Mauna Kea: Telescopes and Sacred Space

A few weeks ago, Michael, one of my sons, was vacationing in Hawaii, on the big island. The tour guide suggested that they take a short cut through the mountains to get to the other side of the island. However, near the ridge of the mountain, Mauna Kea, they ran into stopped traffic as a result of protests. They got to sit there waiting while the protests continued. The tour guide apologized for the delay and explained what was happening. 

The University of Hawaii was able to get grants and donations to fund the construction of a massive observatory complex on the top of Mauna Kea. It would have a dome about 150 feet tall and extend over five acres. A 30-meter telescope would be the heart of the complex. They were able to get the funding because the top of Mauna Kea offers an almost perfect a view of the heavens that you can get from within the earth’s atmosphere. The university already has several other telescopes available at other sites, but this is the astronomers dream site. 

The problem is that Mauna Kea is also a sacred site for the native Hawaiian people. It is a traditional place of prayer, as well as religious and cultural ritual. It is a place of contact between the spirits of Hawaii and humans. According to legend it is the birthplace of humanity. As a point of comparison, what if we knew the actual location of the Garden of Eden and then a nearby university wanted to cement over the garden and put up a brick building on the site? Would you consider that to be progress or the desecration of a sacred place. The construction is seen by many indigenous Hawaiians as a sacrilege, the desecration of a place that ties the Hawaiian people to their cultural and spiritual roots as a people. 

This situation has become a flash point in Hawaii. Not only does it present a dramatic conflict of values between representatives of science and representatives of religion, but because it is only the latest episode in a long history of the struggle of native Hawaiians to maintain their culture under the pressure of modernity and assimilation. 

To the credit of both the protesters and the university, the protests and university reaction to them have been respectful and peaceful, both sides trying to find a compromise that will honor the concerns of both the indigenous people and the plans of the university. 
Some commentators have argued that while there are laws in place to ensure that the native Hawaiians are heard in situations like this, that is about as far as such laws go. The law requires consultation but not consent. The various decision-making boards listen respectfully to the native community but then almost always decide in favor of the agency or business that is sponsoring the construction. Commentators suggest that what is needed is some mechanism that requires consent and not just consultation, at least when important cultural sites are involved. 

This situation is not new. As long as I can remember there has been one controversy or another in Hawaii, where some construction project or military operation was being protested because it would damage an important religious or cultural site. This struggle has been most visible in Hawaii because it is a state and has one of the most vibrant economies in the region, so there is always a push for more economic development. Yet, the same struggle takes place all over the Pacific. 

As western culture and economies come into contact with more traditional cultures the borders between the cultures blur. This blurring has its positive and negative aspects. 

On the positive side there is greater access to educational opportunities and advanced medical care. People can travel and experience many different cultures and locations. There is access to a greater range of consumer products and technology. 

On the negative side traditional medicines are often lost under the pressure to use Western medicines. Western vices tend to take root and flourish, such as substance abuse. Pristine waters are polluted and fishing grounds are destroyed. People shift from healthy diet of fresh and locally grown food to canned goods filled with chemicals, as well as too much salt, fat and sugar. Diet related dis- ease spikes as a result. Indigenous people are often shoved to the side as wealthy investors lease or buy up land, benefiting from the growing economy while the native people become the new underclass. Cultural identity is lost as traditional beliefs and practices are lost under the pressure of cultural assimilation. 

In the Western mind land is a commodity to be bought and sold for a profit or to be used for various purposes. However, most indigenous cultures have a close association to the land. The land is part of who they are as a people. Their story as a community goes back centuries on that land and the spirits of the ancestors inhabit that land. As that land is taken, they lose not only land but their identity. I have seen this process at work in Palau.

I believe that there is a way to adapt the beneficial aspects of one culture without losing one’s identity. It requires a conscious effort, especially by the indigenous community to resist the steamroller of Western assimilation as well as a serious effort to understand one’s own cultural tradition. What is it that marks one’s identity as a people? Certainly, land is involved but what else? Protect what is important. 

It’s been a while since I’ve lived in the islands on a long-term basis, but the rights of indigenous people have been close to my heart for many years. I lived in the islands (mostly Saipan) during the last quarter of the 20th century and have visited several times in recent years. Further, I have been married to a Palauan woman for 44 years and have been engaged in the Palauan community throughout that period, even if in recent years it has been largely the mainland community of islanders. I have been frustrated by the often-cavalier attitude of the Federal government toward islanders, as well as by the various schemes to support economic development that in the long run do more damage to the economy, land and the culture than any financial benefit they may bring. 

Another thing to keep in mind is that economic development is only one small part of true development. In his 1981 encyclical Sollicituduo Rei Socialis, Pope Saint John Paul II argued that true human development includes educational, cultural, moral and social development as well as economic progress. So called development that doesn’t include all these categories necessary for integral and true human development is not development at all.