Ignore the Past, Damn the Future

A look back at the Japanese Interment during World War II...



Ignore the Past, Damn the Future
By Josh Lucas

1.

Since the 11 September attacks, Arab Americans have lived in a new country.
Before the attacks their worries about having insults hurled at them as they
walked on public streets or being attacked by thugs were background, muted
worries. Those things happened, but they did not happen often. Before 11
September, Arab Americans didn't often have to face the vandalism or
destruction of their places of worship. But America has become a more
dangerous place for them now, and if the rest of us are not watchful, we may
once again commit grievous offenses against them, our fellow American
citizens.

After Pearl Harbor, Japanese Americans also faced an increasingly hostile
America. Stores would no longer sell goods or services, including food, to
them; banks would no longer do business with them; being suspected of spying
became a regular part of life. The government did nothing to dispel the
belief that Japanese Americans were disloyal to the U.S. In fact, the
Secretary of the Navy released a statement declaring that Japanese sabotage
on Hawaii was responsible for the success of the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Hundreds of supposedly subversive Japanese were arrested and detained even
though no documented case of espionage or sabotage was committed by an
American citizen of Japanese ancestry or by a resident Japanese alien.

Though the military wanted to intern all Japanese Americans immediately
after Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt refused. General John DeWitt, head
of the West Coast Defense Command, recommended, in February 1942, that
Japanese Americans and resident alies be evacuated from the West Coast
because, as [1]he put it, "the Japanese race is an enemy race and while many
second and third generation Japanese born on United States soil possessed of
United States citizenship have become 'Americanized,' the racial strains are
undiluted".

The media contributed to internment by inflammatory rhetoric. For example,
consider [2]an editorial, from early 1942, in the San Francisco News:

Japanese leaders in California who are counseling their people, both aliens
and native-born, to co-operate with the Army in carrying out the evacuation
plans are, in effect, offering the best possible way for all Japanese to
demonstrate their loyalty to the United States.

Many aliens and practically all the native-born have been protesting their
allegiance to this Government. Although their removal to inland districts
outside the military zones may inconvenience them somewhat, even work
serious hardships upon some, they must certainly recognize the necessity of
clearing the coastal combat areas of all possible fifth columnists and
saboteurs. Inasmuch as the presence of enemy agents cannot be detected
readily when these areas are thronged by Japanese the only course left is to
remove all persons of that race for the duration of the war.

Real danger would exist for all Japanese if they remained in the combat
area. The least act of sabotage might provoke angry reprisals that easily
could balloon into bloody race riots.

We must avoid any chance of that sort of thing. The most sensible, the most
humane way to insure against it is to move the Japanese out of harm's way
and make it as easy as possible for them to go and to remain away until the
war is over.

Life did its part to demonize the Japanese living in the U.S. too. It ran an
article, "How to Tell Your Friends from the Japs", in which can be found the
most base, vile racist stereotypes: "...the Chinese expression is likely to
be more placid, kindly, open; the Japanese more positive, dogmatic,
arrogant...Japanese walk stiffly erect...Chinese more relaxed, sometimes
shuffle..."

But not everyone in the federal government shared the media and the
military's distrust of Japanese Americans, at least initially. In October
and November of 1941, Roosevelt ordered an [3] intelligence report done on
the loyalty of Japanese Americans. Carried out by Special Representative of
the State Department Curtis B. Munson. it found that the issei, the first
generation Japanese, though still Japanese citizens, would gladly become
American citizens if allowed. Although their entire cultural background was
Japanese, they had chosen to live and rear their children in America. Munson
also found that the Nisei, the second generation Japanese, despite
discrimination and insults were eager to be Americans. The report concluded
that "there is no Japanese 'problem' on the Coast. There will be no armed
uprising of Japanese". Perhaps the moves to intern the Japanese would have
failed if the general public had known of the Munson report. Unfortunately
it was unknown to most Americans. The report was not publicly released until
1946, even though the State, War, and Navy Departments all knew of the
results.

Roosevelt eventually capitulated to the prevailing racist mood, signing [4]
Executive Order No. 9066, which authorized the military to designate places
as military areas and exclude any and all persons, whether citizen or not,
from these newly created areas. Though the Japanese Americans were not
specifically mentioned, this order was in direct response to the advice of
General DeWitt and the military generally.

Thus began the removal of more than 112,000 Japanese persons living in the
U.S., including 70,000 U.S. citizens. The homes, property, and possessions
of internees were seized and forfeited. Their bank accounts were frozen, and
they were only allowed $100 a week. Once they left their homes, they were
transferred first to local detainment centers, which were generally
campgrounds or race tracks. They stayed there for a short time, often a few
days, until they were moved to one of eleven concentration camps throughout
the Western states. Food, shelter, and some education was provided in the
camps. Internment in concentration camps lasted until the war was over, with
some remaining until 1946.

2.

According to the government, military, and the media, mass internment of
Japanese was vital to national security. But national security, as it so
often does, masked more fundamental causes; in this case, racism and
economics.

To understand the internments of Japanese living on the West Coast,
especially California, you have to understand how the West was settled.
During the Gold Rush of 1849, Chinese immigrants came to California as
miners. Their labor helped build the wealth of the West. The reaction of
'native' miners, mainly White settlers, was fear and resentment. The Chinese
worked longer hours in the mines for less pay. Economic tensions, along with
White nativism and xenophobia, led to discrimination and violence against
the Chinese. The State of California, to protect the interests of its White
inhabitants and citizens, passed a number of laws officially discriminating
against the Chinese.

Cities expelled completely or restricted the Chinese to particular areas, to
ghettos. The Chinese were prevented from gaining citizenship, being able to
vote, or even from giving testimony against a White person in court.
Discrimination continued until 1882 when California enacted the Chinese
Exclusion Act in order to remove everyone of Chinese ethnicity from the
state. Not surprisingly, there was a severe labor shortage in the
Californian agricultural industry. Japanese workers soon arrived to take the
place of the Chinese, and they became the new targets of the racism and
economic agitation.

This racism continued at a fairly consistent pitch until the 1930s, when the
U.S. entered the Great Depression, and Japan became increasingly aggressive
in China and Manchuria. The resentments intensified as Japan and the U.S.
continued on an imperial, military collision course. Distrust and fear,
combined with racism and economic competition, for almost 100 years on the
West Coast set the stage for the acquiescence or encouragement of White
citizens for the internment of the Japanese.

3.

White people benefitted economically from the land forfeitures and seizures
which accompanied internment of their Japanese neighbors. As the Japanese
settled along the West Coast, they often turned themselves to agriculture,
routinely turning seemingly worthless areas into productive farms. In 1940,
84% of all Japanese employment was to be found in three categories:
specialized agriculture, food distribution, and domestic labor. The average
Japanese farm at the time was very small, about 42 acres, roughly one-fifth
the size of White-owned farms. And yet they were very productive: comprising
about 4% of farmland in California, they produced 42% of the state's fruits
and vegetables.

Since the issei were unable to own land themselves, because they were not
citizens, they bought the land in the names of their nisei children, who
were citizens. In some cases, these newly productive farming areas bordered
dams, railroad tracks, and power lines. The proximity to "strategic" areas
caused increased suspicion after Pearl Harbor since presumably disloyal
Japanese could sabotage strategic infrastructure.

Once Executive Order 9066 was in effect, and the military had designated the
land which the Japanese held to be strategically vital, all Japanese
property claims to the land were null and void; in many cases, the military
either kept the land for its own use or sold it to presumably loyal White
farmers, who were certainly aware of the economic upside of internment to
them. A representative of a grower association in Salinas said, "We're
charged with wanting to get rid of the Japs for selfish reasons. We might as
well be honest. We do."

Japanese Americans were not reimbursed for these property seizures after
they were released from the camps. The Federal Reserve estimated that the
direct property seizures were worth $400,000,000 (in 1942 dollars). They
often found themselves far from their former homes, with little hope of
returning. Even if they returned, their personal belongings, held in storage
areas, were ransacked, looted, and vandalized. And they continued to be
viewed with disdain and suspicion.

It seems at first glance impossible that the U.S. might intern Arab
Americans. It seems less impossible given the opinion of many Americans
immediately following the recent attacks. 34% of New York residents asked if
they would favor interning persons thought to be "sympathetic to terrorist
causes" said they would favor it. About 16% had no opinion about internment;
they did not explicitly oppose it. 67% of them favored racial profiling to
prevent "suspicious individuals" from traveling on airliners.

Given the attitudes of New Yorkers, thought to be one of the most liberal
states, how impossible does interment seem? And if not internment, how
likely is the wholesale violation of civil rights in the name of national
security? How likely are Americans to oppose injustice to their fellow
citizens? To resident Arab non-citizens? Now is not the time to be blind to
government abuses in the name of security. Nor is it the time to be quiet
about bad ideas enacted by those in power for the sake of 'unity.' No, now
is the time to be diligent in the protection of civil and human rights for
all inhabitants, whether citizen or not, of the United States.

 References:
   1. http://www.sfmuseum.org/war/dewitt4.html
   2. http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist8/editorial1.html
   3. http://www.curriculumunits.com/crucible/whunts/munson_report.htm
   4. http://dizzy.library.arizona.edu/images/jpamer/execordr.html



--
Posted on Monkeyfist at http://monkeyfist.com/articles/787