I'm sure there are plenty of good books on the subject but I don't have any recommendations unfortunately.
Edit: Actually maybe the US government's own account is a better place to start: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-107/pdf/STATUTE-...
> Whereas, in pursuance of the conspiracy to overthrow the Government of Hawaii, the United States Minister and the naval representatives of the United States caused armed naval forces of the United States to invade the sovereign Hawaiian nation on January 16, 1893, and to position themselves near the Hawaiian Government buildings and the lolani Palace to intimidate Queen Liliuokalani and her Government;
> In 1899, industrialist James Dole moved to Hawaii. James was the cousin of Sanford B. Dole, who had helped overthrow the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1893, and became the governor of Hawaii in 1898. Two years after James Dole's arrival, he formed the Hawaiian Pineapple Company (HPC).
The term "Banana Republic" refers to UFC's complete domination of most South American governments through criminal activity.
Only a portion of the community still actively talks about the overthrow. Many Native Hawaiians also support the TMT.
>but that doesn't mean I want another country to invade and then build it.
A lot of the people who overthrew Queen Liliuokalani were subjects of the Kingdom [1]. It's a common propaganda point of the sovereignty movement to just label them as Americans, to imply they were some foreigners that just came in and overthrew the Queen. The calling in of the Marines wasn't really sanctioned by the US and later on the US attempted to give Hawaii back to the monarchy.
The sovereignty movement like to play it like the US just invaded, took over the land, and forced out the Native Hawaiians, just like they did with tribes on the mainland. But that's really not true at all. More importantly, it has nothing to do with Maunakea, as the mountain itself never really belong to the people.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_of_Safety_(Hawaii)
I understand there is some debate about how involved the US government was in overthrowing the Hawaiian government. It seems like everyone agrees that there was a coup with the express purpose of achieving annexation by the US, the majority of Hawaiians did not support annexation, and the US government did it anyway. That happened relatively recently, a lot of people are still mad about it, and it's a legitimate thing to be mad about. The US took over a weaker nation against the will of its people. The most generous view we can take is that a minority of Hawaiians requested annexation and the US agreed, which would still be unjust.
I don't think historical details about how exactly the coup happened are relevant to this discussion, and if they are I'm definitely not qualified to argue about them.
I mean I think this is underselling it a little. It seems like the main difference is that Puerto Rican colonization and subjugation started like 350+ years before Hawaiian overthrow and annexation, so there are just very few descendants of indigenous people left in Puerto Rico. Conversely, a significant portion of Hawaii is descended from indigenous people, and some of them probably had grandparents who grew up in an independent nation and remember them talking about it. The wound is still relatively fresh.
I think what happened with TMT would have also happened with Arecibo if the Spanish hadn't already killed nearly all of the indigenous people, to be blunt. It's definitely about sovereignty and not about a distaste for telescopes. There's a lot of infrastructure I'd like to see built in my own country, but that doesn't mean I want another country to invade and then build it.