Is That Legal?

Gee, I wonder if the attack on Pearl Harbor had anything to do with the numbers, or was it just RACISM?

Well, Pearl Harbor *was* a major attack on the US itself. Seems somewhat reasonable.

But why did kamakazi pilots wear helmets?

"If less is more, just think how much more more would be!"

Not much of a trap, Eric. Frankly I'm surprised the numbers were not higher than 45%. Also, the "dastardly East Coast Japanese" that you refer to were not affected by E.O. 9066.

But I have a question for you.

You've linked to the German American Bund under "these folks" above, yet you fail to mention that many members of the Bund were sent to Department of Justice internment camps where they lived alongside Japanese. And yet, in the 1980s the U.S. government provides an apology and $20,000 to the Japanese who were interned, but not the Germans - including most likely Bund officials pictured in you links.

Why is that?

Well, Bob, uh, I mean, "Terry," I'm not entirely sure--I don't know anywhere near as much about the redress movement as I do the internment experience--but I would imagine that it had something to do with the lobbying effectiveness of advocates for Germans and Italians who were interned. (I do know that some people today are lobbying for recognition of wrongs done to German and Italian aliens during the war, a recognition that is long overdue.)

Either that or the singling out of Japanese Americans for redress payments in the late '80s was just another manifestation of the ancient and vicious American habit of discriminating against white people.

The habit isn't that ancient, Eric. It goes back about 40 years....

But it's nice to know you believe the Americans wearing swastikas in your links above deserve an apology and $20,000, too...

At least you're consistent.

Prof. Muller writes:

"In the survey of 500 East Coast citizens that the same government office did a few months earlier, in February of 1942, the respondents said that Germans were the more threatening aliens, by a wide margin! So much for the Pearl Harbor effect."

But it was between February and June of 1942 that news of the Bataan Death March and other atrocities of the Japanese became widely known at home. It also became known that Japanese invasion forces in the Phillipines received a tumultuous welcome from the resident Japanese living in that country.

In general war news from the Pacific in the early months of 1942 was bleak and it is little wonder that the Japanese came to be seen as more of a threat to the United States than the Germans at that point in time. As one who was stationed on the East Coast during the period in question, in my view it is frivolous to suggest that it was "... the government's action against Japanese Americans (which) persuaded people on the East Coast.. that they were dangerous..."

Cmdr. Hopwood,
I'm just quoting from a contemporaneous government document.
If your 60-year-old memory diverges from this contemporaneous interpretation, I'd suggest you have a chat with Archibald Macleish.

Pardon me, Professor. I know you were quoting from the document but it seemed to me that you were concurring with the sentiments contained in the quote. If not, what is your own view as to why public opinion switched from believing the Germans more dangerous to believing the Japanese more dangerous between February and June of 1942?

Such paranoia has precedent, most obviously (to me) the conviction of Russia's Baltic Fleet in that it was being attacked by Japanese torpedo boats *in the North Sea*. Of course they were British fishing boats, not that the Russians figured this out before firing on them.

Touchy, touchy, touchy, Eric. Regardless of whether your thesis (or if you would prefer, Mr. MacLeish's thesis) is correct, Terry and Hopwood raise legitimate questions that deserve a civil answer.

You've developed more than a whiff of fanaticism since you've launched your crusade against Ms. Malkin, and I tell you with deep respect and affection that it hasn't improved your persuasiveness. For your students' sake I hope you're confining your snide answers to this site and not behaving this way in the classroom!

Lostingotham,

First, this ain't "touchy." It's "having fun."

Second, I was blogging about the Japanese American internment, and debunking revisionists, before "In Defense of Internment" was even a twinkle in Regnery Publishing's eye. Read the archives, from the very start. There's no need to view what I post here on the subject as part of a "crusade" (or anything else) against Michelle Malkin.

Third, as to your "more than a whiff of fanaticism" comment, I don't know what you're talking about. If you're saying that I've devoted a great deal of time and energy to countering internment revisionism, and that this has reflected a large portion of what I've chosen to blog about over the last 2 1/2 years, well, yeah. Guilty as charged.

You know what they say about people who demonstrate "more than a whiff of fanaticism" as they argue against government camps for the mass detention of citizens who aren't guilty of anything.

I love that opposition to the principle of the gulag is now regarded as being a little nuts.

Not quibbling with the point you're making, just your delivery. You've long since revealed Malkin for what she is. By making her your obsession, you're lending her more credibility than she deserves.

I'm sympathetic to your arguments on this one, but I think you do them damage by giving objections made in good faith--even those that may have a slightly snitty tone--anything but a civil and professional answer. People aren't yet machines (for better or worse). We're swayed by both emotion and reason. The best argument will fail to persuade if poorly presented. I respectfully suggest that you're so personally involved in this one that you've stopped trying to persuade your interlocutors and begun trying to overpower them. IMHO, that makes for a poor presentation.

Point taken, lostingotham.

Your point reminds me that I need to keep a sense of who my audience is. On the internment issue, I often end up imagining my audience to be just the couple of people who post here on the subject, rather than the many hundreds who visit daily. I will keep your advice in mind.