Having been to Hawai'i a few times, and having seen how the native population, versus the settlers are doing, I must say, if being a settler in Hawai'i is what life under Jim Crow was, it must have all been rainbows and unicorns and sunshine.
It obviously wasn't, but it's always good to see someone point to the stipulations of an indigenous treaty, while closing both eyes to the context in which it was drafted[1]... Or to the broader context of systemic discrimination that is very actively pissing on people, to this very day.
[1] Reparations for specific, not theoretical damages inflicted on indigenous Hawai'ian people by the government of the United States. But good on you for finding a theoretical[2] loophole! Look, everyone, feast your eyes - Europeans were actually the real victims of discrimination in Hawai'i, circa 1920!
[2] Presumably, there's some European person, somewhere [3], that can prove that half of their family tree[4] traces back to direct decadency from a non-settler European who lived on Hawai'i prior to 1778, and would like to be a beneficiary of the treaty, but isn't actually protected by it!
[3] Somewhere next to a spherical cow, and other pedantic, but utterly theoretical oddities.
[4] Unless you mean to tell us that there was some self-sustaining, secret isolated enclave of Europeans that have lived on Hawai'i prior to 1788, that only intermarried between eachother, I would expect that after a century and a half of intermarriage with native Hawai'ians, nobody either in 1920, or today would ever be able to tell the difference between that 'European' and a native.