The Mau movements in Western and American Samoa : an ecological approach
Date
1983
Authors
Wedlake, Barbara Fair
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
During the period 1920-1930, native political movements called Mau movements emerged in the territories of Western Samoa and American Samoa. These two territories were inhabited by native peoples of similar cultural and linguistic background, but the territories were administered by colonial governments, namely the United States of America (American Samoa), and New Zealand (Western Samoa) whose policies were distinctive. An examination of archival documents and available published material reveals that the movement in Western Samoa was more strongly supported by the indigenous population and was more highly organized than the movement in American Samoa. In addition, the goals of the movement in Western Samoa centred on the achievement of political autonomy whereas the goals of the movement in American Samoa focussed on incorporation within the American political sphere. It is the central purpose of this thesis to provide an explanation for this variance, taking into account the opinions expressed in the hitherto available literature. To facilitate this task, the interrelationships of traditional socio-political structure, colonial administrative policy and resource potential in each territory are examined. A comparison of social structure shows that the similarities obtaining between the two territories are restricted primarily to the village and descent group level. On the supra-village political level, the critical distinction is the higher level of sociopolitical organization that prevailed in Western Samoan institutions. American Samoa lacked such institutions, and furthermore was traditionally a satellite territory of one of the districts of Western Samoa. This variance is found to be a significant factor in the development of a stronger and more united movement in Western Samoa. Colonial policies also varied between the two territories. New Zealand administered Western Samoa through a League of Nations Mandate and vigorously pursued an expensive campaign to modernize the territory. Despite the altruistic basis to this policy and the large sums of money invested in various reform programs, the changes in Samoan life introduced by the New Zealand administration were fiercely resisted by traditional Samoan leaders. In contrast, in American Samoa there was no congressional acknowledgement of the American status in those islands, and consequently there was no development of a formal administrative policy. Furthermore, the major source of funding for the American territory was apparently limited to internally generated tax sources. An even more significant feature is the higher percentage of monetary income disbursed in wages to the American Samoans by the administration. In addition, important differences in resource potential between the two island groups had a profound influence on the variance between the political movements. More favourable environmental conditions, high population and the abundance of agricultural land in Western Samoa were associated with a persistent and viable subsistence economy in which chiefs retained their traditional authority over land and kinsmen and maintained a high degree of economic independence from the colonial administration . However, the relatively poorer resource base of American Samoa made expansion of subsistence agriculture extremely difficult . Therefore, during the navy administration, American Samoans increasingly neglected subsistence agriculture in favor of wage labour, thereby developing an increased dependency upon the administration. Consequently, the variance in character and intensity of the two movements must be considered in light of the contrasts in resource potential and the implications of this factor on the establishment of socio-economic relationships between indigenous leaders and their respective colonial administrations.