuries, then we're talking about something different. Unfortunately I don't have time to thumb through the numerous threads which is why I may not answer people's questions or comments all the time if they were directed towards me, but I'd have to say I do question your motives in trying to identify yourself as 'oiwi. I only use that term simply b/c people erroneously use the term "Hawaiian" as a regional term. Not as a NATIONAL one or an ethnic one. And why would you want to call yourself an 'Oiwi?
You mentioned culture & traditions. So is it safe for me to say that you'd prefer 'Oiwi now, not HAWAIIAN which replaced Hawaiian Native because you follow Hawaiian tradition and culture? You LIVE Hawaiian culture and tradition? I mentioned how the culture is a part of me, so I don't see myself "practicing" it, although it was pointed out to me that I was "into" my culture which I responded that I wasn't, but rather I do things b/c it is a part of who I am. So, do you do the same? And if so, why is it that you like to point out "ethnic Hawaiians" and exhibit very pessimistic attitudes akin to Kenneth Conklin?
Jere: "Were the first settlers to the islands oiwi, or only their children, after they were buried?"
Kalani: "'Oiwi, kanaka (the term used before) or kanaka maoli (if you prefer) were all the same. Hawaiian genealogy goes back to Haloa, ka Hawai'i mua loa, or the very first Hawaiian. Wakea and Papa (Haloa's parents) are credited as the progenitors of the Hawaiian people. Yet, we now understand that Wakea and Papa were progenitors for other Polynesians. They were still kanaka in this sense, just not natives to ka pae 'aina o Hawai'i. So, did this make Wakea & Papa 'oiwi as you say? Yes."
Jere: What do you think makes someone "hawaiian" kalani? What do you think makes someone kanaka, or oiwi? If it is not blood, can you give me one example of someone without 20mL of koko traced back to pre-1778 who you consider kanaka or oiwi? Perhaps the adopted son of some kanaka? Or someone who had a blood transplant?
Kalani: "First, you need to just throw out that mentality of BQ entirely. Stop writing 20ml because I know you do not understand what that actually means or are you even aware how much that really is without looking at a bottle of water or some other item that holds liquid? Or did you already do that which explains why you write that all the time? Not to mention any scientist can explain to you how exracting that type (bq) would be impossible if you are looking for a particular type (ie Hawaiian). I assume you know that people are not born with blood in their body that remains stagnent forever and ever, but rather blood is produced in ka iwi.
Since you're not into independence, I don't think I should explain to you what makes someone "Hawaiian". We know how "Hawaiian" has been interpreted and are well aware of how people such as yourself, of which I refer to as part-time Hawaiians who use it whenever they need to in order to prove inclusivity BUT if they need to single us out, then it is an exclusive term. Hence the part-time Hawaiian.
I already explained ancestry/'oiwi/kanaka. As for an adopted son of an 'oiwi, which if I understood you correctly it seems you meant a long, long time ago like the 1800s. I can say that from experience only I have seen others view their ancestor, their FOREIGN ancestor whether adopted or not as a kama'aina. That is not the term that they used though. Kama'aina has a diff. meaning today of course. But whether they viewed their foreign ancestor as a native ('oiwi) or not, you do realize that the issue one that doesn't exist because 1) their descendants have mixed with other 'oiwi and 2) their intent was not about becoming 'oiwi or using 'oiwi to single out people as in what you have been doing.
I think that is what's confusing about you Jere. You flip-flop on the issue when it comes to your SELF-identification. If you want to give the impression to others that you are HAWAIIAN, that's one thing. But to do that and yet berate Hawaiians, that really doesn't make sense."