After 100 years, the Hawaiian kingdom's collapse continues to garner not only academic debate, but also long-standing hostilities rooted in deep-seated sentiments of Pacific Nativism and American Nationalism. From this enduring conflict, two historical interpretations have developed that reflect the polarized views of nineteenth century Western capitalists and the modern Native Hawaiians. Although antagonistic in nature, their narratives reject accepted historical methods in favor of promoting their specific social, religious, and political principles. Using government documents, newspaper and journal articles, as well as the manuscripts of key historical agents, the thesis reexamines the events corresponding to the cessation of Hawaii's monarchy and its sovereignty five years later. Contrary to the competing primary historical narratives, it examines the often-ignored complex social, political, and economic factors that created a tempestuous, but economically profitable, relationship between the kingdom's privileged native class and the elite foreign subjects. The evidence indicates the 1893 coup d'e?ütat resulted from multiple domestic conflicts, independent of American foreign policies, but garnered international attention when a rogue US diplomat aided the Caucasian insurgents. Furthermore, the material suggests American imperialists in 1898, not a policy of imperialism, used their country's increased nationalism during the Spanish-American War to appropriate the Hawaiian Islands as a military asset. The true victim, as with most global historical narratives, remained the islands' neglected commoners caught in the drive to elevate financial standings.