To preface my review of this book, I’d saying that brushing up on Hawaii's discovery and annexation before reading this collection of essays would definitely be helpful. Trask alludes to this history numerous times but never gives a historical overview herself, and it would be difficult to understand her arguments without this knowledge.
In terms of Hawaiian nationalism and sovereignty, I would say that Trask falls pretty close to the extreme end of the spectrum. She is very much anti-haole, which is perhaps understandable, especially given the terrible effects of white imperialism in Hawaii (which few white tourists, and even residents, know). She also seems to disapprove of Asian immigrants and visitors, who actually outnumber whites and make up the majority of both residents in and tourists to Hawaii. However, most of her criticism is reserved for the white outsiders who originally subjugated the native Hawaiians and now control the economic, political, and military power bases in the state.
Trask is not interested in partnering with other groups (feminists, environmental activists, different native communities, or otherwise) and devotes an entire essay to explaining why coalitions with outside groups must be short-term and focused on an immediate goal. If you’re a non-Hawaiian hoping to learn how you can help, you’ll probably be disappointed; Trask is of the opinion that there’s really nothing they can do besides 1) stop visiting Hawaii and contributing to the destructive tourism industry, and 2) reach out to other people of their race and try to convince them why Hawaiian nationalism and sovereignty is justified.
I read the original 1993 edition of this essay collection, not the updated 1999 edition. Even so, given the huge political and cultural shifts that have occurred in the past few years — much less since 1993 and 1999 — I'm not sure that reading the updated version would have made that much of a difference. Reading this book in 2017, when there is so much discussion of how various groups can be allies to different minorities (for example, African-Americans or the LGBTQI+ community) made Trask’s views seem dated, although I don’t think she has changed her convictions in the intervening years.
I also wanted more evidence for her strong claims, and felt like the footnotes and citations should have been more robust, given that these were critical essays. She frequently makes sweeping generalizations and judgments with little to no evidence. Part of this may be cultural; Trask actually talks about how Hawaiians tend to be more emotionally compelling in their appeals, whereas Westerners tend to focus on cold hard reason. I tried to set aside my cultural bias as much as possible, but there were still moments when I just couldn't accept what she was saying without more proof. There were also some places where I felt like she overstepped the line on emotional appeals: for example, when she compares the shame she experienced at the University of Hawaii to that of a rape victim, or described a professor as being "on the edge of insanity" with no medical evidence whatsoever.
I think reading this book is important to understand the perspective of native Hawaiians who are in favor of sovereignty, even though the essays are 25+ years old. I’d be interested in tracking down more contemporary scholarship to see if opinions and approaches have changed, as well as reading critical essays from more moderate activists. Trask is very influential figure, but she’s only one person, and there’s an entire spectrum of opinions out there.